| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/17/2006 10:48:57 PM · #51 |
Just shoot and entered mine, Low Key entry #53. :)
Little left field which is always a worry, also took 15 minutes from concept to entry which is a first! (Suddenly gets very worried and quickly runs off to get a second opinion on his entry)
Message edited by author 2006-03-18 06:49:36.
|
|
|
|
03/18/2006 02:02:14 AM · #52 |
I'm in too. I wasn't sure what to shoot at first, then it came to me on my way to work. Pulled the camera out of the bag, shot, came to work and processed - tada "in like flynn'. A really good shot too! Climbing my way closer to the ribbon pool.
Message edited by author 2006-03-18 02:02:29.
|
|
|
|
03/18/2006 01:40:11 PM · #53 |
HEE HEE - I'm in. It was a two-fer in a way cause it was a 2 second exposure. My 2 second entry would fit in low key as well, but I had to do some cloning, so I put it in that category.
This should be fun for me as I Loooooove dark and people sometimes say to me "too dark.." well, now it's ok!!! ha ha ha ha Actually my low key is lighter than some others I've entered in the past.
|
|
|
|
03/19/2006 12:27:27 AM · #54 |
Another possible example...
|
|
|
|
03/19/2006 07:51:04 AM · #55 |
Originally posted by kiwiness:
Originally posted by Rikki:
ok so i checked the images and here's a question. The Blue mentioned dodging and burning in Classic Editing???? |
Extra Rules: For this challenge, please ignore the "Post-shot Adjustments" section of our challenge rules. |
Just wanna make sure...
So we can burn in this challenge???
Why are those Extra Rules not mentioned in the Challenge Details?
I am propably misunderstanding something here:/ |
|
|
|
03/19/2006 08:29:20 AM · #56 |
Originally posted by asij:
Originally posted by kiwiness:
Originally posted by Rikki:
ok so i checked the images and here's a question. The Blue mentioned dodging and burning in Classic Editing???? |
Extra Rules: For this challenge, please ignore the "Post-shot Adjustments" section of our challenge rules. |
Just wanna make sure...
So we can burn in this challenge???
Why are those Extra Rules not mentioned in the Challenge Details?
I am propably misunderstanding something here:/ |
No - I believe they were referring to an earlier challenge with a similar theme. AT THAT TIME, the rules were different. For this challenge, it's basic editing.
Which is good for me, since I still don't know how to dodge or burn as far as post processing goes.... |
|
|
|
03/19/2006 09:10:51 AM · #57 |
so would this be considered low key ?
|
|
|
|
03/19/2006 10:57:38 AM · #58 |
What about this? |
|
|
|
03/19/2006 11:08:02 AM · #59 |
Originally posted by DanSig:
so would this be considered low key ?
|
Technically, yes, but not sure the voters will agree with me.
|
|
|
|
03/19/2006 11:09:09 AM · #60 |
Originally posted by ragamuffingirl:
What about this? |
No, not really. Quite a bit too much domination of highlights.
|
|
|
|
03/19/2006 11:58:50 AM · #61 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
You seem to be pretty durn good at this sort of thing. Would you mind throwing out a bit of advice for those of us less experienced? I'd be particularly interested in the exposures of the 3rd and 4th pics on the top line. Intentionally underexposed? PS'd to get the achieved look? Thanks! |
I missed your post here, Deb. Sorry, if I didn't respond earlier...
The images you mention were taken with two different cameras. The first one, 'Showdown', was taken with a Sony F717 which has a spot meter. I exposed for the white, so what you see is pretty much out of camera. The second image, 'Boathouse', was exposed as per partial metering with a Canon 10D on some area of the wall (if I recall correctly) which I chose as an area of interest (regarding light and detail). This left a considerable amount of redundant background information (sky, mountains, houses on the mountains etc.). I used a soft omni lighting effect with a low ambiant setting to vignette the image to the point of what we have now. I'm sure I also applied numerous curves and fade adjustments to get it as close to what I wanted to render.
Many of my earlier images were very crudely tweaked, really, which worked great at times and at other times would mutilate a lot of detail: very heavy-handed brightness and contrast adjustments in opposite directions (boosting contrast/reducing brightness). |
|
|
|
03/19/2006 01:10:50 PM · #62 |
Entered! Submission 98 :)
Wow I like this, impressive Zeus! |
|
|
|
03/19/2006 02:04:31 PM · #63 |
Im in! 100...hope this does well. It wasnt taken specific for this challenge but i think it fits well. usually when i take photos for a challenge they tend to do poorly and usually scores well when its taken for myself and fits a challenge... we shall see.....let the games begin!
|
|
|
|
03/19/2006 02:30:05 PM · #64 |
Hmmm - good job I read this. I've just changed my submission.
|
|
|
|
03/19/2006 02:49:40 PM · #65 |
Originally posted by zeuszen:
I missed your post here, Deb. Sorry, if I didn't respond earlier...
The images you mention were taken with two different cameras. The first one, 'Showdown', was taken with a Sony F717 which has a spot meter. I exposed for the white, so what you see is pretty much out of camera. The second image, 'Boathouse', was exposed as per partial metering with a Canon 10D on some area of the wall (if I recall correctly) which I chose as an area of interest (regarding light and detail). This left a considerable amount of redundant background information (sky, mountains, houses on the mountains etc.). I used a soft omni lighting effect with a low ambiant setting to vignette the image to the point of what we have now. I'm sure I also applied numerous curves and fade adjustments to get it as close to what I wanted to render.
Many of my earlier images were very crudely tweaked, really, which worked great at times and at other times would mutilate a lot of detail: very heavy-handed brightness and contrast adjustments in opposite directions (boosting contrast/reducing brightness). |
Very good information - thank you kindly for sharing! I'm not sure if my camera can "partial meter" - may have to read up on it. I do know I can force the exposure by metering on a particular area (ie aim camera toward floor before shooting out the window) but I've had limited success with that method.
I've been having fun playing in Photoshop to see what I can do to a few pictures. I'm rather fond of the exposure corrections over the brightness/contrast.
Thanks again! |
|
|
|
03/19/2006 07:21:16 PM · #66 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
...I'm not sure if my camera can "partial meter"... |
Yes, the 300D has partial metering (9%, I believe). Your manual will tell you how to set it. |
|
|
|
03/19/2006 07:57:07 PM · #67 |
| Yeah, there's that good ol' manual. I do actually read it from time to time - just haven't lately. It makes for a nice little pocket book to carry when you know you'll be stuck in traffic or waiting for some reason. I'll have to give that partial meter thing a try! |
|
|
|
03/20/2006 10:14:36 AM · #68 |
So, being that this is a Basic Rules challenge, are studio shots (or like shots where the photog has massive control over the lighting) going to reign supreme over other shots?
I have a few shots (non-studio) that could work, but I think they would get crushed under the DNMC comments "dude, that's just a B&W. 3".
"BUT LOOK AT MY HISTOGRAM!!!!" :-)
What do you think?
I guess if I submit, I'll find out, eh? :-)
|
|
|
|
03/21/2006 03:25:58 AM · #69 |
Melissa, I think this image has a lot of great elements, love the angle and warm colors, like it. What makes it not low key I think, is the lights are too bright. Mainly the whites are overexposed, "blown-out" (zero detail in the white). Even if you 'turned down' the contrast and brightness, the whites would not change because there is no information to bring out. If possibly you could shoot this again meter on the brightest area. But you may loose too much detail in the dark area. I, myself have not mastered that one yet and would love to see what others have to say.
Hope that helps. :)
Originally posted by ragamuffingirl:
What about this? |
|
|
|
|
03/21/2006 03:29:58 AM · #70 |
gets my vote! nice! |
|
|
|
03/21/2006 04:34:10 AM · #71 |
Wow. I just found this thread, after submitting. I read all your comments, took a good look all the example photos, and now I totally started to panic. This is my first submission here and now I really don't know if my pic is low key at all? It has really dark areas, and if you look at the hystogram, you see that it is really strong in the dark area... I guess now I just have to wait for the voters opinions...
God, I never thought photography could be so stressful! :)
Message edited by author 2006-03-21 04:44:41. |
|
|
|
03/21/2006 04:43:34 AM · #72 |
careful with non-calibrated or dark monitor owning voters with your low-key photos!
how many of you can see this photo properly? :p
 |
|
|
|
03/21/2006 04:46:56 AM · #73 |
Originally posted by chili:
God, I never thought photography could be so stressful! :) |
lol, good luck mate!
|
|
|
|
03/21/2006 11:27:38 AM · #74 |
Originally posted by Beetle:
I won't bother with this one. Too many people have poorly calibrated monitors and won't see half of it.
I have had a couple of submissions that have suffered from not being seen properly - I've learnt my lesson. |
THAT's what I was thinking ...
I did notice that photoshop has a way to preview RGB on a Mac and PC monitor ...
Since I am a snob with a g5 imac, my monitor is "perfect" ! :]
But I definitely agree that there are huge differences between monitors but somehow some people can create images that look good on any monitor (I'm not one of them :)
|
|
|
|
03/21/2006 01:14:27 PM · #75 |
THE PERFECT LOW-KEY: THE UPCOMING ECLIPSE
well, it's a good idea anyway :)
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 07/22/2025 06:06:03 AM EDT.
