(13images) A sunset to remember..

[Goldeeno]

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)

(8)

(9)

(10)

(11)

(12)

(13)

Thanks for looking, any comments?

 

[laguano]

They are all marvelous!

however, on #2, the spotlight effect would look better with a lower opacity.

 

[Goldeeno]

lol on 2 the effect was actually caused by a window frame getting in the way without me noticing, so had black fuzz on the left, i thought id even it up on the otherside.

 

[flyingseale]

It certainly was a cracking sunset. I was driving home from watching Harry Potter and managed to stop and get a few shots. I'll process them and hopefully post later. #3 and #7 work best for me. Most of the others have a vertical shaft of light (which I assume is from the sun). This is distracting and something I've not noticed on other sunset photos. Do you or anyone else know why this is so prominant in these images? Perhaps it's just flare caused by you haveing to point the camera up to avoid the houses?

Mike

 

[Deebo]

Brillant sky but lacking a main focal point. I really like these shots, but if you had a strong subject in the frame too then they would be superb.

Dee

 

[Goldeeno]

Funnily the glow in the centre i could see with my eye, but yeah i think its got something to do with the suns power and the upwards angle.
Thing is i had just got back from work, and not massivly in the mood, was confined to my back yard. Even standing on the BBQ didnt help much. its only a 8ft squard yard lol.

I like the unedited shots, but when i processed them RAW, i found myself always wanting to make them brighter and stronger colours. Has that spoilt them a bit?
I quite liked the Unreal (11 shot, when i changed the settings to fluorescent when editing. But where do you draw the line on the editing of such photos, any advice?

 

[flyingseale]

But where do you draw the line on the editing of such photos, any advice?

Unanswerable question really. ALL images are just one persons interpretation of what was actually seen at the time. If you shoot jpeg and post an unedited version you are relying on the settings in the camera - white balance, etc. So this is not real. You say your images are RAW...mine too. If you take the raw image you have to convert to jpeg (or whatever) before posting on the web. Once again, not really what was seen. Even with film it relies on you getting the exposure correct and then developing and printing can drastically alter the image.
My personal view is that creating an image with my camera is the closest I'll get to being an artist so I process my images to look like I want. If others like them that's fine. If they think they're unreal or over-processed or over-saturated then that's also fine. That's not to say I won't listen to constructive criticism and learn from it, just that at the end of the day I do this for my pleasure.

 

[Goldeeno]

Unanswerable question really. ALL images are just one persons interpretation of what was actually seen at the time. If you shoot jpeg and post an unedited version you are relying on the settings in the camera - white balance, etc. So this is not real. You say your images are RAW...mine too. If you take the raw image you have to convert to jpeg (or whatever) before posting on the web. Once again, not really what was seen. Even with film it relies on you getting the exposure correct and then developing and printing can drastically alter the image.
My personal view is that creating an image with my camera is the closest I'll get to being an artist so I process my images to look like I want. If others like them that's fine. If they think they're unreal or over-processed or over-saturated then that's also fine. That's not to say I won't listen to constructive criticism and learn from it, just that at the end of the day I do this for my pleasure.

Thats just too true, and a great answer