First sunrise attempt

stupid troll moderators

It's good enough that you might need to be more specific with what you would like critiquing.

I guess you would do with a stronger ND filter so you don't have to shoot at f22. Or did you mean you used graduated NDs? On a 50D f22 is going to give quite a bit of diffraction softening. Personally I like the shutter speed - I'm not a fan of silky-smooth sea photos. I'm not sure how much different an f8 1/6s shot would look in the water though.

Also the horizon looks a little tilted to the left. I know it curves a bit, but I would rotate a few 10's of a degree to the right.

ejenner wrote in post #17753776
It's good enough that you might need to be more specific with what you would like critiquing.

I guess you would do with a stronger ND filter so you don't have to shoot at f22. Or did you mean you used graduated NDs? On a 50D f22 is going to give quite a bit of diffraction softening. Personally I like the shutter speed - I'm not a fan of silky-smooth sea photos. I'm not sure how much different an f8 1/6s shot would look in the water though.

Also the horizon looks a little tilted to the left. I know it curves a bit, but I would rotate a few 10's of a degree to the right.

Firstly, I wanted to see if this was "good", albeit, it seems good to me...I have seen better, where others have seemed sharper

I was thinking on the same thought when I returned from holiday, that I needed a stronger ND filter. I was actually using graduated filter, though since it really experimental, as this is my first attempt. The sea was relatively calm, really wasn't that much of waves down below

For me the shot is just okay. I don't care for the composition...it's very heavy and busy on the left and very vacant on the right. I also don't care for the colors; I know unfortunately you can't pick what your sunrise is going to look like...you get whatever you're given to work with. I think if the sun wasn't so far to the left in the frame so that I was able to see more of the purples that are present on the right side of the frame, the picture might seem a little more balanced. I also think that water with this amount of movement (or lack thereof) doesn't always make for the most interesting pictures. For a scene like this it seems like there should either be waves in the water or it should be perfectly calm. Just my opinion though...take it for what it's worth to you.

your settings confuse me, using a ND filter and tiny aperture while shooting at .6 seconds?

at 28mm and f/11 the hyper focal distance is 7.6 feet, the object nearest to your camera position seems to be much farther than that. 50 feet? You could focus out that far and still have everything behind it in focus.

.6 seconds is not fast enough to cause any blurring of the water so just crank up the SS to make up for the two stops gain in aperture.

You probably wouldn't be anywhere near the max SS but if you did run into it, that would be the only reason to use the ND filter.


sunset/sunrise need to have a really compelling foreground. You've done okay but it really isn't that special. As said, everything to the right of center is boring. Maybe if you had stepped to your right a bit and panned the camera back to the left the stuff on land might have made it a better composition.

at .6, you obviously had a tripod, taking a couple of exposures and merging them to get more highlight and shadow detail would have been nice. Without multiple exposures I probably would have chosen to capture the highlights and let the shadows go dark.

It is a nice shot as it is, but not a WOW shot.

edit: just saw that you were using GND, which changes things a bit. I still say that multiple exposures would give a better result.

Left Handed Brisket wrote in post #17754384
your settings confuse me, using a ND filter and tiny aperture while shooting at .6 seconds?

at 28mm and f/11 the hyper focal distance is 7.6 feet, the object nearest to your camera position seems to be much farther than that. 50 feet? You could focus out that far and still have everything behind it in focus.

.6 seconds is not fast enough to cause any blurring of the water so just crank up the SS to make up for the two stops gain in aperture.

You probably wouldn't be anywhere near the max SS but if you did run into it, that would be the only reason to use the ND filter.


sunset/sunrise need to have a really compelling foreground. You've done okay but it really isn't that special. As said, everything to the right of center is boring. Maybe if you had stepped to your right a bit and panned the camera back to the left the stuff on land might have made it a better composition.

at .6, you obviously had a tripod, taking a couple of exposures and merging them to get more highlight and shadow detail would have been nice. Without multiple exposures I probably would have chosen to capture the highlights and let the shadows go dark.

It is a nice shot as it is, but not a WOW shot.

edit: just saw that you were using GND, which changes things a bit. I still say that multiple exposures would give a better result.

How does it confuse you [the settings]? It's not f/11, it's f/22

RichSoansPhotos wrote in post #17754648
How does it confuse you [the settings]? It's not f/11, it's f/22

image quality degrades at smaller apertures (defraction) and depending on wind conditions you could introduce motion blur in the clouds, or even with slight camera shake at long shutter speeds. That's why i suggested f/11 not f/22

Left Handed Brisket wrote in post #17754843
image quality degrades at smaller apertures (defraction) and depending on wind conditions you could introduce motion blur in the clouds, or even with slight camera shake at long shutter speeds. That's why i suggested f/11 not f/22

ok, got it, but seeing that f/11 obviously will allow more light on the sensor, how would I go about reducing light, because I want to use slow shutter speed

I don't see any benefit to slow shutter in the pic you posted. Assuming you want to flatten the water with slow shutter, you need at least one second. Probably more like two

Consider that at a distance the wave moves much more slowly across the frame than at a closer distance. The more it moves across the frame while the shutter is open the more blur.

Fitness Freak wrote in post #17753982
I don't care for the composition...it's very heavy and busy on the left and very vacant on the right.

I find that to be the case with most of these coastal-type shots. Some people love them, but I also find them unbalanced - at least usually. But at least some rocks on the right were included.

Also, to the OP, I was going to say that if you did use Grads, I think you did a pretty good job in placement.

ejenner wrote in post #17755280
I find that to be the case with most of these coastal-type shots. Some people love them, but I also find them unbalanced - at least usually. But at least some rocks on the right were included.

Also, to the OP, I was going to say that if you did use Grads, I think you did a pretty good job in placement.

How did I do a good job in placement??

Not knowing the location, this might not have been possible, but I would have tried to take it from a lower location and maybe further right. Also, maybe either earlier or later to get some more light through the break in the clouds to add more color. The horizon is also not straight.

RichSoansPhotos wrote in post #17755986
How did I do a good job in placement??

Well I don't see an obvious line or graduation. In fact even knowing you were using a grad, I can't see where it was placed which is obviously good.

RichSoansPhotos wrote in post #17755014
ok, got it, but seeing that f/11 obviously will allow more light on the sensor, how would I go about reducing light, because I want to use slow shutter speed

A 2 Stop ND filter would make an F11 exposure into and F22 exposure.

Hell I think most C-Pol's are 2 stop Filters.

NinjaKix wrote in post #17762968
A 2 Stop ND filter would make an F11 exposure into and F22 exposure.

you got it backwards

adding a two stop filter would take you from 22 to 11.