· C&C · Night Shoot ·

I love #2. I think you successfully broke a "rule". Her head off center fit perfectly in the thing is remeniscent of religious icons. Urban saint, you could do a whole series with that, just find more backgrounds that will work the same way.


Oh and thanks for nominating my pic for TPF Photo of the month! I am honored!
You are right... I never even thought about that until you mentioned it. And that is a pretty cool idea for a theme, I may explore that further once I figure out how to pose people.

Oh, and you are welcome about the nomination. It's a great shot and I think you might be able to take honors this month. Anyone who has not voted, go ahead and check out the poll !

And, I will use this moment to post another view of the third pic - let me know how it compares: (and I know the image is very different, just concentrate on the perspective and the level horizon Vs tilted horizon).

3790260706_9b8c6b1830_b.jpg
 
I like the horizontal version much better. It appears that the horizon isn't level, but other than that, I think it's a much stronger shot. I'm also a bit of a rule of thirds nazi, but in this case, with the reflection, it begs for that particular rule to be broken.
 
i like one and two.one looks like a oil painting and i like the colors.3 would be great if it was not on a tilt.
 
I like the horizontal version much better. It appears that the horizon isn't level, but other than that, I think it's a much stronger shot. I'm also a bit of a rule of thirds nazi, but in this case, with the reflection, it begs for that particular rule to be broken.
Wow, you're right! I did not even check the horizon before posting, but it is a bit off... d'oh. Well that defeats the purpose. Anyway, I agree, I rarely like horizons close to center but I think it works here. Also, the pic is much colder than the one up top, and I do not like that at all.

Anyway, thanks for the follow-up!
 
i like one and two.one looks like a oil painting and i like the colors.3 would be great if it was not on a tilt.

5 dislikes on the angle of #3, and the other individual "liked, now dislikes." That's pretty much unanimous, in my book. I just wanted to set it apart from all of the boring straight horizon shots I see... but, that's what people are used to. I helped shoot a wedding last year and I shot quite a few on an angle (I made sure it is obvious I intended to do so, so they didn't think I was a moron who cannot keep the horizon straight), but it certainly made the shots more interesting. I want to keep shooting that way, it's sort of become my trademark at this point, so why fight it? Just means my images will not be popular any time soon.

Thank you with regard to 1, it does have that sort of feel to it.
 
Last edited:
i like one and two.one looks like a oil painting and i like the colors.3 would be great if it was not on a tilt.

5 dislikes on the angle of #3, and the other individual "liked, now dislikes." That's pretty much unanimous, in my book. I just wanted to set it apart from all of the boring straight horizon shots I see... but, that's what people are used to. I helped shoot a wedding last year and I shot quite a few on an angle (I made sure it is obvious I intended to do so, so they didn't think I was a moron who cannot keep the horizon straight), but it certainly made the shots more interesting. I want to keep shooting that way, it's sort of become my trademark at this point, so why fight it? Just means my images will not be popular any time soon.

Thank you with regard to 1, it does have that sort of feel to it.

There's a time and a place for it, like everything. I've seen some wonderful shots (wedding shots included) that were purposely tilted. I think you do wonderful work, but 99% of the time, when I see a tilted shot, my first thought goes to a newbie photographer trying to be different. Like I said, there are certainly times when it works, I just don't think it worked on this particular shot.
 
Nicely done. Night photog of city skylines and such is tough to do. I've spent years figuring it out. That being said, you MIGHT try to brighten them up JUST a hair. Not much.

Also, it LOOKS like you boosted the saturation... you said you didn't but there's an odd color haloing going on in the first one that totally looks like saturation pushed too far.

aCK my cat is licking my face! help!

(cough)

anyway... one trick to consider... if you stop your lens down a bit (depends on the lens but usually f8-11 or so) you can get some nice star effects around the light sources. Does some very nice things to the image.
 
1. I "fixed" the first image, I think. And by fix, I mean I used the image with very little post work. The image should NOT have much noise, I shot at ISO 100, but probably did after taking it into PS.
Wow, much better.
I rarely like horizons close to center but I think it works here.
A centered horizon seems to only work when you're doing a reflection shot.
 
Last edited:
Nicely done. Night photog of city skylines and such is tough to do. I've spent years figuring it out. That being said, you MIGHT try to brighten them up JUST a hair. Not much.

Also, it LOOKS like you boosted the saturation... you said you didn't but there's an odd color haloing going on in the first one that totally looks like saturation pushed too far.

aCK my cat is licking my face! help!

(cough)

anyway... one trick to consider... if you stop your lens down a bit (depends on the lens but usually f8-11 or so) you can get some nice star effects around the light sources. Does some very nice things to the image.
Thank you! I said I did very little post in PS, but #1 (only) is an hdr, so naturally, the saturation was bumped up quite a bit without me physically moving a slider.

Also, good tip on starburst effects around the light sources, I will have to try that out. Can't you buy UV filters that create certain effects as well?
 
Thank you! I said I did very little post in PS, but #1 (only) is an hdr, so naturally, the saturation was bumped up quite a bit without me physically moving a slider.

Ah, ok I missed the HDR part. Yeah that does explain it, though I personally try to keep the HDRs calm.

Wait... why did you do an HDR for this one? :lol:

Now my feelings are totally changed... because unless I'm mistaken you TOTALLY could have pulled that shot off without HDR. It looks like pretty much any nighttime skyline shot that I would take with normal processing.

Also, good tip on starburst effects around the light sources, I will have to try that out. Can't you buy UV filters that create certain effects as well?

You can buy various filters, yes... "star" filters I believe they are normally called. I also have a kids pair of glasses that does it. Really wild when you look at Christmas trees. :lol:

That being said, if your lens has a particularly complimentary star formation, may as well use the blades. The only drawback is if you are in a situation where you want to take a faster exposure (since by stopping down you naturally are cutting out the light, thus increasing exposure time (or ISO... but ewww...))

Every lens has different effects. I've found the Nikkor 50mm 1.8 to be absolutely STUNNING with stars. The Sigma 10-20mm is very nice as well, but not nearly as amazing as the 50mm.
 
I took a couple of test shots here and realized I was blowing out sections of the photo, such as the buildings on the right side of the frame. I wanted to preserve the detail there and not have to worry about trying to bring back detail in the darker areas if I were to underexpose a bit, so I just bracketed them. It did make a difference... in my opinion, quite a positive one. But, in the end, the photo did not retian all of the fine detail when I converted from TIFF to JPG anyway.

I did notice that the 50mm does tend to create some cool star effects coupled with the UV filter I have attached. Here, I used the kit lens (my only two choices at the time) so I could go wide enough.
 

Most reactions

Back
Top