Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Critique Corner 
Thread started 19 Jul 2010 (Monday) 17:48
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Lake Photos - Why are these not better???

 
smackitsakic
Member
126 posts
Joined Mar 2010
     
Jul 19, 2010 17:48 |  #1

I was at the lake this past weekend and took some night photos of the lake/reflection/sky. I'm a bit disappointed in how they turned out. I was hoping for everything to be a bit sharper and the colours to be a bit brighter.

What can I do better when i'm back at the lake two weeks from now?

Thanks! (all photos were metered off of the sky to the right of the sun, except for the shot of the moon which was metered off of the reflection and the 5th picture which, out of curiousity, I shot in automatic mode)

1

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i1005.photobuck​et.com …/July%202010/_M​G_3850.jpg (external link)


2

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i1005.photobuck​et.com …/July%202010/_M​G_3849.jpg (external link)


3

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i1005.photobuck​et.com …/July%202010/_M​G_3838.jpg (external link)


4

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i1005.photobuck​et.com …/July%202010/_M​G_3828.jpg (external link)


5

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i1005.photobuck​et.com …/July%202010/_M​G_3826.jpg (external link)



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
telephoto500
Member
Avatar
155 posts
Likes: 11
Joined Sep 2008
     
Jul 19, 2010 20:32 |  #2

try not to shoot into the sun


shuttertreasure.com
https://www.flickr.com​/photos/138443754@N08/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Rivest
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,678 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2010
Location: Canada.
     
Jul 19, 2010 21:32 |  #3

#2 is good although I would have used a lower view point (to remove branches in the corner) and a longer shutter speed, to smooth out the water.

My 0.02$ ;)


Hi, I'm David.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gibbit1
Goldmember
Avatar
1,658 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Jul 2009
Location: Valdese, nc
     
Jul 20, 2010 06:04 |  #4

Well, if you don't have one already, you need a tripod. You also might want to invest in a set of ND grad filters, because the contrast in the scene greatly exceeded the dynamic range of your sensor. You could also take multiple exposures at different settings and combine them for an HDR image.

Another thing you'll want (again, if you don't have it) is a remote release. For these images, you'd need to use f/16 or so to get everything in focus front to back. A tripod and remote release will allow you to set a small aperture and still get a sharp image without camera shake.

Hope that was helpful. I'm not fully awake yet.


"Everything will be alright. I'm from the government and I'm here to help."
Gear: EOS 5DMKII; EOS 400D (infrared converted); Canon 24-105mm f/4 L; Sigma 17-35mm f/2.8-4 EX; Canon 70-200mm f/4 L; Canon 135mm f/2.0 L; Pentax SMC Takumar 50mm f/1.4 with EOS adaptor, Rokinon 14mm f/2.8; only enough knowledge to be a clear and present danger to society.
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
GorgeShooter
Goldmember
Avatar
1,422 posts
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Oregon
     
Jul 20, 2010 10:26 |  #5

The light is too flat. The horizon isn't level on #2. The 1st one seems more like a snapshot IMO. I like the use of foreground elements in #4 and 5. The dock in #2 doesn't lead the eye into the photo.


1DX | 5D MkII (gripped)
16-35 f/2.8L | 24-70 f/2.8L | 24-105 f/4L IS | 70-200 f/4L IS | 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS | 24 f/3.5L TS-E | 45 f/2.8 TS-E | 40 f/2.8 Pancake | 15 f/2.8 Fisheye | Tokina 100 f/2.8 Macro | Canon 1.4x TC | 580 EX II | 430 EX II | Manfrotto 055CXPRO4 | Kirk BH-1
:: Smugmug :: (external link) | :: Photography BLOG :: (external link) | :: Workshops and Classes (external link) ::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
smackitsakic
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
126 posts
Joined Mar 2010
     
Jul 20, 2010 13:31 |  #6

I will play around with this when i'm at the lake again.

How do I approach focusing this scene? Do I focus on the moon and use a really small aperture to, in turn, bring everything in focus?

I've heard so much about hyperfocal distance, but I have no idea how to achieve it.

Thanks!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gibbit1
Goldmember
Avatar
1,658 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Jul 2009
Location: Valdese, nc
     
Jul 24, 2010 15:40 |  #7

Focusing on the moon will, for all practical purposes, be focusing at infinity. That will leave your foreground blurry, even at small apertures. It's actually best to exclude the moon, then take a shot of just it and add it to the scene in Photoshop. The reason is simple: While the rest of your scene will require several seconds to record a proper exposure, the moon will only require a few tenths of a second. Also, the moon moves pretty quickly, so any exposure of more than a second will show the moon as just a bright glob.

So, compose a shot without the moon. Use f/16 or f/22 if you want everything in focus. Focus about 1/3rd of the way into the scene, and everything should come out sharp. Now, zoom in on the moon and spot meter it. You'll probably get about 1/60th at f/8 or so. It varies with weather conditions. Combine them in PS and you're good to go.


"Everything will be alright. I'm from the government and I'm here to help."
Gear: EOS 5DMKII; EOS 400D (infrared converted); Canon 24-105mm f/4 L; Sigma 17-35mm f/2.8-4 EX; Canon 70-200mm f/4 L; Canon 135mm f/2.0 L; Pentax SMC Takumar 50mm f/1.4 with EOS adaptor, Rokinon 14mm f/2.8; only enough knowledge to be a clear and present danger to society.
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ayn
Member
Avatar
90 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Apr 2008
Location: San Francisco
     
Jul 24, 2010 19:21 as a reply to  @ gibbit1's post |  #8

a couple of things:

- exposures of the sky and the lake are typically different, to remedy this, you can either use a gradual neutral density filter, or shoot raw and fix it in post processing (I do the latter). Bracketing the shot would also help to find the best one to do that with.

- you might want to use a (circular) polarizer to clear up the reflections on the water.

Here are some images around Lake Tahoe I shot with a very little bit of processing, mainly the Graduated Filter (g) in Camera Raw + a bit of curve adjustment, you can easily do that manually by using a few adjustment layers with masks (use gradient tool to paint the mask).


IMAGE: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3113/3235892930_973243e8da_z.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/ayn/3235892930  (external link)

IMAGE: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3465/3238194576_d0c5d2ae36_z.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/ayn/3238194576  (external link)

IMAGE: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3641/3439047211_fc120fb10b_z.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/ayn/3439047211  (external link)

@ayn (external link), photography.andrewng.c​om (external link), blog.andrewng.com (external link)
Founder & iOS at Priime (external link)

Writeups: 100L Macro (external link), 85L II (external link), 5D2 (external link), X100 (external link), G11 (external link), LX3 (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tonilg
Member
97 posts
Joined Jul 2010
Location: Bellingham, Washington
     
Jul 24, 2010 20:47 |  #9

Ayn your pictures are beautiful! I just want to hang out with you for a day!


http://www.tonilynnpho​tography.com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ayn
Member
Avatar
90 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Apr 2008
Location: San Francisco
     
Jul 24, 2010 20:48 |  #10

Thanks @tonilg. If you find yourself in SF just send me a PM. :) (looks like I finally reached post count of 30 to sell a lens! wohoo! it's been fun, decent forum, I'll def come back).


@ayn (external link), photography.andrewng.c​om (external link), blog.andrewng.com (external link)
Founder & iOS at Priime (external link)

Writeups: 100L Macro (external link), 85L II (external link), 5D2 (external link), X100 (external link), G11 (external link), LX3 (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ayn
Member
Avatar
90 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Apr 2008
Location: San Francisco
     
Jul 24, 2010 20:50 as a reply to  @ ayn's post |  #11

oh btw, the most annoying thing of shooting landscapes above was actually cleaning up the dust in the photo in photoshop, you don't realize how dusty the sensor is until you shoot at f/22. ;)


@ayn (external link), photography.andrewng.c​om (external link), blog.andrewng.com (external link)
Founder & iOS at Priime (external link)

Writeups: 100L Macro (external link), 85L II (external link), 5D2 (external link), X100 (external link), G11 (external link), LX3 (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

1,944 views & 0 likes for this thread
Lake Photos - Why are these not better???
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Critique Corner 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Abdullah
937 guests, 303 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.