First Sunset in Hawaii-- HDR-- C&C please

[shortpballer]

Hey everyone,
Just got to Hawaii today and this is the first sunset. I was a little disappointed because the sun was mostly covered by clouds. But the picture still turned out pretty well. Let me know what you think. Its HDR.

 

[shortpballer]

This one is from when the sun was almost gone completely. This one isn't HDR. I just combined the different exposures in photomatix. Let me know which one you guys like better.

 

[spaz2145]

This one is from when the sun was almost gone completely. This one isn't HDR. I just combined the different exposures in photomatix. Let me know which one you guys like better.

Is there a fisheye or wide view lens used on the second one? the building looks curved and so does the right side...great shots

 

[shortpballer]

I was trying to see if anyone would notice.

The first is taken with a 12-24 tokina superwide
the second is taken with my sigma 8mm ex fisheye

 

[shed301]

actually the 2nd one looks more HDR than the first one

 

[shortpballer]

Well its definately not HDR. I did use photomatix. But i just used the combine tool instead of generating an HDR.

 

[Josh220]

There is a definite curve to #2. I think the first image would have been better if it were less busy. There are way too many trees.

Also, the focus is off on #1, was this handheld or on a tripod?

Edit: after a closer look, the focus is also off on #2. Especially on the trees.

 

[shortpballer]

There is a definite curve to #2. I think the first image would have been better if it were less busy. There are way too many trees.

Also, the focus is off on #1, was this handheld or on a tripod?

Edit: after a closer look, the focus is also off on #2. Especially on the trees.

Of course it is going to look like the focus is off... they were both set at infinity so it is impossible for the focus to be off. Second the first is HDR which means I took 5 pictures 1 at the proper exposure and then +-1 EV and +-2EV then I generated an HDR... the second I did the same thing but instead of generating an HDR I combined them. So in the span of all the shots going off, the trees obviously moved with the wind. This is inevitable thats why i tried to crop out a lot of the trees.

and the curve is due to the fisheye lens...I like it

 

[Josh220]

There is a definite curve to #2. I think the first image would have been better if it were less busy. There are way too many trees.

Also, the focus is off on #1, was this handheld or on a tripod?

Edit: after a closer look, the focus is also off on #2. Especially on the trees.

Of course it is going to look like the focus is off... they were both set at infinity so it is impossible for the focus to be off. Second the first is HDR which means I took 5 pictures 1 at the proper exposure and then +-1 EV and +-2EV then I generated an HDR... the second I did the same thing but instead of generating an HDR I combined them. So in the span of all the shots going off, the trees obviously moved with the wind. This is inevitable thats why i tried to crop out a lot of the trees.

and the curve is due to the fisheye lens...I like it

Well I am glad you know everything and don't need any help. However, focusing to infinity shouldn't make your entire image OOF. If it does, you may want to try focusing on a spot 1/3 of the way into your image, then repositioning and shoot with a small aperture.

I know what a fisheye does. It is also the reason your horizon isn't straight.

 

[shortpballer]

There is a definite curve to #2. I think the first image would have been better if it were less busy. There are way too many trees.

Also, the focus is off on #1, was this handheld or on a tripod?

Edit: after a closer look, the focus is also off on #2. Especially on the trees.

Of course it is going to look like the focus is off... they were both set at infinity so it is impossible for the focus to be off. Second the first is HDR which means I took 5 pictures 1 at the proper exposure and then +-1 EV and +-2EV then I generated an HDR... the second I did the same thing but instead of generating an HDR I combined them. So in the span of all the shots going off, the trees obviously moved with the wind. This is inevitable thats why i tried to crop out a lot of the trees.

and the curve is due to the fisheye lens...I like it

Well I am glad you know everything and don't need any help. However, focusing to infinity shouldn't make your entire image OOF. If it does, you may want to try focusing on a spot 1/3 of the way into your image, then repositioning and shoot with a small aperture.

I know what a fisheye does. It is also the reason your horizon isn't straight.

I didnt' say I dont need help. I'm letting you know that it looks out of focus, because I put 5 different pictures with different exposures together. And the likeliness that the wind moved the trees is 100 percent. Thats what I was trying to tell you.

 

[Josh220]

Of course it is going to look like the focus is off... they were both set at infinity so it is impossible for the focus to be off. Second the first is HDR which means I took 5 pictures 1 at the proper exposure and then +-1 EV and +-2EV then I generated an HDR... the second I did the same thing but instead of generating an HDR I combined them. So in the span of all the shots going off, the trees obviously moved with the wind. This is inevitable thats why i tried to crop out a lot of the trees.

and the curve is due to the fisheye lens...I like it

Well I am glad you know everything and don't need any help. However, focusing to infinity shouldn't make your entire image OOF. If it does, you may want to try focusing on a spot 1/3 of the way into your image, then repositioning and shoot with a small aperture.

I know what a fisheye does. It is also the reason your horizon isn't straight.

I didnt' say I dont need help. I'm letting you know that it looks out of focus, because I put 5 different pictures with different exposures together. And the likeliness that the wind moved the trees is 100 percent. Thats what I was trying to tell you.

Yes, but I was also pointing out that it's not just the trees that are OOF. That is understandable. But you missed the focus on the image in general, not only the moving trees.

 

[shortpballer]

Everyone has an opinion. Just like everyone has an a$$ hole. It just happens to be that some of them stink

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

Everyone has an opinion. Just like everyone has an a$$ hole. It just happens to be that some of them stink

Congratulations!
You made it to my ignore list!

 

[shortpballer]

Everyone has an opinion. Just like everyone has an a$$ hole. It just happens to be that some of them stink

Congratulations!
You made it to my ignore list!

Aww I was just playing :hug::

 

[Josh220]

Everyone has an opinion. Just like everyone has an a$$ hole. It just happens to be that some of them stink

Yes, however I find my self perplexed to your defensiveness. You make a C&C thread, but any time a critique is given, you try to shut it down with your own explanation that justifies why it's wrong. (i.e., "Well... it's supposed to be like that!")

You justify the trees being OOF by saying it's "supposed" to be like that since there were multiple shots to make an HDR. However, neither image is HDR. The first image just looks like an underexposed sunset, not a high dynamic range (HDR in case you didn't know).

Take the criticism to better your future images rather than trying to mold your flawed images into something that is "supposed" to be wrong, OOF, etc. I don't think I have ever seen someone respond with "Yeah, the entire image is supposed to be OOF. I did it on purpose."

Everyone has an opinion. Just like everyone has an a$$ hole. It just happens to be that some of them stink

Congratulations!
You made it to my ignore list!

Win!