What about lightening the shadows a bit and cropping to a panoramic view?
Just some more food for thought 😊
OK. I'm convinced by Dan's alterations as well. The message remains the same while the alterations further reinforce what I feel is the message. I still see the result as a a dip of the lid to the principles of triangulation and construction. The lighter foreground increases the visual connection with the forms of the background buildings and the cranes. The horizontal lines of the cranes are important in feeling some of the stresses those apparently fragile structures manage. The wider crop accentuates the horizontal line of the cranes.
@Bryan has written:This one was taken the same day as last week's.
Another pretty shot of a bird I shall never meet, with a rainbow of natural coloring that boggles the mind. I do like the unusual effect of the shadow of his beak and the quizzical posture. I think some brightening would help combat the effects of the contrasty lighting, add some facial detail and clarify the wonderful colors - maybe raising shadows and overall brightness or maybe even some selective brightening around his mask too. You are becoming a bird whisperer!
Thanks minnie.
On another forum the above and last week's image attracted a comment that they were over exposed. I had already realised that these birds have quite reflective feathers with a lot of specular highlights and had been dialing in a fair bit of -ve EC and reducing highlights where necessary. So I never thought of actually raising anything in this week's... This is about as far as I am prepared to go - I hope it's enough.
@MikeFewster has written:And yeah Dan, I know I don't use Quote correctly, I'll get around to it. I hate the flat view forum structure.
Some forums give members the option to list posts beginning at the last post and then the previous posts. Unfortunately this one doesn't.
What works well for me, especially in long threads, is to first go to the last post and then read the posts back from there.
This minimises the chance of reposting something that has already been mentioned.
I have tried that. It works to some extent. It's why I delay posting much for the first few days of the week. Life is so much simpler when all the comments develop beneath the one image. It's the critical difference between what we try to do where the whole conversation with a mix of views is valued and everyone builds on the input of others as compared to forums where the discussion is mainly between the OP and an individual response.
@minniev has written: @Bryan has written:This one was taken the same day as last week's.
Another pretty shot of a bird I shall never meet, with a rainbow of natural coloring that boggles the mind. I do like the unusual effect of the shadow of his beak and the quizzical posture. I think some brightening would help combat the effects of the contrasty lighting, add some facial detail and clarify the wonderful colors - maybe raising shadows and overall brightness or maybe even some selective brightening around his mask too. You are becoming a bird whisperer!
Thanks minnie.
On another forum the above and last week's image attracted a comment that they were over exposed. I had already realised that these birds have quite reflective feathers with a lot of specular highlights and had been dialing in a fair bit of -ve EC and reducing highlights where necessary. So I never thought of actually raising anything in this week's... This is about as far as I am prepared to go - I hope it's enough.
Personally I would go with something like this. With this version I can see a hint of the bird's eyes on my screen.
@DanHasLeftForum has written: @MikeFewster has written:And yeah Dan, I know I don't use Quote correctly, I'll get around to it. I hate the flat view forum structure.
Some forums give members the option to list posts beginning at the last post and then the previous posts. Unfortunately this one doesn't.
What works well for me, especially in long threads, is to first go to the last post and then read the posts back from there.
This minimises the chance of reposting something that has already been mentioned.
I have tried that. It works to some extent. It's why I delay posting much for the first few days of the week. Life is so much simpler when all the comments develop beneath the one image. It's the critical difference between what we try to do where the whole conversation with a mix of views is valued and everyone builds on the input of others as compared to forums where the discussion is mainly between the OP and an individual response.
We all find our own path in how we approach viewing the posted photos and sharing our impressions.
Whether in flat view or threaded (and I like threaded view SO much better), I tend to respond directly to the initial post. I try to avoid reading others' comments till after I've responded so I don't let them influence my view. Sometimes I accidentally stumble onto a comment or an edit before I've posted my own reaction, because of how this forum is constructed, but my intent is to respond without any influence other than the photo itself. If I later find a comment or edit that changes my impression, I can always add a response later down the line. But there are many different ways to approach this and none of them are wrong as long as we stick to clear, honest, civil responses.
Threaded view would certainly make it easier to follow expanded discussions and avoid misplaced quotes and other formatting issues.
Icefields Highway (wish I was there now instead of here in 110 degree heat). One from the archives, so old it was taken with the venerable E30. I never did anything with the picture because there was a worrisome distraction I could not get rid of without making major alterations in the scene, but the sky and light were so dramatic I couldn't delete it. So yesterday I decided to see whether the new lightroom tools would salvage it, and this is the result. Still a few nits but I'm better satisfied with it.
Quite a landscape with many elements. The sunlit peaks, valleys and green grass offset the brooding clouds, their shadows and approaching storm, with the old tree sitting on that side of the fence...
@MikeFewster has written: @DanHasLeftForum has written: @MikeFewster has written:And yeah Dan, I know I don't use Quote correctly, I'll get around to it. I hate the flat view forum structure.
Some forums give members the option to list posts beginning at the last post and then the previous posts. Unfortunately this one doesn't.
What works well for me, especially in long threads, is to first go to the last post and then read the posts back from there.
This minimises the chance of reposting something that has already been mentioned.
I have tried that. It works to some extent. It's why I delay posting much for the first few days of the week. Life is so much simpler when all the comments develop beneath the one image. It's the critical difference between what we try to do where the whole conversation with a mix of views is valued and everyone builds on the input of others as compared to forums where the discussion is mainly between the OP and an individual response.
We all find our own path in how we approach viewing the posted photos and sharing our impressions.
Whether in flat view or threaded (and I like threaded view SO much better), I tend to respond directly to the initial post. I try to avoid reading others' comments till after I've responded so I don't let them influence my view. Sometimes I accidentally stumble onto a comment or an edit before I've posted my own reaction, because of how this forum is constructed, but my intent is to respond without any influence other than the photo itself. If I later find a comment or edit that changes my impression, I can always add a response later down the line. But there are many different ways to approach this and none of them are wrong as long as we stick to clear, honest, civil responses.
Threaded view would certainly make it easier to follow expanded discussions and avoid misplaced quotes and other formatting issues.
I second same thoughts on the subject and lament the lack of threaded view, which hugely would improve the communication among the participants. Some time this year, I reckon...
@DanHasLeftForum has written:WATER COLORS
Ovens River running through Bright, North East Victoria, Australia.
I've looked at this image a few times now over the past days.
And I have read some of the comments.
For my own (small) comment, I want to just get back to your original image, whithout all the extra information and opinions.
I can recognize what is shown here (a river with rapids), but I was at first unsure of how the effect was achieved.
My initial impression (being the naive documentary photographer that I am) was that we were looking at a "straight" shot, of some kind of event, where patches of coloured light were projected onto the water (a bit like stage lighting, but onto a moving river instead of on ballet dancers). It could have been a theatrical event or an avant-garde performance or experimental art installation.
The title would have been appropriate.
But now I realize that this is your own artistic expression, where the photo almost acts as blank canvas for a play with colour and light (and darkness).
And then the title is even more appropriate, because we are more in the realm of painting here, than of photography.
Painting not with oils or acryl, but with ... water colours.It is not really my personal cup of tea (taking as criterium: would I hang this on a wall for me to look at it more often).
But I do appreciate every expression of creativity and the willingness to share it.
Much like with LouHolland actually (a former contributor whose PP experiments went often in the same kind of direction).
I'm confused. I don't know who said what I struck out above but it wasn't me.
@RoelHendrickx has written: @Rich42 has written:A commercial building at the main intersection in Carlsbad, CA. It houses, what else?, a surf shop.
Not a lot of artistic work for the photographer. Present it honestly. Line it up straight. Correct some perspective distortion.
And include the palm tree to give some SoCal location flavor, as well as the crow saluting Old Glory. Don't get no better'n that.
Rich
When shooting interesting buildings in crowded city situations, I often shoot the buildings not from ground level up, but starting a bit higher.
It helps be get rid of pedestrians, cars, garish shop windows, traffic signs, garbage bins and other eye-sores.
I have the feeling that you have employed a similar strategy here, but in a rather extreme way.
We only see the roof, and then not even the whole roof.
It leaves me with a feeling of wanting to see more.
Do you have any other images of the same building (maybe in portrait orientation)?
That lonely branch of palm tree fills a bit of empty space, but not quite enough for my taste. Being that small and on the border, makes it feel less like a deliberate inclusion than like something that was hard to avoid. *(I do understand of course that you wanted to stand straight in front of the building.) *Roel,
There are times one has to take what one gets. I couldn't get much else.
But I like the way I was able to line things up for the upper part of the building with the geometry that results in this shot. Getting more of the building in the frame was not possible for a number of reasons and realize it may seem incomplete. But that's the image! 😉
It's a landmark here, and those who know the structure would kind of "get" the composition, (I think!).
I actually liked that the palm intruded just a bit, just a "skosh," but understand that others might feel it needs to be more present.
Thanks for the comments!
Rich
I knew you would have included more if you could have. What I would have loved to see is the full triangular roof / wall sections and the blue / grey panels under the windows... I think in this case a little bit of palm tree is better than none.
@Bryan has written:That shot just hurts my eyes.
An image has good separation blur where the background is (mostly) indistinguishable and minimal separation blur where the background is distinguishable with minimal blur. There is generally no happy medium - certainly not in this case.
I can't be sure on sharpening but the bird's head feathers look like they have had hot wax combed through them - a common result of over sharpening.Edited for clarity.
Thank you for your thoughts Bryan 🙂
You are the first one ever who has said that image hurts their eyes.
I suspect it might be related to the way your screen is rendering the image. Your screen is most likely calibrated and profiled differently to mine.
It's not the calibration of my monitor. It's the level of background blur. Neither diffuse from enough separation nor close enough to focused to remain comfortable.
@DanHasLeftForum has written: @Bryan has written:That shot just hurts my eyes.
There is good separation blur where the background is (mostly) indistinguishable and minimal separation blur where the background is distinguishable with minimal blur. There is generally no happy medium - certainly not in this case.
I can't be sure on sharpening but the bird's head feathers look like they have had hot wax combed through them - a common result of over sharpening.Thank you for your thoughts Bryan 🙂
You are the first one ever who has said that image hurts their eyes.
I suspect it might be related to the way your screen is rendering the image. Your screen is most likely calibrated and profiled differently to mine.
It's not the calibration of my monitor. It's the level of background blur. Neither diffuse from enough separation nor close enough to focused to remain comfortable.
Ok, but I can't edit photos to suit people's individual eye sight.
@Bryan has written: @DanHasLeftForum has written: @Bryan has written:That shot just hurts my eyes.
An image has good separation blur where the background is (mostly) indistinguishable and minimal separation blur where the background is distinguishable with minimal blur. There is generally no happy medium - certainly not in this case.
I can't be sure on sharpening but the bird's head feathers look like they have had hot wax combed through them - a common result of over sharpening.Edited for clarity.
Thank you for your thoughts Bryan 🙂
You are the first one ever who has said that image hurts their eyes.
I suspect it might be related to the way your screen is rendering the image. Your screen is most likely calibrated and profiled differently to mine.
It's not the calibration of my monitor. It's the level of background blur. Neither diffuse from enough separation nor close enough to focused to remain comfortable.
Ok, but I can't edit photos to suit people's individual eye sight.
No. No amount of editing can fix that.
@DanHasLeftForum has written: @Bryan has written: @DanHasLeftForum has written: @Bryan has written:That shot just hurts my eyes.
There is good separation blur where the background is (mostly) indistinguishable and minimal separation blur where the background is distinguishable with minimal blur. There is generally no happy medium - certainly not in this case.
I can't be sure on sharpening but the bird's head feathers look like they have had hot wax combed through them - a common result of over sharpening.Thank you for your thoughts Bryan 🙂
You are the first one ever who has said that image hurts their eyes.
I suspect it might be related to the way your screen is rendering the image. Your screen is most likely calibrated and profiled differently to mine.
It's not the calibration of my monitor. It's the level of background blur. Neither diffuse from enough separation nor close enough to focused to remain comfortable.
Ok, but I can't edit photos to suit people's individual eye sight.
No. No amount of editing can fix that.
Since no-one else who has viewed the image anywhere has told me it hurts their eyes, I hope you find someone who can cure your issue with your eyes.
@Bryan has written: @DanHasLeftForum has written: @Bryan has written: @DanHasLeftForum has written: @Bryan has written:That shot just hurts my eyes.
An image has good separation blur where the background is (mostly) indistinguishable and minimal separation blur where the background is distinguishable with minimal blur. There is generally no happy medium - certainly not in this case.
I can't be sure on sharpening but the bird's head feathers look like they have had hot wax combed through them - a common result of over sharpening.Edited for clarity.
Thank you for your thoughts Bryan 🙂
You are the first one ever who has said that image hurts their eyes.
I suspect it might be related to the way your screen is rendering the image. Your screen is most likely calibrated and profiled differently to mine.
It's not the calibration of my monitor. It's the level of background blur. Neither diffuse from enough separation nor close enough to focused to remain comfortable.
Ok, but I can't edit photos to suit people's individual eye sight.
No. No amount of editing can fix that.
Since no-one else who has viewed the image anywhere has told me it hurts their eyes, I hope you find someone who can cure your issue with your eyes.
Over time I have posted some pretty ordinary pics on this forum. It only takes one person to relate the flaws and it's taken on board. After all, that is the function of the Critique part of C&C - don't you think?
@MikeFewster has written: @DanHasLeftForum has written: @RoelHendrickx has written:
This entire thread is an exercise in frustration for me. I agree with the points Dan made about fish eyes and his suggestion for a small lift around Els to bring her out from the background. Roel's film suggestions resulted in bookmarking. Great. I was ready to post. Then I discovered the later discussion where Roel explains his fish eye technique and Dan plays further with the image.Flat view makes this all very tedious. Going backwards and forwards to put everything together before making a post is ultra tedious.I'm not into ultra wide angle or fisheye shots generally but this one seems to work for me because of its composition and/or cropping. I like the glow from the backlight surrounding the building. It helps take me through the scene from foreground to background.
Just some food for thought. Maybe highlight your wife a bit more to help her standout in the scene?
Thank you for sharing 😊
You are misquoting me because a lot of that I didn't say at all.
For the sake of clarity to those who don't read every post I have struck out where I have been incorrectly quoted.
FWIW I don’t see the incorrect quoting.
Mike just kunda summarized different parts of the conversation, centering on different aspects, and expressed how all that would be easier to follow in a threaded forum view under the image - hence his frustration.
No need nor trigger to be confrontational here.
@RoelHendrickx has written: @DanHasLeftForum has written:WATER COLORS
Ovens River running through Bright, North East Victoria, Australia.
I've looked at this image a few times now over the past days.
And I have read some of the comments.
For my own (small) comment, I want to just get back to your original image, whithout all the extra information and opinions.
I can recognize what is shown here (a river with rapids), but I was at first unsure of how the effect was achieved.
My initial impression (being the naive documentary photographer that I am) was that we were looking at a "straight" shot, of some kind of event, where patches of coloured light were projected onto the water (a bit like stage lighting, but onto a moving river instead of on ballet dancers). It could have been a theatrical event or an avant-garde performance or experimental art installation.
The title would have been appropriate.
But now I realize that this is your own artistic expression, where the photo almost acts as blank canvas for a play with colour and light (and darkness).
And then the title is even more appropriate, because we are more in the realm of painting here, than of photography.
Painting not with oils or acryl, but with ... water colours.It is not really my personal cup of tea (taking as criterium: would I hang this on a wall for me to look at it more often).
But I do appreciate every expression of creativity and the willingness to share it.
Much like with LouHolland actually (a former contributor whose PP experiments went often in the same kind of direction).I'm confused. I don't know who said what I struck out above but it wasn't me.
That was all me.
I responed to your initial image, even though there had already been other comments.
@DanHasLeftForum has written: @RoelHendrickx has written: @DanHasLeftForum has written:WATER COLORS
Ovens River running through Bright, North East Victoria, Australia.
I've looked at this image a few times now over the past days.
And I have read some of the comments.
For my own (small) comment, I want to just get back to your original image, whithout all the extra information and opinions.
I can recognize what is shown here (a river with rapids), but I was at first unsure of how the effect was achieved.
My initial impression (being the naive documentary photographer that I am) was that we were looking at a "straight" shot, of some kind of event, where patches of coloured light were projected onto the water (a bit like stage lighting, but onto a moving river instead of on ballet dancers). It could have been a theatrical event or an avant-garde performance or experimental art installation.
The title would have been appropriate.
But now I realize that this is your own artistic expression, where the photo almost acts as blank canvas for a play with colour and light (and darkness).
And then the title is even more appropriate, because we are more in the realm of painting here, than of photography.
Painting not with oils or acryl, but with ... water colours.It is not really my personal cup of tea (taking as criterium: would I hang this on a wall for me to look at it more often).
But I do appreciate every expression of creativity and the willingness to share it.
Much like with LouHolland actually (a former contributor whose PP experiments went often in the same kind of direction).I'm confused. I don't know who said what I struck out above but it wasn't me.
That was all me.
I responed to your initial image, even though there had already been other comments.
It is very easy to use quotes correctly and not misrepresent what other people have posted.