Landscapes C&C

Noxire · Dec 3, 2009

Hello some C&C would be nice

I love photography as a hobby and I'm pretty serious about it, thats why I want pointers to what I'm doing wrong. Please be harsh, I won't learn from comments only telling whether it looks crappy or beautifully. I want comments telling why it do (technical aspects as well as artistic) and then how to do it better next time

Thanks for taking your time to write an input

Johannes

fokker · Dec 3, 2009

Wow, these are both stunning actually! In particular I like the second one. did you do much post-production work on these?

What would I do better? Nothing, except clean the sensor on your camera!! The sensor dust in #1 is really bad and noticeable.

DReali · Dec 3, 2009

Agreed! both good shots but the haloing around the trees is really noticeable. Are these HDR by any chance?

DennyCrane · Dec 3, 2009

I like the composition on both, but they seem a little over-saturated and have a little too much contrast... and as mentioned, the spots at the top of the pictures is distracting... be it sensor dust or something in the lens, etc... A little work with either clone or heal could fix those pictures up, but I'd try to eliminate the cause.

Atlas77 · Dec 3, 2009

These are over-processed IMO. And I agree, clean that sensor.

kamalzharif · Dec 3, 2009

fokker said:
Wow, these are both stunning actually! In particular I like the second one. did you do much post-production work on these?

What would I do better? Nothing, except clean the sensor on your camera!! The sensor dust in #1 is really bad and noticeable.

yes, that true.. the dust is an enemy that kill the beautiful images

between, you did a good try!

Invictus · Dec 3, 2009

Really nice shots, a big fan of #2 for the HDRish look

Noxire · Dec 4, 2009

Yep both are hdr.
Really appreciate you telling me 'bout the sensor dust (gonna clone that right away)

creisinger · Dec 4, 2009

Both spots are very nice to take good shots! Well chosen.

In the first one I don't like the relatively bright "halo" above the trees especially in the left half of the image. I'd say too much HDR processing there.

It's a tricky one as the foreground still could be bit lighter. I would process this image twice: Lower half of the image with major HDR processing and the upper half in a way so that there is not so much of bright sky right above the trees. Then blend them together in Photoshop or whatever you're using.

HDR imaging is really a matter of personal taste. Some people do like the halo effects around high contrast areas but I don't. Especially where the sky hits the ground.

I also think it was a bit too late for that shot as the sun is awfully low which does give you a good light (in terms of color) but I think there are some shadows cast onto the tree line (in the left half of the image as well, it appears the front row of the trees is illuminated only on the top half).

A higher sun would have helped to illuminate the foreground more as well.

Second shot is ok. I'd have tried to use a dark neutral density filter to make the water surface look like soft cotton. That would have added more mood to the shot.

Vicelord John · Dec 4, 2009

this may have been addressed but I didnt read all the replies... obviously these are HDR. The first shot I'd be interested in seeing the more exposed shot. It could be tremendous.

Noxire · Dec 4, 2009

Thanks creisinger for the long and educational post

Appreciated ^^

Jacki · Dec 4, 2009

In my opinion, the halo on the trees contrast so much with the sky that it is distracting. Overall, I think these pictures turned out very well.

Is HDR "high definition resolution"? Is that something that is a direct setting on the camera, or do you make the photo HDR in photoshop?

battletone · Dec 4, 2009

My three things I noticed is one (especially the first one) it doesn't seem crisp and clear.
Second I find the cloud movement distracting, but when taking photos with moving things, I guess there isn't much you can do other than using the properly exposed sky in one exposure and mask along the horizon to allow a second exposure of the foreground to show through as opposed to straight HDR.
Finally the 3rd image seems like the rocks are under exposed, which IMO would defeat the purpose of having an HDR shot.

I would like to know though, did you use AEB or did you manual change the exposure between each shot? Seems like the clouds moved a lot further across the sky in the first image than would be possible with 3-5 fast shots of auto bracketing.