Author | Thread |
|
11/09/2007 09:59:53 AM · #1 |
Hi all, I was playing around with camera settings last night, trying to learn more and more every day, and I took a picture of Lake Ella. I really don't know what to think about it though. I am not a pro on photoshop, and have not done anything to this photo except rotate and crop. I was wondering if anyone wouldn't mind critiquing it for me, and maybe giving me some suggestions as to what I could do in Photoshop to enhance the picture? I know the lighting isn't the best, maybe the picture is too busy, I don't know. Please help. Thank you in advance.
[thumb]610667[/thumb]
|
|
|
11/09/2007 10:06:20 AM · #2 |
I notice it's ISO1600, so there a lot of noise in the sky and the water in the foreground. For these types of night shot, I'd go with ISO200 and a longer shutter speed.
When you're processing, take care with the contrast. You've got a very bright spot in the middle where the fountain is, you need to make sure this isn't blown out. You also need to balance this with some good 'black points' somewhere (i.e. try to get the sky looking dark, instead of that bluish-gray colour) |
|
|
11/09/2007 10:08:58 AM · #3 |
How long was the exposure. Did you shoot handheld or with a tripod?
The light of the fountain is blown pretty bad. the other lights in the background are a bit strong also.
If you use a tripod. I would either lower your ISO from 1600 down to 400 or even lower. set the ap to around somewhere around 7 or 8 and then experiment with different shutter speeds.
|
|
|
11/09/2007 10:14:10 AM · #4 |
|
|
11/09/2007 10:46:55 AM · #5 |
|
|
11/09/2007 11:00:37 AM · #6 |
Given that you have technical problems that can't be overcome on this particular shot, how about a soft focus effect for mood?
Shadow/highlight used in CS2 to balance light as ebst possible, extreme neat image smooths it and gives the glow effect, and a gradient applied to the sky layer to balance foreground and sky.
On a more technical note, images like this are best shot at twilight or thereabouts, where there is enough residual illumination to balance the lights with the rest of the scene. And lose the ISO 1600; use a tripod, ISO 100-200, and a longer exposure.
R.
|
|
|
11/09/2007 11:05:29 AM · #7 |
From a fellow 'learning the ropes' guy, and at the risk of patronising, that anything stable can function as a tripod- a bunch of rocks. a banister, the floor, or anything else. Once upon a time i took off my show and rested my camera on that so it wasn't shaking, and I also made a triangular shape from 3 beer bottles and rested my camera on that for a 30 second exposure. Worked fine.
Use your surroundings to your advantage. If you know the area well this might save you carrying a tripod there and/or avoiding any unwanted attention. |
|
|
11/09/2007 11:07:52 AM · #8 |
Originally posted by Tez: From a fellow 'learning the ropes' guy, and at the risk of patronising, that anything stable can function as a tripod- a bunch of rocks. a banister, the floor, or anything else. Once upon a time i took off my show and rested my camera on that so it wasn't shaking, and I also made a triangular shape from 3 beer bottles and rested my camera on that for a 30 second exposure. Worked fine.
Use your surroundings to your advantage. If you know the area well this might save you carrying a tripod there and/or avoiding any unwanted attention. |
I assume that's your "shoe"?
And yes, anything will work in a pinch. If carrying a tripod is not possible, a little beanbag makes a nice accessory. A cable release is desirable, but if no cable release is available then using the self-timer is a decent workaround. But that limits exposure to 30 seconds.
R.
|
|
|
11/09/2007 11:12:33 AM · #9 |
aye, 'shoe', thanks for pointing that out R.
And something I noticed on your image R, have you tried boosting the blacks by about 5% to return some depth to the shadows? I can't try it because I'm at work but the shadows looks a little green to me.
As an alternative, canon do a great remote control for the 400d. Mine cost me £6 from ebay and has a range of about 20ft or so. Well worth a look. |
|
|
11/09/2007 11:24:17 AM · #10 |
Originally posted by Tez: And something I noticed on your image R, have you tried boosting the blacks by about 5% to return some depth to the shadows? I can't try it because I'm at work but the shadows looks a little green to me. |
'Twas a 3-minute quickie; I did NO color adjustments at all. It would benefit from color tweaks for sure.
R.
|
|
|
11/09/2007 12:05:26 PM · #11 |
Okay, so I have a few more shots from that night that I think look a little better, but now, the problem is that it is too dark. Maybe this photo below has room for improvements unlike the other one. Thank you to everyone, I really appreciate it.
[thumb]610684[/thumb]
|
|
|
11/09/2007 12:46:01 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by bennettjamie: [thumb]610684[/thumb] |
Better in terms of exposure. But the ISO1600 is still causing problems. |
|
|
11/09/2007 12:56:41 PM · #13 |
That's better for the lights but you can never recover sky/shadow separation from it. Gotta shoot with some skylight still present.
R.
|
|
|
11/09/2007 12:58:42 PM · #14 |
Left ya a comment. Hope it's helpful. |
|
|
11/13/2007 10:48:38 PM · #15 |
Okay, so I went back to the lake today, and took this one. I think it is much better, even though it is not a night shot which I originally was trying to capture. What do you think?
 |
|
|
11/14/2007 08:55:43 AM · #16 |
|
|
11/14/2007 10:44:14 AM · #17 |
Thank you to those who have commented, your comments were really helpful. If anyone else has any, I would love for you to share. I have really learned a lot these past few weeks, DPC members are great!
|
|
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: 09/10/2025 07:10:38 PM EDT.