Sunrise critique?

[thedude]

Hi everyone,

I got up the other morning and realized I had no milk. No milk=no breakfast for me! Obviously the only solution is to go to the store. On the way there, I saw that the sun was coming up and there was a beautiful layer of fog shrouding the lanscape. I tried to capture the look of the fog, but honestly I'm not sure I did it justice.

I like these pictures, but I don't know how much of it is because they're mine.

Please give me your honsest opinion, I'm an adult...I can handle the criticism!

Thanks in advance!

Canon Drebel
kit lens
18mm
f9
1/160
ISO 400

http://www.lomah.net/cblack/img/landscapes/sunrise/092504/IMG_2917resize.jpg

Canon Drebel
kit lens
25mm
f9
1/320
ISO 400

http://www.lomah.net/cblack/img/landscapes/sunrise/092504/IMG_2918editresize.jpg

*edit for spelling*

[Malok]

These are nice photos! What a difference the morning light makes! I think that the first one has too much dark space at the bottom. You may want to crop that. The other thing that would really make both of these shine is if the tree was isolated by itself. Right now, the other trees or bushes on the right merge with the main tree distracting from its beautiful form. If you were able to position yourself so that the tree was on its own with the rising sun, it would have been stunning. Regardless, they are very nice shots.

Malok

[thedude]

Thank you for the suggestions. I agree, after talking with a co-worker, he pointed out the same things.

One thing we discussed, is there a way to bring out the detail in the tree without blowing out the sun area? Without digital manipulation? I can't think of any way to do it, although I have heard of neutral density filters...is this their purpose?
Could they be used on a lens with a rotating front element?

I forgot to add that that location is ~200 yards from my house. I think that I can get the shot you're talking about by moving slightly farther down the road. This time of year, we get a lot of fog in the early AM, so I'll have plenty of opportunities to try out your suggestion!

Thanks!

[thedude]

One other thing...

If I were to attempt the same shot with a telephoto lens, would I be able to make the sun look larger in relation to the tree? I guess I would have to be pretty far back to accomplish this.

any thoughts?

[Malok]

A neutral density filter won't really work for this situation as it would only make the tree darker, unless you could find one that is tree shaped. I actually like the dark tree and think that this will be better than if you tried to bring out the details.

[Molydood]

the dude, dude, your dudeness etc. I'm guessing you like the big lebowski? Strange, my sig comes from that film. Well, that and part of my name 8)

[jukas]

Thank you for the suggestions. I agree, after talking with a co-worker, he pointed out the same things.

One thing we discussed, is there a way to bring out the detail in the tree without blowing out the sun area? Without digital manipulation? I can't think of any way to do it, although I have heard of neutral density filters...is this their purpose?
Could they be used on a lens with a rotating front element?

I forgot to add that that location is ~200 yards from my house. I think that I can get the shot you're talking about by moving slightly farther down the road. This time of year, we get a lot of fog in the early AM, so I'll have plenty of opportunities to try out your suggestion!

Thanks!

Personally the second image is more appealing than the first, there is just too much dark grass, the tighter crop is much better.

A ND filter wouldn't help you in this case and I believe you're actually thinking of a graduated ND filter, where the upper half is 1 - 4 or more stops darker than the bottom. This is very usefull for preserving the foreground, while not making the sky too light (sunsets where you want foreground detail, etc).

In order to have background and foreground detail, you would have to take the image exposing for the sky, then take the same image exposing for the foreground and blend them in photoshop. Luminous Landscape has a good tutorial on this.

Personally, this image doesn't do a lot for me, but I think it has great potential. Here are some things I would try if I was going to duplicate this image.

A) Expose for the sky, and photograph it as the sun just starts to crest the horizon, that will give you some vibrent colors and a nice look of the sun. Take your exposure reading of the sky just to the left or right of the rising sun, if you expose the sun directly it'll be too bright.

To me, where it's already climbed higher than the fog, it's lost interest. Unless you feel like doing a lot of blending work, let the tree fall underexposed, silouttes work very well.

B) Once the sun is up, reposition yourself so that the sun is behind the oak, and you get just a little flair of the sun slipping past the tree. Once again expose for the sky to the sides of the sun.

C) Come back to this location when the ground fog is more prominent and hanging lower to the ground so it appears as a nice mist.

D) Carry your camera with you frequently, I lost a great opportunity at making a image with a massive oak tree, surrounded by fog, just barely light by the recently risen sun because I was in a hurry to get the kids to school, and I didn't have my camera with me.

E) Have fun! My suggestions are only based on what appeals to me, what works for me, may not work for you, and really the goal is to get out there, make photographs and enjoy yourself :D

[thedude]

jukas- thanks for the great suggestions!

I believe I'll try the multiple exposure approach. I'm concerned however with making the photograph look too 'artificial'. I think it would be a fun exercise.

I already carry my camera everywhere. My wife get's soooo frustrated because if we're going out to eat, to the store, to friends etc...I grab my camera and it tags along with us!

molydood-yep, The big lebowski...how'dja guess?!!! lol :D

[RichardtheSane]

I like the second shot.

I say leave the tree as a sillouette because it makes for a better ans simpler composition. You can see it is a tree, so I don't think adding the detail of the tree would add anything to the shot.

If done well then you can get a really natural looking sky. The shot below is a result of blending 2 exposures together and I still think it looks natural.

http://www.richardlindley.co.uk/images/crw_8251-1_std.jpg

Did you shoot RAW?

[Molydood]

btw dude, the pictures didn't show last night, but now they do I can comment. I like both, but prefer the second image.

wierdly, I actually started thinking of the film the minute you spoke of the milk issue, you can image I was a bit freaked out when I saw your sig! lol :-)

[rickc]

At the moment, the pictures are not showing.

rich..

[thedude]

Richard-No, I didn't shoot RAW. I don't trust myself enough with paintshop to do what I understand is required to make a quality image. As I step farther and farther out on the limb of photography, I imagine that will be my next step to conquer.

I like the image you put up. I think that it's interesting that our eyes have so much more dynamic range than a camera is capable of. You're right, that does appear to be a 'natural' scene. I guess it's because I think that's how your eye might see it if you were there, however, we all know that without a little work, the camera might not see it that way!

As far as the pictures go...I get free hosting from someone I know online. At the moment, they are in the process of moving datacenters. My site has been jumping on and off for several days now. Sorry for the problems!

I stopped at the same spot today and took some more pictures. I tried to keep in mind the suggestions you guys made, including re-framing the shot, less dark area at the bottom etc...

There was no fog today, but that might make it interesting to see the difference in the two shots.

I'll post if any are worth anything!

Thanks again!

[sGu]

second shot is excellent!

however the first one has too much dark foreground, which doesn't help with viewing