What could improve this picture?

[Bouncin_Around]

Good afternoon!

I have only very recently (within the last month) become interested in seriously improving my photography skills. I have been searching photo books and blogs for tips and trying to implement them. I have been a point-and-shoot camera and have basically just started playing with the more advanced settings trying to understand the cause and effect relationship between the camera settings and photo results. Although, this situation stumped me.

My boyfriend and I were hiking at Great Basin National Park and happened to see a double rainbow (2 partial arches). I took many pictures experimenting with various settings and at differnet points along the trail. This is one of the best original photos.



I used pixlr advanced to crop the photo and then played with other settings, but found that setting the vibrance at 100 showed the rainbow best. Here is that photo:



What would have made this picture better? I am interested in mainly the shooting technique so future pictures may turn out better, but would also welcome editing tips that would enhance this particular photo. These pictures are small. Let me know if there is a way that I can enlarge them for the post that would help you guys. (I am also brand new to the forum as well).

Stephanie

 

[amolitor]

The biggest single change that would help the rainbow photograph itself is a longer lens, so you can "get in closer" to it.

 

[Designer]

The high contrast scene that you tried to capture is very difficult, even with different equipment. In the film days they used to tell us to "expose for the shadows, and print for the highlights". Meaning you get more range by fiddling with stuff in the darkroom. I can't give you much help here, especially after the fact, but some people with a way to screw on a filter would probably suggest a graduated ND filter, which would darken the sky and lighten the foreground. Perhaps you can fiddle with it on your computer, but each software requires learning its own adjustments.

But I'm glad you're having fun with it.

 

[KmH]

It was a high dynamic range scene, so either a graduated neutral density filter reducing the exposre of the sky, or making at least 2 exposures, one for the bright part of the scene and a second for the dark part of the scene, to blend post process was called for.

In other words, the dynamic range of the scene was greater than the image sensor in your camera was capable of recording. The camera does not see they way our eye's see.

Study some of the basic fundamental concepts here - Learn Photography Concepts

 

[LinkTheWorld]

The really dark spot where the trees are is the thing I see as the biggest issue. Since your pictures are "ok to edit" I took the time to edit your first picture. I dont know if you will like it better or not, I couldnt fix the dark tree area, but the rocks lightened up a little. Plus now the sky is more blue. If you want me to delete this post or the picture, just let me know.

What do you think?

 

[AaronLLockhart]

I'm confused on what you want your focal point to be. The demeanor of the photo would suggest the rainbow, but you have got too much of the foreground in the picture for that to be the case. In general, it seems as if you were going for a general landscape photograph, with something to look at everywhere in the photograph.

Only one problem: Your trees are majorly underexposed. This is not, and would not make a good silhouette landscape because of the fact that you only have the tips of your foreground to silhouette. So, it would look like a gigantic black blob at the bottom of the screen if you tried.

I know you're not going to get the opportunity to shoot this exact photograph again, but I would suggest HDR. I would suggest a 10+ exposure HDR at that. The dynamic range in this photograph is HUGE. So, it's going to take a lot of exposures to capture it's entire range.

 

[ceejtank]

I would have used spot metering on the dark rocks/trees, then re-metered on the rainbow area, and blended the two together.

My biggest issue with the picture is the darkness of the ground/trees. Too much sky too for me. Since I see you said the focus of it was the rainbow, that makes it more understandable as to why you had so much sky.

It's not necessarily a bad shot composition wise (interesting subject matter, lots of colors, good range).. it's just how dark teh shadows are that was the issue if you ask me.

Just my .02

Edit**: What camera are you using? I may be able to help with setting suggestions if this information is posted....

 

[AaronLLockhart]

]
Edit**: What camera are you using? I may be able to help with setting suggestions if this information is posted....

Not trying to start an argument or flame war... but... please, explain to the world how information about which camera he is using will help any of these images?


The camera doesn't make the photograph. It simply catches what the photographer sets it to. Knowing what camera he is using will not do a single thing to help him catch this image any better the next time.

 

[ceejtank]

]
Edit**: What camera are you using? I may be able to help with setting suggestions if this information is posted....

Not trying to start an argument or flame war... but... please, explain to the world how information about which camera he is using will help any of these images?


The camera doesn't make the photograph. It simply catches what the photographer sets it to. Knowing what camera he is using will not do a single thing to help him catch this image any better the next time.

"I may be able to help with setting suggestions if this information is posted"

I might be able to help with setting suggestions if it's a canon camera i'm familiar with. I never said I could help improve this picture, but for future shots I could explain how to set up the metering as I suggested in my above post if it's a camera who's functionality I understand thoroughly. Otherwise I could only speak in generalities.

p.s. the person signed their name as stephanie.. meaning its not a he.

 

[unpopular]

Rainbows are difficult. One thing that comes up with me a lot I'll see something like this and am like "OMG, I have to photograph THAT" without considering the rest of what is going on. The rainbow here might have been interesting, but the rest of the landscape is compositionally challenging.

Technically, I see a lot of latitude in the hilights left, and you probably could have pushed your exposure a stop or two. However that would have made for a challenge in PP, especially in recovering the rainbow as it would be pushed up against the left of the histogram.

Of course, it is also important to realize that not all experiences can be photographed, and are better left simply remembered as they were.

 

[AaronLLockhart]

Rainbows are difficult. One thing that comes up with me a lot I'll see something like this and am like "OMG, I have to photograph THAT" without considering the rest of what is going on. The rainbow here might have been interesting, but the rest of the landscape is compositionally challenging.

Technically, I see a lot of latitude in the hilights left, and you probably could have pushed your exposure a stop or two. However that would have made for a challenge in PP, especially in recovering the rainbow as it would be pushed up against the left of the histogram.

Of course, it is also important to realize that not all experiences can be photographed, and are better left simply remembered as they were.

hahaha that song has me rolling!

 

[unpopular]

you have to agree though. That was the baddest ****ing rainbow.

 

[AaronLLockhart]

you have to agree though. That was the baddest ****ing rainbow.

It was pretty bad ass... I bet that's the key to getting one. Maybe she needs to shoot a video and sing a song, or shoot a video and then autotune her words into a song. Then, all of the sudden the exposure levels will align perfectly and render perfectly exposed images at the top of this thread.

How magical.

 

[unpopular]

I hear a healthy dose of mescaline might help too.

 

[AaronLLockhart]

The bolded part is the important part of that statement.

I beg to differ.

If you asked me what kind of camera I am using, I would tell you to look in my signature. I wouldn't give you the settings in which I took a specific shot, in which you are implying that you are truly asking.

The most important part of that excerpt was the question asked, not the statement. You ASKED what camera she was using, not what settings she had it adjusted to.

I fixed your question for you:

"Could you please post the EXIF data from the photographs you took? I may be able to help with setting suggestions if this information is posted...."