Noob needs C&C!

[Neocane]

I'm a complete noob and the only training in photography I've had was a few years of photography class in highschool almost 30 years ago. I shoot only as a hobby and for my own interest, but every now and then I capture what I think is an interesting or good shot. I've posted a few pictures to another website for desktop consideration but am getting the impression I have a LOT to learn due to a complete lack of interest from those viewing/voting on my images. I could really use your critiques and/or suggestions, or just your opinions. Fire away.

This is an old vintage Texaco gas pump that has sat in our local historical park for years. I
finally went and took some shots of it and then tweaked it in Lightroom to age it a bit.

My family and I went to a local car show a few weekends ago and the colors and chrome of this old
classic caught my eye. Processed in Photoshop camera raw and tweaked in photoshop.

At the same car show this bright yellow paint job really stood out and I loved the reflections it
supplied to the adacent vehicle. I focused on the fender and caught some decent detail. Processed
in Photoshop camera raw and tweaked in photoshop.

 

[BuS_RiDeR]

#1 is not strait... Maybe try to make the tower vertical. Also, maybe make the sky a bit bluer... I think I would have liked it more if it had a bit less angle to it..

#2 and #3 don't say anything to me.. :er:

 

[tirediron]

Agree with BusRider - #1 is by far the strongest shot. A polarizing filter would have made all the difference here, darkening the sky and increasing the contrast between cloud and sky.

 

[KmH]

In #1 the sky is overexposed which decreases the saturation.

You had to overexpose the sky to get the subject exposed so it would be recognisable.

It's still somewhat underexposed, and there isn't enough of it in the shot for people to glom to what it is. I think had the pump nozzle been in the shot it would have been better received.

Shooting it in the vertical format would have helped a great deal as vertical format tends to do for most slim, tall things.

Off camera flash (from camera right) would have solved the dynamic range problem.(overexposed sky, underexposed subject)

 

[misskrys]

I really like them. I think #2 could have been better if you had gotten the whole headlight in the shot. Maybe a shallower DOF too? The third one is a cool idea with the reflection, but I feel like it's missing something

 

[TrueColors]

#1 Should have been taken as a portrait, not landscape. It kind of feels empty to the right and the gas pump is cut off.

#2 Refer to the rule of thirds. I think this shot would have been much nicer had you framed the headlight better and got the tire out. Slightly underexposed IMO

#3 Underexposed

 

[Neocane]

Thanks folks, I appreciate the C&C. It seems I should put a bit more thought into the shot in the first place and less on trying to correct my shots with PS or LR.

 

[D-B-J]

i personally like #1

 

[KenC]

I like what's going on in the fender in the foreground of #3, but the darker background showing more of the car body is distracting. If you can re-shoot, concentrate on just the rounded fender and what's reflected in it.

 

[mwcfarms]

#1 Should have been taken as a portrait, not landscape. It kind of feels empty to the right and the gas pump is cut off.

#2 Refer to the rule of thirds. I think this shot would have been much nicer had you framed the headlight better and got the tire out. Slightly underexposed IMO

#3 Underexposed

++1

 

[JR Productions]

#1 would have been the best out of the 3 if the sky was richer and bluer. It's so over exposed that it almost looks white. And taken as a portrait not Landscape like TrueColors suggested.

#2 I like. I'm a huge hot rod lover and I think its an artistic shot. Had the tire been out of the frame it would've been a lot nicer. A little less "busy."

#3 Captured the cars color well but just makes me say "what the.... am I looking at?" That's not really a good thing in photography.

All in all some good shots.

and I would DEFINITELY focus more on learning the camera, lighting, and position. Instead of spending more time in PS. In most of my shots I only mess with a slight Contrast boost MAYBE the exposure on some shots and Occasionally the Vibrancy. Other than that it's straight off the camera.

 

[JG_Coleman]

I like where you were headed with #1 but, as others have mentioned, you didn't really optimize the frame or subject orientation to bring out the best. The de-saturated sky can probably be brought back to life in Photoshop or Lightroom by globally modifying the blues in the shot ...decreasing the luminance, adding a bit more saturation, and tweaking the hue. However, this may or may not introduce blue luminance noise, as well... you'll have to give a try to find out. It won't save this particular shot, but it'll be a good lesson in post-processing which may be handy down the road. A polarizer truly would've been ideal in this situation.

The other two shots dawn on me as the types of photographs which I used to take all the time, but eventually learned to avoid. The headlamp and fender probably looked very impressive in person, but when framed in a rectangle without any of the context derived from actually being there to see these things, you wind up with pieces that don't really speak much to your viewer. These are the types of things that simply tend not to be aptly captured in their full glory by a camera, regardless of technique... they look very intriguing in person but lose their appeal when framed by a lens.

 

[Neocane]

As the title suggests, i am a noob. So when you folks suggest a neutral density filter, what kind or density or whatever would you guys suggest?

Canon EOS T1i, 18-55mm kit lens.

 

[JG_Coleman]

A neutral density filter isn't really what you'd need to optimize any of these shots. Neutral density filters are screw-on filters with a uniform dark tint designed to reduce the amount of light entering the camera without discoloring your subject. For the most part, I only use them when I want a "dreamy", flowing look on rivers or waterfalls. If I'm in a very high light situation, an exposure of a river may only last for 1/500 sec... far too quick to blur the water. The neutral density filter will darken everything up so that I can use longer shutter speeds without overexposing the scene. There are different levels of tint available on neutral density filters, from very light (0.3X, a 1 stop light reduction) all the way to very dark (3X, a 10 stop light reduction).

A graduated neutral density filter is a bit different, though I still don't think any of your shots pictured would've benefited from one in any way. Grad NDs are usually rectangular panes of plastic or glass that are tinted on one half like a neutral density filter, but clear on the other half (in between there is a gradient between the two halves, thus the name "graduated"). They are used to hold back light selectively in a frame. For instance, when you're taking a landscape shot and the sky is exceptionally bright, this ends up causing a problem... if you expose for the foreground, your sky comes out almost pure white, whereas if you expose for the sky, your foreground comes out very dark and lacks detail. In that case, you'd position the graduated ND over your frame, holding light back from the sky with the darker half, while letting all of the light comes through from the foreground on the clear half. Thus, you have a much more balanced exposure that captures detail and color in both the foreground and the sky.

What might've helped some of the shots you have posted here is a polarizer. Polarizers, like neutral density filters, are screw-on filters with a dark tint. Unlike neutral density filters, polarizers are designed to reduce glare by preventing certain types of reflected light from entering the camera. In the case of your first photograph, a polarizer would've deepened the blue in the sky while leaving the clouds just as white as you see them now. Polarizers can also reduce glare off of fenders, foliage, and glass windows, water... the list goes on and on... while also deepening the colors in these things, as well.

 

[BrianLy]

Yea, I agree the first one would look more nice if it was vertical.