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 28 Aug 2011 (Sunday) 20:32
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Aqueduct.

 
phazelag
Member
Avatar
44 posts
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Hesperia, CA
     
Aug 28, 2011 20:32 |  #1

I am clearly still learning. Here are two photos. The first one is HDR so you can see the aqueduct as it was dark. And the second has almost no processing. Just some small LR3 adjustments that I cant even remember now. The exif data is embed and viewable. But the second shot is 110 seconds at f11 ISO 100. Canon Rebel T1i 500D Tokina 11-16mm at 11mm. Here is the gallery link if you want to see where I started and finished. I was trying to shoot this for an environmental shot for my town. This is where I run and love it. But hard to say if it will come accross. I have a thick skin!

http://www.scottzinda.​com …PBRCP2#14504962​41_ck3z2gK (external link)

IMAGE: http://www.scottzinda.com/Other/Landscape/i-M5MdkxX/1/XL/Sunset-XL.jpg


IMAGE: http://www.scottzinda.com/Other/Landscape/i-jSn499b/1/XL/Crossroads-XL.jpg

Z
www.scottzinda.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
ejay79
Member
Avatar
135 posts
Joined May 2007
Location: Illinois, USA
     
Aug 28, 2011 20:37 |  #2

I prefer the non-HDR'd one by far. If I had this shot to edit in LR3, I think I'd do a gradient filter to bump the exposure level of the bottom half of the photo.

Regarding composition, I think tilting the lens up a bit would do well. That focal length will still show much of the reflective water (nice work on that, btw) but include more of the beautiful sky. Clouds + Sunset + 16mm is a great combination for a dramatic look.


ejiphotos.com (external link), The Johnson Blog (external link)
+Eric Johnson (external link), @eajhnsn1 (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
vpnd
Goldmember
Avatar
1,483 posts
Joined Oct 2007
Location: nd
     
Aug 28, 2011 22:22 |  #3

#2 is sharper from the f11 and the blurr on the water is cool


Canon "Snappy".... Thanks Mom and Dad!
"I don't like to play dress up, or pet my gear. I like to shoot stuff and then print it and put it on my wall."

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
phazelag
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
44 posts
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Hesperia, CA
     
Aug 28, 2011 22:35 |  #4

ejay79 wrote in post #13015984 (external link)
I prefer the non-HDR'd one by far. If I had this shot to edit in LR3, I think I'd do a gradient filter to bump the exposure level of the bottom half of the photo.

Regarding composition, I think tilting the lens up a bit would do well. That focal length will still show much of the reflective water (nice work on that, btw) but include more of the beautiful sky. Clouds + Sunset + 16mm is a great combination for a dramatic look.

Thanks Ejay, I actually am about to by a graduated filter set but if you look all the big stores are out of most of them. But do you think if I did that I would lose the light on the water or blow it out I mean? Or would that just be a sacrifice? I know this technique is ideal when it is just mostly water and sky, or just land and sky with a grad filter. Unless there are other tricks I havent caught on to yet.


Z
www.scottzinda.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
phazelag
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
44 posts
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Hesperia, CA
     
Aug 28, 2011 22:44 |  #5

vpnd wrote in post #13016518 (external link)
#2 is sharper from the f11 and the blurr on the water is cool

VPND actually both were F11. The first one was just bracketed and I think it lost some sharpness in HDR merge from the micro contrast or smoothing. Oh and I had to apply some noise reduction in LR3 on the first one. The HDR had noise that I didnt mind, but I was trying to see it through. Thanks for your help!


Z
www.scottzinda.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ejay79
Member
Avatar
135 posts
Joined May 2007
Location: Illinois, USA
     
Aug 28, 2011 22:49 |  #6

phazelag wrote in post #13016588 (external link)
Thanks Ejay, I actually am about to by a graduated filter set

I was just thinking you should try the Graduated Filter tool in lightroom, then you could make very fine adjustments and see how it turns out.


ejiphotos.com (external link), The Johnson Blog (external link)
+Eric Johnson (external link), @eajhnsn1 (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
phazelag
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
44 posts
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Hesperia, CA
     
Aug 28, 2011 23:21 |  #7

ejay79 wrote in post #13016664 (external link)
I was just thinking you should try the Graduated Filter tool in lightroom, then you could make very fine adjustments and see how it turns out.

I need to try that. Thanks!


Z
www.scottzinda.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
phazelag
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
44 posts
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Hesperia, CA
     
Aug 29, 2011 02:31 |  #8

Ejay,
Well I just tried out the Grad filter in LR3 and it was pretty cool. I thought I had used most of the tools in LR but not that one. Actually thats the one tool I hated in photoshop too because it just bounces around alot and just lived with out it. But now I must master it! I only had a few minutes but here is a sample of the second photo with the GF applied. There is some noise from bringing up the exposure and fill light, but I still like it. The sky is weird but I will work on it later. Thanks for your Help I have grown!

IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Z
www.scottzinda.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Woodworker
Goldmember
2,176 posts
Joined Aug 2009
Location: East Midlands, England
     
Aug 29, 2011 07:11 |  #9

Something different.

David


David

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
phazelag
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
44 posts
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Hesperia, CA
     
Aug 29, 2011 09:59 |  #10

Now that I am awake and saw the third image larger bringing up the exposure that much showed some missing details in the darker areas. I have some shots from earlier in the day I will try the filter on and see how it comes out.


Z
www.scottzinda.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TheLaird
Goldmember
Avatar
2,413 posts
Gallery: 24 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 793
Joined May 2008
Location: Inverness, Highlands of Scotland
     
Aug 30, 2011 06:56 |  #11

The water certainly gives a wonderful lead-in line and adds greatly to the depth. Perhaps clone out the pylons.


Illegitimi non carborundum --- as they said in Roman times ---

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
phazelag
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
44 posts
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Hesperia, CA
     
Aug 30, 2011 09:24 |  #12

TheLaird wrote in post #13023641 (external link)
The water certainly gives a wonderful lead-in line and adds greatly to the depth. Perhaps clone out the pylons.


The Laird, I know they pylons are not that attractive. But this shot was for me and people who live here. We all know they are there and it would look more weird with them the gone. I am not too worried about them. I do get it though. Your point is valid.

I am not looking to make this fine art. I am just looking for some technique in camera mainly for better capture next time. I realize the subject is iffy for many.

Thanks.

Scott


Z
www.scottzinda.com (external link)

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

2,024 views & 0 likes for this thread
Aqueduct.
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 ShootTwice
1317 guests, 228 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.