Waterfall in Garden

hawkeye · Oct 29, 2007

Anita said:
Very beautiful!

$2 for a tripod??? What do they charge for a monopod $.75?

67 cents :mrgreen:

The Empress · Oct 29, 2007

skieur said:
Why have the beginners here not noticed that this shot is out-of-focus and fuzzy....a rather major weakness? Any other "positive" comment is totally irrelevant. A fuzzy, blurred shot ends up in the garbage of any serious photographer.

skieur

Not that i want to start an arguement either, but first just because we may be "beginners" on this site doesn't mean that we are beginners to photography. second, there is no need to be rude about your opinion, you can state it w/ out being a jerk about it. Your post was completely uncalled for!!! Sry Sw1tchFX for doing this in your post! It is still a great pic in my, and obviously other's opinion!!!!

LaFoto · Oct 30, 2007

Well, I believe this is HDR with water (and a real one, i.e. one of at least three successive exposures, auto-bracketed), and if a wind was rippling the water, it just CAN NOT have remained in the same place as where it was during the first and where it would be for the third expose, even if those were only fractions of seconds apart. Which - so I think - accounts for the aspect of "blurriness" (motion) in the water at the front, which, so I think personally, gives this photo an extra, something special, something capturing, as I have rarely seen before. So to me, this photo is not just bad quality. To the contrary: it is very well thought out, planned, composed, exposed and merged (I would think). And after all that (so I feel) something was additionally done to it to give it the dreamlike effect it has.

If the photo author felt that only these intense colours, the high dynamic range and the soft dreaminess represent how he felt when he was in those gardens, then I find it all justified. And I don't see any justification in publicly trampling on a work like this one.

Sw1tchFX · Oct 31, 2007

skieur said:
Why have the beginners here not noticed that this shot is out-of-focus and fuzzy....a rather major weakness? Any other "positive" comment is totally irrelevant. A fuzzy, blurred shot ends up in the garbage of any serious photographer.

skieur

It's not out of focus, It's just that I did a light USM on it so I wouldn't loose the gaussian blur.

LaFoto said:
Well, I believe this is HDR with water (and a real one, i.e. one of at least three successive exposures, auto-bracketed), and if a wind was rippling the water, it just CAN NOT have remained in the same place as where it was during the first and where it would be for the third expose, even if those were only fractions of seconds apart. Which - so I think - accounts for the aspect of "blurriness" (motion) in the water at the front, which, so I think personally, gives this photo an extra, something special, something capturing, as I have rarely seen before. So to me, this photo is not just bad quality. To the contrary: it is very well thought out, planned, composed, exposed and merged (I would think). And after all that (so I feel) something was additionally done to it to give it the dreamlike effect it has.

If the photo author felt that only these intense colours, the high dynamic range and the soft dreaminess represent how he felt when he was in those gardens, then I find it all justified. And I don't see any justification in publicly trampling on a work like this one.

Exactly right on the ball. I knew what I was going to do before climbing into my car to drive there.

The foreground texture was completely unintentional and I was going to remove it with another layer that was processed to match, but I liked the smooth texture on the leaves that was created and decided to leave it.

heip · Oct 31, 2007

Nice comp, nice colours!!

Disfunctional · Nov 15, 2007

skieur said:
Why have the beginners here not noticed that this shot is out-of-focus and fuzzy....a rather major weakness? Any other "positive" comment is totally irrelevant. A fuzzy, blurred shot ends up in the garbage of any serious photographer.

skieur

maybe thats your style of photography... i like photos a lil blurred sometimes it goes good with the photo sometimes it doesnt... this one it look grade A

if youd throw this pics away your freaking mad...
not everyones style and look of appearance is the same.

nikonkev · Nov 15, 2007

Very peaceful autumn shot. Good work!

NJMAN · Nov 15, 2007

How did I miss this post and all the drama that came with it??

Without reading all the comments, what I see when I look at this photo is some gaussian blur added, which gives it a nice soft tranquil quality, and I also see some saturation increase, which happens a lot when doing HDRs unless you proactively tone it down. Im not sure if you boosted it during tone mapping or in PS afterward.

I can also see how the added blur may sort of give the appearance of it being oof, but there is definitely some sharpness in the foliage, so that would rule out any focus issue to me.

All in all, I think its good. It has the look of a painting rather than a photo, which I think is appropriate with this sort of composition.

Nice work. :thumbup:

rob91 · Nov 15, 2007

skieur said:
Why have the beginners here not noticed that this shot is out-of-focus and fuzzy....a rather major weakness? Any other "positive" comment is totally irrelevant. A fuzzy, blurred shot ends up in the garbage of any serious photographer.

skieur

Spoken like a true philistine.