| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/12/2006 09:47:16 PM · #1 |
I would never complain about a 6.3 score, but I honestly had a feeling and a hope that this would score slightly higher (I am finding that my score usually ends up about .3 below what I predict). The comments were pleasant, but didn't really offer much critique.
This is a shot that I would love to recreate much better, and I probably can. It is only about 20 minutes away, and I just need to be there in the right conditions and at the right time of day.
So tell me, if I had to do it over again, what would I need to do to make this a 7.0 photo? Can it be a 7.0 photo?
A point I'd like to make...the light stays on steady. It does not blink. Is there anything I can do so that it doesn't blow out?
Please help me. I really want to know.
edited to add photo
Message edited by author 2006-07-12 21:47:43.
|
|
|
|
07/12/2006 09:55:10 PM · #2 |
| I'd say the main thing to aim for is more detail: texture in the clouds or a stormy/starry sky, a longer exposure to see more details on the trees, a sailboat or passing bird, maybe a foggy day when you can see beams of light from the lighthouse. It's a pretty scene but some of the richness is lost when you end up with largely featureless shapes. Oh, and I wouldn't worry too much about the light blowing out- it's understood and accepted. I think this spot could easily yield a 7+ score, but it has to be shot under just the right weather and light conditions. |
|
|
|
07/12/2006 09:55:51 PM · #3 |
I'm the wrong person to give advice, since I've never managed a "7", but I think this is a wonderful shot.
Some maybes....clone out the small bit of light over on the left hand side of the pic, a little more water and sky - especially water, and maybe at a time when there is some interest in the sky? |
|
|
|
07/12/2006 09:57:02 PM · #4 |
As a quick reaction to the photo, I'd say it's beautiful and peaceful, well done, but it somehow lacks either drama or mystery. It's like it's a beautiful shot but it doesn't hold me for all that long. I also think that maybe placing the horizon line a bit lower might work better, especially if there was a story in the sky.
As for doing it over, you could try it in all sorts of lights and see what happens. As for it being a 7 photo, I figure it probably could be, but you'd have to find the right combination of light and challenge topic. |
|
|
|
07/12/2006 10:01:28 PM · #5 |
| I really like this. I would have given it better than a 7 however I think around here this would be just below 7, like 6.8 or so. The color is spectacular. |
|
|
|
07/12/2006 10:27:18 PM · #6 |
Ask and ye shall receive...
I'm with Shannon on this one. Detail, there isn't enough of it.
(IMO)
It is an interesting but not captivating shot. The deep blues are neat at first but quickly become overwhelming.
Granted this probably looks really good at it's intended (full) size.
At this size all the little lights seem to mush all into the silhouette of the landscape. Perhaps a star filter would add a little flare to those lights (if you can't get rid of em, emaphsize them).
As it stands, with as much negative space going on and lack of detail through the tree line and lighthouse, my eye is continually driven back to the dock which is the only thing that stands on it's own...I don't think that is what you intended.
For me it is a better than average shot and had I voted in this challenge I would have given it a 6 tops.
Bottom line (again IMO) the concept is cool, blending the sky into the water, but way too much of the same blue for my liking and the darkness hides a lot of the detail that I would like to see.
Just my 2 pennies...
Andy |
|
|
|
07/12/2006 11:00:35 PM · #7 |
I often find that lighthouse snaps are better received if there is a storm and bold waves. Like Ursula said - a lighthouse on a calm sea lacks drama.
edit: typo
Message edited by author 2006-07-12 23:00:51. |
|
|
|
07/13/2006 12:24:51 PM · #8 |
Shannon, Judy, Ursula, Jason, Andy & Mukund, thanks for the honest opinions. I'll look for drama before I head out there & detail once I get there.
Mukund, I'd love to do this with a stormy sea, but it just never happens at this lighthouse. It sits at the mouth of the Susquehannah River as it flows into Chesapeake Bay. It doesn't get too wild. I wish it did, though. It's usually pretty calm out there. :-)
|
|
|
|
07/13/2006 01:03:38 PM · #9 |
It is a pretty picture, but as others have said, lacks a bit of a wow factor. It is the kind of place I could imagine a series of photographs being taken with different light (stormy, sunrise, night (as here)). I would experiment with high f-stops (f22 or 32) and longer exposures as well.
|
|
|
|
07/13/2006 01:14:12 PM · #10 |
Aside from all the other wise things people have said here, the key to shots like this is to make 'em sooner than 45 minutes after sunset; you want a balance between sky and lights, basically. We used to have to deal with this as architectural photographers; using transparency film, the available window for shooting the given shot would be as little as 5 minutes; anything on either side of that was nowhere near as good.
Go set this shot up sometime half an hour before sunset, and start shooting exposures every 5 minutes. Any old day will do. Make a note of the actual time of sunset, and then compare your EXIF data on the best-balanced "straight" exposure to the actual time of sunset, and you'll see right where your window is. We have more slop available to us with digital processing, of course, but it's good to nail it as best possible.
In any event, once you've narrowed your window of opportunity down, you'll have a better idea exactly when to be there someday when the sky is nice and dramatic.
The following image isn't an exact analogue, but it's the closest I have to a comparable shot, because I have the moon, the sky, the water, and some foreground structure that needs detail. This is pretty close to straight from the camera:
Edit to add: above was shot about 15-20 minutes before actual sunrise, and the sun, if it were visible, would be just out of the frame on the left.
R.
Message edited by author 2006-07-13 13:16:21.
|
|
|
|
07/13/2006 01:28:51 PM · #11 |
I took a stab at reprocessing your image using contrast masking and some gradients. There are some unavoidable green artifacts showing up in sky and water both, but they are a result of working from the already-saturated version you posted. I'm sure we could do better from the original. There's more available in this image than meets the eye based on your actual entry :-)
Robt.
|
|
|
|
07/13/2006 01:49:00 PM · #12 |
| Excellent job, Bear! That probably would have pushed the entry into top-5 territory (assuming you could make similar edits in Basic Editing). |
|
|
|
07/13/2006 01:53:22 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Excellent job, Bear! That probably would have pushed the entry into top-5 territory (assuming you could make similar edits in Basic Editing). |
From the original, he could get damned close in basic, but the sky and water gradients would have to go.
R.
|
|
|
|
07/13/2006 02:52:51 PM · #14 |
Your image is really nice. Reminded me of this one immediately.
They have similar attributes but Skips has a dash more going on, in terms of interest, slightly greater detail and a broader tonal range.
Only slight differences all around but they might be the answer to your question.
edited:to say that the interest level is actually the same but his technicals are a hair better and the three tones add a lot to the image. Hope that makes sense?
Message edited by author 2006-07-13 17:18:35. |
|
|
|
07/13/2006 02:54:55 PM · #15 |
| I gave 9... so it should be worth for 7... but, as i always say, DPC works in mysterious ways ;) |
|
|
|
07/13/2006 03:23:41 PM · #16 |
perhaps it's just me, but I get the impression that this location is much more suited to a sunrise rather than a sunset shoot.
also, I'd like to see this shot a bit sharper. I think if you incorporate many of the ideas already posted here, and you walk away with a sharper image, than this isn't only a 7+ scorer, but a ribbon winner. |
|
|
|
07/25/2006 08:10:23 PM · #17 |
I have revisited my files from that night and I found one that I took two minutes and six files earlier. This one was f8 for 15 seconds. Sure wish I had really looked at all of the shots and picked this one for the challenge. Looking back at my challenge entry, I should be really happy with the 6.3. Would this have reached the mighty 7?
Sad thing, I had the other one printed and have entered it in the county fair this weekend. the print is kinda dark and noisy. I'm going to have this one printed before the state fair rolls around.
Message edited by author 2006-07-25 20:11:36. |
|
|
|
07/25/2006 08:23:27 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by larryslights:
Would this have reached the mighty 7? |
I woulda gave it a two, but I'm a troll! |
|
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: 10/16/2025 11:12:07 PM EDT.
