LOG IN    OR   REGISTER TO FORUMS


Quicksilver -- time exposure shot

FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Critique Corner
Thread started 15 Jun 2008 (Sunday) 18:44   
LIST NEARBY THREADS
 
Bill634
Senior Member
Joined May 2008
193 posts
Quebec, Canada
[MORE/SHARE]

I used a tripod and time exposure to take this extreme low light ( almost dark) shot shortly after I first bought my EOS 30D. I thought it turned out well but it hasn't gotten much response anytime I've entered it in photo contests. I'd like to hear some constructive criticism because this type of photography really appeals to me.

IMAGE: http://i282.photobucket.com/albums/kk249/Bill634/QuicksilverStream.jpg

Post #1, Jun 15, 2008 18:44:05




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
thebeatnut
Senior Member
Joined Jun 2008
196 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

Your other option could be a much longer exposure. A friend of mine took a shot in the dark of water rather like this and left it on bulb for 15 minutes. It really brought the colours out.

Post #2, Jun 17, 2008 15:23:52




LOG IN TO REPLY
luigis
Goldmember
luigis's Avatar
Joined Jun 2008
1,399 posts
Buenos Aires, Argentina
[MORE/SHARE]

Hi Bill, this is also the kind of pictures that I love to make so nice to find a friend.
I like your picture a lot, it is a very nice long exposure shot, I like the cold temperature original more than the warmer edit.
I think that from very good to great the picture is missing either a subject like a big rock or something in the middle of the stream or to go the other extreme a more featureless background to make it more pure and smooth.
Just my 2 cents it is a high scoring picture to me.

Luigi

Post #3, Jun 17, 2008 15:33:13


www.luisargerich.comexternal link
Landscape Photography & Astrophotography
Follow me on Twitterexternal link
My Awesome Gear List

LOG IN TO REPLY
griptape
Goldmember
Joined Feb 2007
2,036 posts
Home
[MORE/SHARE]

luigis wrote in post #5739719external link
I think that from very good to great the picture is missing either a subject like a big rock or something in the middle of the stream or to go the other extreme a more featureless background to make it more pure and smooth.
Luigi

I completely agree. You simply don't have a subject (or at the very least contrast against your subject so you can tell what your subject is and isn't). Water and rocks aren't very interesting. We've all seen water and rocks. I'm not trying to be harsh, but it looks like a dirty, muddy looking place that I would try to avoid stepping in rather than something I'd go out of my way to look at.

Post #4, Jun 17, 2008 16:45:20




LOG IN TO REPLY
Bill634
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Joined May 2008
193 posts
Quebec, Canada
[MORE/SHARE]

I appreciate the input from all of you, thanks. This particular spot appeals to me because of the distinctive geological formations in the rock. Far from being dirty or muddy the water is absolutely crystal clear. The edit by 'LeuceDeuce' brightens the image and brings out more detail but the actual rock color is more accurate in the original. I guess that's why I wanted to shoot the scene at nightfall...to try and get that sort of surreal water quality while maintaining the deep colors in the rock. I originally entered the photo in a contest with the name 'Warlock Brook' since I was aiming for a slightly spooky feel. It definitely doesn't work for everyone. A semi-pro friend immediately 'dissed' it as too dark also. As for lack of a clear subject, I have trouble with that at times. I tend to think of it as a mini-landscape where the sum of the parts is the subject. I plan to shoot it again with my new 17-55 F2.8 lens. This was done the 17-85.

Post #5, Jun 17, 2008 20:06:06




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
LeuceDeuce
Goldmember
LeuceDeuce's Avatar
Joined Oct 2007
2,362 posts
Vancouver BC, Canada
[MORE/SHARE]

Well if anything, at least editing it got people to talk about it :)

Since you've elected to remove your original I'll remove the edit. I guess you're done with feedback.

Post #6, Jun 17, 2008 20:10:54 as a reply to Bill634's post 4 minutes earlier.


my website: Light & Shadowexternal link
my flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
Bill634
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Joined May 2008
193 posts
Quebec, Canada
[MORE/SHARE]

Since you've elected to remove your original I'll remove the edit. I guess you're done with feedback.

Huh? Not at all LeuceDeuce, I didn't remove the original. It's showing up fine on my PC. I welcome your edit and anyone else's. The changes you made don't quite match what I had in mind when I shot the image but you took time to work on it and I am grateful for the input.

Post #7, Jun 18, 2008 14:14:28 as a reply to LeuceDeuce's post 18 hours earlier.




LOG IN TO REPLY
LeuceDeuce
Goldmember
LeuceDeuce's Avatar
Joined Oct 2007
2,362 posts
Vancouver BC, Canada
[MORE/SHARE]

Bill634 wrote in post #5746564external link
Huh? Not at all LeuceDeuce, I didn't remove the original. It's showing up fine on my PC. I welcome your edit and anyone else's. The changes you made don't quite match what I had in mind when I shot the image but you took time to work on it and I am grateful for the input.

Yeah I just saw that. Last night I was getting the red X, and assumed you took it off your host site.

Post #8, Jun 18, 2008 15:15:35


my website: Light & Shadowexternal link
my flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY


LIST NEARBY THREADS
646 views & 0 likes for this thread
Quicksilver -- time exposure shot
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Critique Corner



NOT A MEMBER YET? CLICK HERE TO REGISTER TO FORUMS

CHANGE BODY TEXT SIZE FOR ALL THREAD PAGES
POWERED BY AMASS 1.0version 1.0
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net


SEND FEEDBACK TO STAFF  |  JUMP TO FORUM...  |  FORUM RULES


Spent 0.00078 for 4 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.01s
1005 guests, 726 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 3341, that happened on Dec 11, 2014
Latest registered member is hockeydude35

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: By using this site you agree that some cookies will be stored on your browser. For unlogged users we store one session id cookie. For registered members we store (in addition to login session cookie) only cookies that are essential for required functionality, we do not store any personal tracking data in cookies or other browser's data storage methods.