Morning on the St. Marks Savannah

[bulldurham]

 

[Photosensitive]

Quite interesting....

 

[xDarek]

You should've make the photo a bit earlier, when the Sun was behind the rock.That way the image would look more amazing, but this one is good too.

 

[bulldurham]

What rock...it is a copse of trees and I cannot image why it would be more spectacular when the sun was lower....to me, it is always more helpful to the critic to speak about that which is there rather than what one might speculate should've, could've or might of's. I have that shot and it did not light up the grasses as this one did, thus the title and the emphasis I chose to give to the image.

 

[CdTSnap]

What rock...it is a copse of trees and I cannot image why it would be more spectacular when the sun was lower....to me, it is always more helpful to the critic to speak about that which is there rather than what one might speculate should've, could've or might of's. I have that shot and it did not light up the grasses as this one did, thus the title and the emphasis I chose to give to the image.

Interesting... Ive had some pretty wild "critics" from yourself

 

[bulldurham]

[/QUOTE]Interesting... Ive had some pretty wild "critics" from yourself [/QUOTE]

The word is "critiques." Someone who makes critiques is called a "critic" and my critiques were always directed to the work on your page as presented. "I've" only offered that in my opinion the tonal range in your images was too soft. I never suggested you should have made the shot at another time of the day and I did identify the subjects correctly. For some inexplicable reason you want to continue your other debate with me into another thread. I have a better suggestion that you simply, "bugger off." I do not like overly soft images, I do not like grungy HDR and I do not like you. Please, no further correspondence from you to me as I can assure you there will be no further correspondence from me toward you.

 

[Didereaux]

Suns' disk is defined....nicely done. Not easy that.

 

[Tim Tucker]

What rock...it is a copse of trees and I cannot image why it would be more spectacular when the sun was lower....to me, it is always more helpful to the critic to speak about that which is there rather than what one might speculate should've, could've or might of's. I have that shot and it did not light up the grasses as this one did, thus the title and the emphasis I chose to give to the image.

This is not presented as correct, only different.

I'm not sure exactly what you mean by your comment, (not about the sun's position), as you don't choose the emphasis by the title you give it. The emphasis is chosen by the way you present the image for the viewer to see, by understanding the viewers logic rather than trying to imprint your own via a title.

I like it and I like what you've done, the way you've caught the sun and the light on the grass. What I've done is as follows:

The crop is what I would call invisible structure, that is a rhythm and structure that the viewer is not meant to see or understand. It gives rhythm and harmony without being noticed. The main horizontal bands of light/mids/dark from top to bottom is roughly in the ratio of golden selection which I've echoed in the proportions of the frame, (a root5 rectangle which is a relative of golden selection (1.618:1) and is 2.236:1), this also works well with your central 'triangle' of light.

With colour I wouldn't try to push just one colour but let the sun 'bring the colour forth' by keeping the shadows more neutral. The overall orange tends to wash out some of the light, detail and natural colour. Don't be afraid of more neutral colour, though with more neutral colours you can push the vibrance if you desire.

I also used the healing brush to remove the ground in the bottom left.

Below is a more structured illustration of how the composition works. The shaded areas show the root5 rectangle and how it's really a golden ratio triptych, the circle shows it's construction. The crosses show how rebatement overlaps this very nicely. When you look at something you're always judging size and distance by relationships and distances. By using this hidden scale of distance and relating it to the proportions of the frame you can create a rhythm that sits quietly and un-noticed which can enhance static tranquility.

 

[bulldurham]

I had already gone back and color corrected the orange to a lesser intensity, much as you have not though perhaps not quite as far as you went so that requires a deeper inspection. I used a "Golden Mean ratio because I was trying to convey a grander scale of the grasses but I do like your crop and may see if I can find a happy median and in the end may use yours as presented. My only reservation is I've never been a huge fan of dead center suns though in fairness to your edit, it is above TDC. Cheers and thank you for an informative lesson in developing viewing ratios.

 

[Tim Tucker]

For the colour I simply created a duplicate layer, then used image/adjustments/match colour and checked the neutralise box. I then added a darks luminosity mask so it was only affecting the shadows. The darks luminosity mask is simply the inverse of the basic luminosity mask (drag the RGB down to the broken circle icon in the channels pallet). You can then use the layer opacity and the mask opacity to adjust the effect.
As height in the frame is normally equated with distance it has a far less pronounced effect on static balance as left to right does. If you don't want dead centre then try to move the sun slightly to the right as the greater area of brightness is to the left and you can use the 'visual centre' of the main bright area as your point of balance. Play around with it.

 

[bulldurham]

You've obviously been working with luminosity masks more than I have (only about 3 months now) so learning to use the neutralize with the darks mask is a very useful bit of information. I've met you somewhere in the middle and I am pleased with my outcome but very much appreciate your outcome and tutelage.

 

[StefaninLA]

i like it........90 of all picsare shot in optimal lighting so its refreshing to see a straight into the sun shot.

 

[bulldurham]

And to those wanting to shoot directly into the sun, might I suggest using your live view rather than looking through the lens. I've tracked BIF and carelessly swung into the sun at 500-600mm and instantly regretted that move. Oh, dang that hurts the old retina!