Critique on outdoor farm photography?

[YoungPhotoGirl]

 

[Braineack]

Can you reshoot it at a different time of day?

 

[YoungPhotoGirl]

Can you reshoot it at a different time of day?

How come?

 

[Braineack]

The lighting is VERY harsh. It's casting dark shadows on the face's of the cows and I can tell you used a lot of recovery, especially on the brown calf, to bring them back out. Otherwise most of the cows are just clipped black shapes.

The sky was pushed too far where the clouds don't look real and are starting to halo.

That mid-afternoon sun is KILLER.

 

[YoungPhotoGirl]

The lighting is VERY harsh. It's casting dark shadows on the face's of the cows and I can tell you used a lot of recovery, especially on the brown calf, to bring them back out. Otherwise most of the cows are just clipped black shapes.

The sky was pushed too far where the clouds don't look real and are starting to halo.

That mid-afternoon sun is KILLER.

I intentionally edited for an HDR-type effect not as harsh though), so you don't like the artificial look of it, is that what you mean?

 

[tirediron]

What is your vision or intent for the image; it greatly helps critique, particularily when editing in a unique manner to explain your thought process. I will say that your ratio of watermark to image is way too high!

 

[Overread20]

Cows are curious critters and you've certainly got a good few looking your way within the herd; what's nice is that over by the water trough you've still got one cow poking her head up to look at you, it helps give that side a focus and point of interest which otherwise would have been possibly wasted space since those cows would not be contributing to the other 3/4 of the shot.

Even though you've gone for a cartoon effect with the tonemapping the harsh light has still harmed the shot. You've plenty of bright white areas which have blown out with no detail; plus the grass itself has ended up very bright; far brighter than the cows which are your subjects (bright points draw our eyes attention).

Light like this is hard to work with, its harsh and strong and if you balance for the highlights the shadows end up very deep and dark. You can take 2 or more shots and blend them for HDR, but for a subject like this its impossible (they move far too much it would be a nightmare to blend two or three shots together).

A later or earlier time will have the sun lower in the sky, giving a more diffused and softer light. You can still bump up the shadow areas for the cartoon effect, but you'll get a much more pleasing spread of light values over the shot. Midday shooting is tricky, especially so if you don't have some cloud blocking out the harshest light from the sun.

 

[Braineack]

I intentionally edited for an HDR-type effect not as harsh though), so you don't like the artificial look of it, is that what you mean?

It just looks odd. you're trying to pull detail out of something that's completely out of focus and doesn't need contrast/clarity. It's to the point of artifacting, the clouds are haloing, and the saturation is turning the sky/clouds purple.

So no, I tend not to like photos that push the processing to the point that it looks unrealistic. I personally try to edit to make my photos look realistic; this sometimes even has me *gasp* reduce the saturation!

The recovery on the cows, to me, just looks odd. My brain sees it and knows instantly that something doesn't make sense. The brown calf is too bright in that sort of back/top light, same with the other black cows you brought up. It gives them, like overread suggest, a cartoon feel.

 

[minicoop1985]

HDR, in my opinion, is best done in very specific circumstances. Unfortunately, I don't think this works for HDR. With such strong tones to begin with, it becomes oversaturated, like Braineack said, to the point of looking a bit unrealistic. If you want the contrast in the sky and some darker blues, try exposing for the ground and blow out the sky. This frees you to create a graduated filter in Lightroom/PS and darken the sky to your heart's content. Here's an example of that method:

Cloud connected by longm1985, on Flickr

Clouds can also help soften sunlight dramatically, too. Also, keep in mind, when it comes to noise, it's easier to darken a photo that's too bright than to brighten a photo that's too dark.

 

[KmH]

Back lit subjects generally require fill lighting.

With that many 'subjects' and that wide and deep a scene it would take a fair amount of lighting fear to add the required fill lighting.

Another consideration is the light metering mode the camera is set to. I suspect the camera was set to Matrix light metering for that shot.

 

[Designer]

When I look at your photograph, I see something that might have a use in a business card. Considering the prominence of your logo, it seems ready-made for that.

However, looking at the remainder of the photograph, I would say there is not a "subject". A herd can sometimes be called A subject, but then you probably wouldn't want the water tank in there.

In addition to better light, try to isolate a subject, whether is is one, two, three, or more animals; the natural grouping of a subject should be more clearly defined.

Then, crop to emphasize the subject rather than sky and grass.

I don't know why you want such a large intrusive logo (or even a logo at all, for that matter) but perhaps smaller or positioned in a different part of the photograph.

To summarize:

1. better light
2. better composition
3. less logo

 

[AlanKlein87 4]

You certainly got the attention of the cows. I counted 5 that were looking at you directly. Good thing none were bulls. I agree with the other about the HDR effect being overdone. Get rid of the overbearing watermark. Compositionally I think there is too much going on. The subject to me is the cow on the right with the drinking area. All that stuff on the left is too much - it complicates the picture and gets confusing. Try cropping in on the right, maybe crop other areas as well to see what they look like. Nice shot.