Discussion in 'Landscape & Cityscape' started by Robbie, Apr 13, 2007.
This is my first go..
What do you think ?
Nice silky water effect/ I would use the PS dodge tool to brin gout the detail of the shadows on the right hand side of the bridge and the foregrounds rocks. Try and see the difference in the shot
Lovely image but I had a quick go at lightening the shadows - unfortunately no detail in quite a few areas. Highlight and shadow tool and curves used
Thanks so much for the feedback.
Should I have used a flash to combat those shadows ?
Silky water effect? This is basically stop action!
I really like the composition and everything, but it needs a longer exposure to get that "silky" water effect.
Yeah, that's what I thought. I was pushed for time though, and thought to myself that i'd be better off going for a faster shutter speed - that's not to say I dont like a silky effect. It's just that sometimes it can look a bit too sereal for me ( does anyone else think this ? ), so I tried to go for a compromise, but didn't really get it. As you said, a longer exposure would have been better.
Any thoughts on the fill flash ?
Thanks everyone for the feedback so far.
Well, in this particular photo, I quite like the stop action of the water, we see the silky effect so often (and I am forever trying to achieve it, too, mind you), which is NOT how our eyes see flowing water, we more see it like it is shown here, gurgling, reflecting, foaming, bubbling - and I like the fact that we see it here!
As to fill flash: I don't know how far your flash reaches and how effective it could have been. But it could have been an option to be tested on this scene, I think.
The presented edition is way too pale and milky, I think.
I do like the very deep blue of the sky beneath the bridge, though the colour does speak of some underexposure. If at all, you would need to work on this photo in parts, selectively trying to bring out more detail in the shadows here and there, leaving other parts untouched, I guess.
It's a nice composition but, as others have said, the exposure lets it down. I'd guess that the camera is either spot metering or more likely centre weighted. This has exposed the water just about right but left the rocks under exposed. Solutions for the future would be to wait for the sun to go behind a cloud to reduce the reflections from the white water or take another shot exposed for the rocks and then combine them in photoshop.
I think a nice way to achieve a perfect shot here would be a relatively long exposure with a quick fill flash towards the end. You would get silky AND detailed, and would have gotten all the details out of the rocks.
Looks like a great place.
I did underexpose the photo - but not intentionally..I got the camera just a couple of weeks ago and didn't realise that the settings meant each photo was automaticaly underexpose by -1.3 or something like that. I shortly changed the settings though.
The photo itself was taken in a remote corner of the Yorkshire Dales, UK. I've already fallen in love with the location.
I did one mod to it. Unfortunately, you need a ps plugin to do it. It is Shadow Recovery Pro and I used the strongest strength (12). It left alone all the things that were correctly exposed. There are still a few strong shadows, but nothing too unreasonable. I love the location.
Separate names with a comma.