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
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Guest
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Discussion Critique Corner 
Thread started 28 Sep 2008 (Sunday) 22:13
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

To reshoot or not to reshoot, that is the question

 
ImageMogul
Senior Member
Avatar
596 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Aug 2007
Location: Tennessee
     
Sep 28, 2008 22:13 |  #1

I saw a haybale on a hill with some purple flowers in front while driving to work. I stopped to shoot it, but I had to rush it. The DOF is not what it could be I think and I'm not sure of the focus. I had to handhold but probably could have gone a couple more stops smaller in aperature. I don't know. Scrap it and reshoot? I don't know if I could get that darn butterfly to pose again, but if it looks bad overall ... I'd rather reshoot. Alright, what do you think. I'm over a bale ... er ... uh ... barrel on this one.

IMAGE: http://imagemogul.smugmug.com/photos/382548049_M3fdu-L.jpg

Thanks
Mark

Composition can’t be reduced to a set of rules ... Dissonance has its place in photography as well as music. If we confined ourselves to major and minor scales, the blues wouldn’t exist. Rules are tools, not laws.” ~ James Martin
http://www.imagemogul.​smugmug.com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Croasdail
making stuff up
Avatar
8,135 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 899
Joined Apr 2005
Location: North Carolina and Toronto
     
Sep 28, 2008 22:16 |  #2

What do you think about the shot with the trees on top cropped off the top using a standard 8x10 format? I am not sure you need them.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bigbitt8706
Senior Member
Avatar
255 posts
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Right in the middle of Texas
     
Sep 28, 2008 22:46 |  #3
bannedPermanent ban

Croasdail wrote in post #6399822 (external link)
What do you think about the shot with the trees on top cropped off the top using a standard 8x10 format? I am not sure you need them.

+1... loose the trees and this would look really cool... nice eye


http://www.clintbitten​binderphotography.com/ (external link)
all images copyright the Temple Daily Telegram and myself.
dont steal my stuff!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sokun
Senior Member
Avatar
276 posts
Joined Sep 2008
Location: Los Angeles, Ca
     
Sep 29, 2008 00:15 |  #4

I agree with the guys about the background. It's unnecessary and I would bring the camera down to get rid of it. I also think you need to figure out which object in the picture you like more because both of them are pretty interesting, but when combined with such a narrow aperture, they really fight for your attention.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
fadetoblack22
Senior Member
320 posts
Joined Aug 2008
     
Sep 29, 2008 07:24 as a reply to  @ sokun's post |  #5

I've seen this kind of shot before and I'm confused about something...How is the bale in uncut grass?? :p




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
acchildress
Senior Member
986 posts
Joined Oct 2007
     
Sep 29, 2008 07:48 |  #6

That bale was cut and baled about 6 weeks ago and just left in the field.

I thought that I liked the photo the way it is, but I scrolled the photo up to the top of the screen and cut off the trees and presto it is much better that way.

Yall are right.



Come be a big fish in a little pond, help build
theanswerjar.com  (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kirkt
Cream of the Crop
6,602 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 1556
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Philadelphia, PA USA
     
Sep 29, 2008 09:10 |  #7

Maybe reshoot with more shallow DOF, with focus on the bale so the flowers in the foreground are blurred - the color and form will suggest the flowers, but the focus will be on the bale. Try shooting in different light (early morning, evening) to get more shadow definition of the bale's form, maybe?

Good crop suggestion form the posts above as well.

Keep working this one and post the results!

Kirk


Kirk
---
images: http://kirkt.smugmug.c​om (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
PETERSYMES
Goldmember
Avatar
1,502 posts
Joined Dec 2007
Location: Kent,England
     
Sep 29, 2008 16:24 |  #8

I agree with Kirk.
The flowers look a little over sharpened to me!!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
midnitejam
Senior Member
806 posts
Joined Jul 2006
Location: Parma Ohio
     
Sep 29, 2008 19:09 as a reply to  @ PETERSYMES's post |  #9

The hay cock needs to be at least as sharp as the flowers.
Crop the trees.
Print it and hang it. You have a winner


Midnitejam--The happiness in your life depends on the quality of your thoughts.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
fadetoblack22
Senior Member
320 posts
Joined Aug 2008
     
Sep 30, 2008 02:46 as a reply to  @ midnitejam's post |  #10

I'm not sure what f stop you used, but if you do reshoot again use f/22.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Walczak ­ Photo
Goldmember
1,034 posts
Joined Apr 2008
     
Sep 30, 2008 09:57 |  #11

Just my own opinion(s) here but most of the issues you made comments on could probably be fixed in Photoshop. I agree with the comments that it does look a little over-sharpened in the foreground and in addition to that I'd also straighten the tree line and maybe take a closer look at your colors...looks a tich too red to me.

As to reshooting it or not...honestly that's kind of up to you. Without seeing the full size original to see just how much work you'd have to put into it, it's a hard call. Personally if I'm not happy with a shot and I don't feel I can "fix it", then as long as the opportunity is available, I will usually go for the reshoot myself...but again that's if I can't fix it. If I can repair an otherwise decent image and only spend 1/2 an hour doing so compared with maybe spending an hour or more driving back to the place (not to mention the money spent on gas) along with setting up the camera/shot again and then having to edit the new pic...you get my drift. Sometimes it's easier to reshoot, sometimes it's not really worth the effort.

That said, from what I see here it looks like a lovely shot and most of the issues probably could be fixed in pp. You'll have to decide if the time is worth it and/or your editing skills are up to the task. -If- you choose to reshoot, I would pay a little more attention to your DOF....decide exactly what you want the focus to be. To me the hay bail and the flowers in the foreground should take priority. I seriously doubt I'd use f/22 as was suggested though...you don't need that much DOF and in fact, I'd try to keep the trees in the background out of focus as they're not really relevant to the shot other than providing a sense of DOF (which would be lost if you had EVERYTHING in focus here). And you could always clone the butterfly back into the new shot from this one :D.

Okies...just my $.02 worth,
Jim


"It is horrifying that we have to fight our own government to save the environment. " - Ansel Adams
Walczak Photography - www.walczakphoto.izfre​e.com (external link)
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Flo
Gimmie Some Lovin
Avatar
44,987 posts
Likes: 16
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Nanaimo,B.C.
     
Sep 30, 2008 10:32 as a reply to  @ Walczak Photo's post |  #12

I am trying to figure put why folks want the bale looking good..you have those gorgeous flowers and the butterfly..I would 69 the bale and crop.:confused: Just me.


you're a great friend, but if Zombies chase us, I am tripping you.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
PETERSYMES
Goldmember
Avatar
1,502 posts
Joined Dec 2007
Location: Kent,England
     
Sep 30, 2008 13:06 |  #13

Flo wrote in post #6409580 (external link)
I am trying to figure put why folks want the bale looking good..you have those gorgeous flowers and the butterfly..I would 69 the bale and crop.:confused: Just me.

69??:confused:




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Flo
Gimmie Some Lovin
Avatar
44,987 posts
Likes: 16
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Nanaimo,B.C.
     
Sep 30, 2008 13:35 |  #14

PETERSYMES wrote in post #6410464 (external link)
69??:confused:

Axe...lol....and it was freudian slip.lol..I meant 86:p:o


you're a great friend, but if Zombies chase us, I am tripping you.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kirkt
Cream of the Crop
6,602 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 1556
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Philadelphia, PA USA
     
Sep 30, 2008 13:47 |  #15

I suggested blurring the flowers because, even in their blurred state, it will be obvious what they are and the color of the flowers and their form/arrangement are what anchor the foreground, not the details of the petals themselves, etc. The bale, if blurred, will be more amorphous and not necessarily a recognizable element, even in a field of grass. If you keep everything in focus, the scene gets a little confusing.

The form of the bale is really nice - its isolation is also sort of serene and its existence amid the grass is nice context. The sharpness of the bale and the grass would emphasize the nice texture that each possesses. The composition as in the original photo, with the tree line cropped, would be balanced as well and the blurred flowers in the foreground would separate and give depth to the image. The purples and blues of the flowers also adds a nice complement to the golds and oranges of the bale and grass.

Reshoot it if it is not inconvenient - shoot in the late evening for a golden tone and stronger definition of form via shadows or early in the AM for a bluish tone and see what you get. If you want to compress the fore and back grounds together, shoot telephoto, if you want more separation, shoot wide. Do all of that fun stuff in-camera as you will go insane trying to mask the flowers from the grass/bale. Try shifting focus, first shooting the flowers in focus and blurring the bale/grass, and then shoot another image focusing on the bale and blurring the flowers, etc.

Go for it, it will be a good learning experience with a nice scene. Who knows, you may even get a Wyeth landscape out of it. Or you could just 69 the bale and shoot the flowers. Hehe.

Enjoy!

Kirk


Kirk
---
images: http://kirkt.smugmug.c​om (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

1,885 views & 0 likes for this thread, 11 members have posted to it.
To reshoot or not to reshoot, that is the question
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Discussion Critique Corner 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

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

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 2.58forum software
version 2.58 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member was a spammer, and banned as such!
2678 guests, 144 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, 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.