Apocalyptic ..

alphamalex wrote in post #14939462
Leigh,

Thanks for the very detailed explanation. I have read it once, and will take some more time digesting what you have said. I will say one thing regarding your remark about me reacting with less grace than I should have. I would say I was quite responsible and tactful in my replies; even whilst replying to remarks that were maybe slightly less than cordial. That's ok, I don't care .. my goal is to understand and learn, not get in a shouting match; so I listened, and am still listening.

That said, I have looked back at my second attempt, and then my first attempt, and then my second attempt again, and lo and behold, I like it. I can see its a little over processed, but so help me, I like it. Like I said I will go over your message again and again because you were quite detailed in the critique, but I like it

This has made me realize one thing though; I thought I didn't like 'over-processed' HDRs, but apparently, I myself am overcooking 'em! I guess this is a moment of self-reflection; if nothing, this is my take away from this exercise.

So here's the component images, and the unprocessed composite; once again, I am open to constructive criticism. The short story is, after a crashing t-storm, I was on my bicycle going to the library when this scene caught my eye. I stopped the bike and snapped a few handheld frames trying to catch as much as I could of the fast moving clouds.

Thanks everyone for the comments and the critique. I am old enough to listen and smart enough to learn; so please, learn me

Freddy ..

The first photo posted in this post labeled 036 looks the best of everything you've posted. Why? The clouds look natural. The processed versions look like something from an alien planet that would never exist here. You really only needed one exposure to capture this scene as well. You don't need to try to open up every single shadow - especially where they don't contain anything that adds the the photo. You could easily brighten your foreground in that shot. Or as an alternative you can use a graduated ND filter with a single exposure in order to pull a bit more out of both the sky and the foreground. You still have the problem with the road, with not having a good solid subject other than the clouds, etc.

If someone viewed your photo, would they be told a story? I don't really think so. Your photos should tell a story, stand on their own, and not have to be explained by more than a few words.

There comes a time when you see a scene and it has a great element, but the rest isn't that good. What should you do? IMO, and what I do, is I don't bother shooting it. If it doesn't have all the elements I want and need to create a compelling photograph, then why waste my time? I don't want to create snapshots. I want to create compelling photographs. We can't start at doing that, I know. I have a TON of snapshots from my earlier years doing photography. At the time, I thought they were pretty good - thankfully I had input from others who would give me honest critique on what I was doing wrong, what I could do better, etc. If all people ever told me was "hey great shot!" then I'd never strive to get better.

Maybe I'm harsh in my critiques of people's work, but I'm honest and I hope that it makes you want to get better.

Work on honing your HDR and work on finding a subject for stuff like this. When all else fails...use your car! A wonderful sky can be great but by itself it does become a little boring. Adding a subject instantly raises the "interesting factor". Here is an example. This day I thought the sky was great so I really wanted a photo but I had nothing to put in the photo. The field itself is pretty boring so I decided to use my car.

Now this isn't a perfect HDR by any means but it is definitely more interesting than if I were to just shoot an open field. It is unfinished and there was lots of dust spots on my polarizer so its not a keeper to me but I just wanted to illustrate my point with it.

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/mrbubbles916/7​933188040/

OP: The road portion kind of takes away from the shot.

alphamalex wrote in post #14931597
I thought I had captured a pretty good snap of post-thunderstorm clouds breaking up, but now I'm hearing that I took a shot without a distinct subject, and the clouds that I did take a picture of, are not nice/interesting. Well, that bums me out

Don't be confused. You asked for opinions. Not everyone is going to come in and say they like it. I happen to agree here. It's a neat shot of the clouds. The post processing goes in the right direction to help convey what you felt when you saw it. I get all that. But it's not something I would hang on a wall. It isn't a compelling subject. I think the HDR is overcooked. I think "snapshot" is taking it a bit far because it is obvious that some time went into it but it falls into that category of average where there happens to be a lot of material. The reason I say this isn't to make you feel bad or confuse you. I think you are here because you want to know how to make things even better.

A good landscape or "skyscape" photo needs multiple elements that are compelling. I field of grass is just boring. I drive past shots like this all the time because I know they aren't worth shooting. But suppose you had a field of sunflowers in this and you maybe lit them up with some fill flash. And you got really close so that the bottom of the image was filled with some rather large sunflowers. But you shot with a small aperture (or focus stacked) so that everything was sharp. That would probably combine to make a dramatic image. Or maybe a lonely dead tree on a hill located in the lower corner with everything else being sky would be cool.

The point is - take the extra step. Go the extra mile to make it stand out. You'll end up shooting fewer pics but that's OK. That was the norm when we used film. We only would shoot when we knew we would have a good shot. Digital makes you want to shoot everything which is OK as far as practice is concerned but when it comes to work that you want to present to others, be extremely selective.

alphamalex wrote in post #14937707
Is this better?

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/kykhans/7913825​760/
036_HDR by kykhans, on Flickr

I like this one better. The clouds are believable. It's a little heavy on processing but not over the top in my opinion.

To all the Gurus here, thank you for your time, support, and critique; I agree, and I understand

To be honest, this was not meant to be an example of an exceptional image; I just happened to like the drama in the final product.

I agree about the road, there was no value added in it, and it has been removed. AFA the second processing is concerned, I still like it, but as has been pointed out, its not something I'd take home to mama.

Image 036 is the 0 exposure and IMO its ok, but how do you get a great image (lets not discuss subject and compo at this time) from a single exposure when there is much dynamic range in the whole scene. If I work with that one image, I'd still have to squeeze/stretch it to make it presentable, no?

As thanks, I offer you a recent capture from this Saturday when I was visiting another planet ; again, I like the hell out of it, hope you all like it too

alphamalex wrote in post #14950486
To all the Gurus here, thank you for your time, support, and critique; I agree, and I understand

To be honest, this was not meant to be an example of an exceptional image; I just happened to like the drama in the final product.

I agree about the road, there was no value added in it, and it has been removed. AFA the second processing is concerned, I still like it, but as has been pointed out, its not something I'd take home to mama.

Image 036 is the 0 exposure and IMO its ok, but how do you get a great image (lets not discuss subject and compo at this time) from a single exposure when there is much dynamic range in the whole scene. If I work with that one image, I'd still have to squeeze/stretch it to make it presentable, no?

As thanks, I offer you a recent capture from this Saturday when I was visiting another planet ; again, I like the hell out of it, hope you all like it too

What planet is that? Looks familiar. As a fellow planetary traveler I'm surprised I haven't run into you - especially while hitchiking across the galaxy.

I like this one better. The corn is a bit more of a subject than a field of grass. I have a small tip that may help if you like the HDR look. If you look at that image you'll see halos that get bright at the edges of areas of high contrast such as the tops of the trees and the sky. That is what really makes a tone-mapped image look bad. Grab yourself a tripod and bracket your exposures. Blend them and use layer masks to get your tone-mapping less extreme but more productive without the halos. You'll like your own stuff a lot better.
Here's a nifty little program I bought for just such things. I actually like it better than CS5 for this kind of thing. I think there is a free trial. http://www.oloneo.com/

alphamalex wrote in post #14950486
Image 036 is the 0 exposure and IMO its ok, but how do you get a great image (lets not discuss subject and compo at this time) from a single exposure when there is much dynamic range in the whole scene. If I work with that one image, I'd still have to squeeze/stretch it to make it presentable, no?

Shoot RAW, learn to use and use filters, and work on post processing skills.

Qbx wrote in post #14950474
I like this one better. The clouds are believable. It's a little heavy on processing but not over the top in my opinion.

Where do you live where clouds look anything remotely like that?