3 Seascapes for c&c

[RobNZ]

Simple thumbs up or thumbs down will do, however c&c welcome if you can be bothered.

1:

2:

3:

My c&c

No1: Could have been good but the grass/rocks in the foreground havent worked out, I included them in the shot intentionally but it was so dark at the time I couldnt see well enough to get a good feel, rush shot spur of the moment on our walk back.

No2: I am not digging the rocks on the actual coastline, take up too much of the shot and the wave that enters frame right is too undefined to called a wave. I should really redo the PP on this one, but compostitionally I dont think its worth it.

No3: Kinda like it, and have tried it without the trees on the left but I think I prefer it this way.

Nothing like being out shooting in weather like I had this night, massive swells for this area but the air was spookily still, not a breath of wind, as you may be able to tell by the lack of movement shown in the trees with the longer exposures.

 

[D-B-J]

i like them. Nice shots.

 

[Xavi]

#2 is great! Love the pinkish glow in the cloud over in the distance. Haven't seen too many with colors like that. Personally the only thing that takes away from the whole scene is the small tree in the upper left hand corner. Its very dark and just doesn't fit too well with everything else. Otherwise its awesome!!

best wishes

 

[Dallmeyer]

Great pictures! Thanks for sharing

 

[myfotoguy]

Nice set! I like #3 the best. Not sure what it is, the corlor?. the framing? I just like it

 

[BuS_RiDeR]

:thumbup:

 

[JasonLambert]

:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:

 

[fokker]

Thumbs up generally

I think #1 could be sharper - probably a narrower aperture and a longer shutter speed would have helped (this would require a remote shutter release with a shutter lock on a bulb exposure). It also seems a little bit noisy in the sky, which is unusual considering ISO100. I agree that the rocks in the foreground didn't really work out, but you should be able to crop them out easily enough.

#2 I like

#3: A bit too much foreground IMO, might have looked better if you got a bit closer to the water and shot down at it on a steeper angle.

Were you using a ND filter for these?

 

[RobNZ]

Thumbs up generally

I think #1 could be sharper - probably a narrower aperture and a longer shutter speed would have helped (this would require a remote shutter release with a shutter lock on a bulb exposure). It also seems a little bit noisy in the sky, which is unusual considering ISO100. I agree that the rocks in the foreground didn't really work out, but you should be able to crop them out easily enough.

#2 I like

#3: A bit too much foreground IMO, might have looked better if you got a bit closer to the water and shot down at it on a steeper angle.

Were you using a ND filter for these?

No 1 I use mirror lockup, remote release wired, infra red RC and 2 second timer on Live View depending on the situation. This was a spur of the moment shot, more of a scouting shot so will go back and reshoot. I noticed the noise too and it has been reduced but the original is pretty damn noisey only so much you can do post, under exposed, limited to 30 second timer, rushed.

I left my CP on for all the shots, lazy I know haha, 2nd shot I used a graduated ND.

Actually that noise has been bugging me, I always shoot at 100 ISO and leave noise reduction off in cam (takes too much time between shots and I couldnt see much of a diff that I wouldnt be able to get post) and anything past a few mins is pretty much useless, is this normal for a 500D?

Thanks for all the comments so far. I feel my photography is improving quite well thanks to alot of the information I get from this forum.

 

[chammer]

Because of the comments posted already about #1 I'll refrain, however, I really enjoy #2 & #3. Lovely colors and dreamy water. #2 appears to be a touch soft, but honestly, it doesn't matter. The content more than makes up for it. :thumbup:

 

[Maxim01]

Like number 2 and 3. Number one is ok, just the rocks grass and beach line dont really go. Over all they look nice

 

[fokker]

Thumbs up generally

I think #1 could be sharper - probably a narrower aperture and a longer shutter speed would have helped (this would require a remote shutter release with a shutter lock on a bulb exposure). It also seems a little bit noisy in the sky, which is unusual considering ISO100. I agree that the rocks in the foreground didn't really work out, but you should be able to crop them out easily enough.

#2 I like

#3: A bit too much foreground IMO, might have looked better if you got a bit closer to the water and shot down at it on a steeper angle.

Were you using a ND filter for these?

No 1 I use mirror lockup, remote release wired, infra red RC and 2 second timer on Live View depending on the situation. This was a spur of the moment shot, more of a scouting shot so will go back and reshoot. I noticed the noise too and it has been reduced but the original is pretty damn noisey only so much you can do post, under exposed, limited to 30 second timer, rushed.

I left my CP on for all the shots, lazy I know haha, 2nd shot I used a graduated ND.

Actually that noise has been bugging me, I always shoot at 100 ISO and leave noise reduction off in cam (takes too much time between shots and I couldnt see much of a diff that I wouldnt be able to get post) and anything past a few mins is pretty much useless, is this normal for a 500D?

Thanks for all the comments so far. I feel my photography is improving quite well thanks to alot of the information I get from this forum.

Well longer exposures always introduce a bit more than the normal amount of noise, though I still would have thought you'd be safe at 100 ISO. underexposing and bringing the level up in PP will definitely increase the noise (roughly each stop of exposure added in post will equate to another stop of ISO speed - so bringing the shot up by 2 stops would be equivalent to shooting at 400 ISO) but even so it's still a bit surprising. You may want to try leaving long exp. noise reduction in camera turned on for next time.

 

[RobNZ]

The trouble I found with in camera noise reduction was the time it took to process the shot, the othernight I was out shooting 6 minute exposures and it takes the camera the same amount of time to process, I will look into it tomorrow, thanks for the feedback on that fokker

 

[Stormchase]

:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:
I likem!