cnynrat
Expedition Leader
I have a similar reaction. I'm left wondering why the rest of the car wasn't included in the frame.
Photo Critiqing Thread
- Thread starter GaryMc
- Start date
I have a similar reaction. I'm left wondering why the rest of the car wasn't included in the frame.
Yeah, its kind of like cutting out 1/2 of your great aunt Sue from the family portrait or something....
Clark White
Explorer
Ha! Love the analogy! I guess I was going for the closeup, but with out the closeup...will remember for next time, thanks!
Clark
Clark White
Explorer
I took a bunch of pictures of my girl friend on the north rim of the Grand Canyon this past weekend and was wondering what the collective thoughts on them are? I'm only posting these 4, as they are 4 that I don't quite like, but can't put my finger on what I should have done differently. Looking for advice on what I should have done framing wise as well as editing before I spend lots of time on the rest of the images from that trip.
These two I did black and white because they were taken in the Red Rocks of Norther Pariah river, and it gave such a red hue to everything that it drove me crazy, even after playing with the red Luminance and Saturation.
Thanks!
Clark
These two I did black and white because they were taken in the Red Rocks of Norther Pariah river, and it gave such a red hue to everything that it drove me crazy, even after playing with the red Luminance and Saturation.
Thanks!
Clark
john101477
Photographer in the Wild
For me, number 2 has to much distraction with the twin crooked trees. For me at least this one comes down to composition.
Number 3 has serious potential IMO and I would love to play with the original. I basically feel that the B&W needs tweeked to pull out the contrast. but I can also see a selective color option happening here.
Number 4 has great composition imo but I can see some tones being adjusted along with a very very light rectangular vignette. another I would love to tweek a bit
IDK maybe something like this for the 4th image. Hope ya dont mind, grabbed the last shot. quick edit, post here and delete from my comp
Number 3 has serious potential IMO and I would love to play with the original. I basically feel that the B&W needs tweeked to pull out the contrast. but I can also see a selective color option happening here.
Number 4 has great composition imo but I can see some tones being adjusted along with a very very light rectangular vignette. another I would love to tweek a bit
IDK maybe something like this for the 4th image. Hope ya dont mind, grabbed the last shot. quick edit, post here and delete from my comp
Last edited:
Clark White
Explorer
John, I sent you a PM with my e-mail, I can send you the RAW files if you are still interested in playing with the originals.
Clark
Clark
john101477
Photographer in the Wild
Played around re-editing some shots and then a couple more in CS6 after I loaded it. I need to spend some time now setting everything up and learning how to use at least 10% of the program.
Re-edits
1.
2.
CS6 early play with BW conversions
3.
4.
How you like CS6 so far? one of my buddies that lives near by is a beta tester for Adobe. From what I seen it looks way cool. I am hoping to pick it up in a cpl weeks.
I am not going to touch the top 2 as I am unsure what I would have done different
3rd - I am a sucker for long exposure and star trails, my only complaint would be that I wished there was more detail in the sky/stars, where as the long exposure effect in the water and the clarity of the land is awesome.
4th - well... showed it to my wife and she started to giggle. I cant remember did CS6 come with the same clarity slider as LR4 did? if so a graduated filter and a bump up in clarity "might" be cool, although it might ruin the feel of the shot to?!?!
#3 would have been awesome to do multiple exposures, changing settings to allow for the detail John mentioned.
#2 while you can't change the sun's path, A) the lit rock in the background is distracting and reds in the rock in the foreground could have really used a good "popping".
But that's the cost of shooting natural light. Composition is great in all of them.
#2 while you can't change the sun's path, A) the lit rock in the background is distracting and reds in the rock in the foreground could have really used a good "popping".
But that's the cost of shooting natural light. Composition is great in all of them.
photoman
Explorer
John- images 3 and 4 were my first attempts at CS6 so not anywhere close to offering much input at this point. There are a few more goodies compared to CS4 and the layout is a bit different. I plan on spending sometime tonight setting up the screen like I want and doing "add ins". Need to spend some time on Adobe and Youtube to learn a bit more.
Thanks for the comments.
#3 was from a trip last August through Northern California and is a really small town along the coast. I waited until most the lights were off near the little pier before taking this shot but there was still some lights on and light from beyond the horizon line. Only took a few shots and then headed off to a lighthouse.
#4 well yes it is a bit phallic in appearance. This is Wahweap Hoodoos outside of Page AZ. Camera Raw has the clarity slider and from some of the reading I have done everything that is in LR4 is in ACR and CS6. Just in different areas.
photoman
Explorer
Didn't think about multiple exposures on a long exposure night shot but why not- its only time and battery life.
#2- yeah I wasn't real happy with it but I plan to be up there again by end of year at least once so I'll work on another version of this one.
john101477
Photographer in the Wild
Where at in Northern Cali? I miss it back there myself. Getting ready to go experience a new place though. Headed to Cumberland MD friday morning. I am pretty sure I am going to buy CS6 in the next month myself.
Hmm, wonder if a grad ND upside down would have done the same thing? I would think that unless you used the topaz software star "filter" that it might not be as clean of a shot if done in multiple shots. Have not tried the topaz filter but hear it is pretty dang cool
Lost Canadian
Expedition Leader
Simple answer to your question Clark, is the light is poop. It's too harsh. There are shadows running everywhere in a couple of those, which creates distracting lines. You had the right idea by putting her in the shade in your second shot, it's softer light, without the harsh shadows, but next time maybe try composing to eliminate the bright distracting background and elements, simplify the shot.
If you can't avoid the harsh light, work with it, you can move into the shade, use a reflector or a very small touch of flash to add some life to dark shadows, and to balance the shot and bring out the subject eyes,... or just say what the heck and blow things up, shoot into the sun with your subjects face in complete shadow, overexpose the shot, give it charter. If you try and keep the compositions simple you'll land more keepers, so eliminate unnecessary elements that add nothing to the scene if you can. Also expose for the skin, especially important when dealing with shadow or shooting into the sun. As for processing, the only tip I have is people generally look better with subtle natural contrast, and balanced neutral saturation. Too much of either can spoil the shot.
Keep on shooting!
Here's a couple recent shots as examples to the aforementioned, where I was working in harsh daylight and had to make it work.
1) Placed the couple in the shade, with a simple background. No shadows, soft light. Certainly not mind blowing, it's basic but it works.
2) Placed the women in the shade of a tree as best as I could, however shadows were unavoidable. Placed a flash with a softbox, camera right, set to -2-3 EV give or take, which was just enough light to calm the harsh shadows and lend life to their eyes. Not perfect but you do what you can given the rushed circumstances of a wedding shoot.
3) Said the heck with it, sun was directly overhead no shade. Had the couple turn their backs to the sun, keeping their faces in the shade, and exposed for their faces,...probably +2-3EV over a whole scene metering. Also, I got way low, putting them in a power position, eliminated all other elements surrounding them, and shot into the sun. No light modifiers.
Last edited:
taco2go
Explorer
Trevor I like the little solar flare on her dress in that last shot- glad you kept it.
Thanks for the discussion gents- I always find it difficult to critique people-pictures publicly, probably because I don't know much, but I always learn so much from just looking and reading that I would be remiss not to aknowledge the great tips you folks share on here.
As far as people shots I have a lot of "to heck with it" shots of my kids in my folders, and somehow I enjoy looking at those the most. I did finally end up buying a book on natural light portraiture, thanks to the stuff I'm noticing on this forum.
Thanks for the discussion gents- I always find it difficult to critique people-pictures publicly, probably because I don't know much, but I always learn so much from just looking and reading that I would be remiss not to aknowledge the great tips you folks share on here.
As far as people shots I have a lot of "to heck with it" shots of my kids in my folders, and somehow I enjoy looking at those the most. I did finally end up buying a book on natural light portraiture, thanks to the stuff I'm noticing on this forum.
