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 13 Aug 2012 (Monday) 09:33
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Mt. Rushmore CC please

 
ashikuli1
Member
79 posts
Joined Jul 2011
     
Aug 13, 2012 09:33 |  #1

My recent visit to Mt. Rushmore. One of these are HDR, other one is not. Please provide some feedback on composition and lighting. Thanks


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.



HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Canon 6D|Canon 60D |Canon 50 1.8| Canon 85mm 1.2 L | Canon 24-105 L| Canon 17-40 L| Canon 17-55 IS | Canon 70-200 L F4 IS | 430Ex II |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
drveede76
Member
121 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 35
Joined Dec 2011
     
Aug 13, 2012 09:40 |  #2

#1 looks over processed to me. I like the look of highly processed HDR in some cases, but the greens are too green, and the sky is very distracting. The framing looks good, and I am sure that this can be dialed back a little.

Dave


6D, 24-70L 2.8 ii, 16-35L 2.8, 70-200L 2.8 IS ii, 24-105L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
joedlh
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,413 posts
Gallery: 46 photos
Likes: 566
Joined Dec 2007
Location: Long Island, NY, N. America, Sol III, Orion Spur, Milky Way, Local Group, Virgo Cluster, Laniakea.
     
Aug 13, 2012 09:57 |  #3

Was your intention to depict what Mt. Rushmore would look like at the Apocalypse? If so, well done. Although I would have expected a fiery, not a blue sky. Way too overcooked. The trees too. The other one is an interesting point of view, but too much featureless rock. Perhaps crop it vertically and either include all of Mr. Lincoln or none of him.


Joe
Gear: Kodak Instamatic, Polaroid Swinger. Oh you meant gear now. :rolleyes:
http://photo.joedlh.ne​t (external link)
Editing ok

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
erikfig
Goldmember
Avatar
2,151 posts
Likes: 200
Joined May 2012
Location: Orlando, FL
     
Aug 13, 2012 11:29 |  #4

That is exactly why I don't like HDR's


Who cares about my gear?
FlickR (external link)
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Littlejon ­ Dsgn
Goldmember
3,266 posts
Likes: 897
Joined Feb 2012
Location: Sandy, Oregon
     
Aug 13, 2012 16:22 as a reply to  @ erikfig's post |  #5

#1 way to overcooked
#2 I personaly dont like that prospective




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Gizmo1137
Senior Member
Avatar
960 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Feb 2009
Location: Phoenix, AZ
     
Aug 13, 2012 16:50 |  #6

joedlh wrote in post #14852076 (external link)
Was your intention to depict what Mt. Rushmore would look like at the Apocalypse? If so, well done. Although I would have expected a fiery, not a blue sky. Way too overcooked. The trees too. The other one is an interesting point of view, but too much featureless rock. Perhaps crop it vertically and either include all of Mr. Lincoln or none of him.

bw!:)

Littlejon Dsgn wrote in post #14853612 (external link)
#1 way to overcooked
#2 I personaly dont like that prospective

I agree with this and others who have suggested #1 is over cooked. Good news is you should be able to dial it back.


Best, Bruce

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LONDON808
Senior Member
Avatar
872 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Honolulu hawaii
     
Aug 13, 2012 17:15 |  #7

post the original please, i would really like to see how you butchered this so bad


View My Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Qbx
Goldmember
3,962 posts
Gallery: 49 photos
Likes: 493
Joined Dec 2010
     
Aug 13, 2012 19:28 |  #8

I'm a fan of HDR; but I'd agree that #1 leans over the line a bit. Try some different variations and you might have a better image. I like #2 - different take on a popular spot.


-- Image Editing OK --

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Shutterwolf
Senior Member
Avatar
523 posts
Joined Apr 2012
Location: California
     
Aug 14, 2012 00:07 |  #9
bannedPermanent ban

Littlejon Dsgn wrote in post #14853612 (external link)
#1 way to overcooked
#2 I personaly dont like that prospective

Agreed!


Josh
https://www.facebook.c​om/ShutterwolfPhotogra​phy (external link)
60D, 550EX, Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 Mark II, Canon 28-135mm IS, 18-55(old), Rebel Xti/400D (for sale)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Dawicka2
Senior Member
398 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Feb 2012
Location: Moved to D.C. area!!!
     
Aug 16, 2012 22:23 |  #10

ashikuli1 wrote in post #14851953 (external link)
One of these are HDR, other one is not.

Which one is HDR?


Magic lantern'd T2i, a 1d2n, 15-85, rokinon 8 and 85mm, nikon 55 f1.2, sigma 24mm f1.8 and Tokina 400mm creeperPrime.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
5ifty ­ mm
Member
Avatar
121 posts
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Seattle
     
Aug 16, 2012 22:29 |  #11

erikfig wrote in post #14852455 (external link)
That is exactly why I don't like HDR's

Dont be mislead by poorly done HDR. No offense to the OP, but the first image I would not consider HDR, just because it was an HDR process that was done.

HDR was designed to do one thing. Add dynamic range that the camera cannot capture in one shot. Yes it can be used for a stylized look, but 95% of "HDR" that you see online are done poorly and way overdone. Again no offense to the OP.

For example. Almost every image you see in the link below is HDR.

http://www.spacesimage​s.com …ientation=*ALL*​&commit=Go (external link)


Camera + Lens

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bartc
Goldmember
1,880 posts
Gallery: 126 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 2837
Joined Jul 2012
Location: Boise, Idaho
     
Aug 16, 2012 22:33 as a reply to  @ Dawicka2's post |  #12

#1 the sky makes my eyes trip out
#2 i like the perspective...but i think leaving the foreground in silhouette would look better as theres way to much degradation in the foreground from bringing out the shadows


-Bart
5D mk3 gripped |EF 28-70mm F2.8L | EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS | A Big @ss lightbank...and all sorts of modifiers

http://bartcepekphotog​raphy.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
carlh
Senior Member
571 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Jun 2012
Location: Telford, Shropshire
     
Aug 17, 2012 04:22 |  #13

i like hdrs but need to be toned down a little, theres a halo all round the mountain :)

will be great if you can adjust it right



www.cdhpix.co.uk (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CSMFoto
Goldmember
Avatar
1,178 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Dec 2011
     
Aug 17, 2012 08:19 |  #14

Eh, HDR is boring when used in the completely wrong way. This is WAY overdone and is it more about the gravity of how large the mountain is or is it more about the dramatic clouds?

The 2nd of the images is better, I like the crop a lot but still needs a bit of work. Be careful from going from one extreme to the other in terms of your post processing. Don't overdo your exposures trying to compensate for the sun overpowering your skies etc. I can tell how you did this from the halo on the separation from the right to the sky on the right side. Looks like a loose edit with the magic wand tool and no feathering.

Remember in grade school when they(forget which teachers) would tell you the KISS rule? Keep It Simple Stupid. :-) not calling you stupid, just something I tell myself when I feel I get out of control with different techniques, whether it be for skin softening, bringing back skies or digitally melting a photograph together.

Here's an example of one "HDR" I attempted a while back when I was on vacation.

IMAGE: http://www.cary-smith.com/img/s9/v13/p621575077-5.jpg

It's still not what I'd like it to be, but with tree cover it gets a bit complicated and for something I'm not paid for I say w/e. You can tell the exposure difference from the palm fronds in the top left and the tree cover. It's about a 2 stop different between the correctly exposed tropical foliage and the sky. It's also about another 2 stop diff between the foliage and the foreground with the water. In your camera you can setup bracket shooting and it takes 3-5 shots for you depending on your camera.

HDR mean's(as you probably know) High Dynamic Range. Our camera's only see about 12 stops from bright to dark, our eyes however see more. The technique in my mind is to accurately stitch together multiple exposures(for myself, 3 is normal). Put your camera on a tripod, hit the clouds, the midtones, and your shadows. From there stitch them together in a believable scene.

If you are trying to get into more digital manipulation I would suggest you purchase a bamboo tablet from Wacom. They're very cheap and I purchased a Bamboo to start with and will NEVER go back to editing with a mouse to edit my manipulations. As I arrive home today I will post up more images of my digital manipulations for you to see better how this bamboo can help you.

Hope this helps!!

Facebook (external link) | CSM Photography (external link) | Gear
I got some camera's & lens'.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tiberius
Goldmember
Avatar
2,556 posts
Likes: 11
Joined Apr 2008
     
Aug 17, 2012 08:39 |  #15

Replace the sky in the first one. It looks way too fake.


My photography website!PHOCAL PHOTOGRAPHY (external link)

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

3,121 views & 0 likes for this thread
Mt. Rushmore CC please
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 oliverkell
1150 guests, 239 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.