Evaluate my photo

[shaggy1969]

Hi Folks

Well it is just over a year now that I first dared to ask for your evaluation on one of my pics,funnily enough that was also of lantern fishing raft.

Have run this photo through post editing (in RAW) several times but every time I am finished I am still left with the feeling that something is not right.

Is it the water? is it too busy or too dark? It has left me scratching my head and thinking that something is wrong every time,so I will leave it down to

the judgement of you good folks to tell me what it is,whether it be good or bad.

Camera ILCE-6000

Lens E PZ 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 OSS

Focal Length 50mm

Exposure 1/250

F Number f/11

ISO 100

Many thanks in advance for your comments and suggestions.

BTW,I would of liked to get lower down to get a better angle but I was on one of the fishing rafts at the time balancing precariously on a couple of bamboo poles.

Regards

Shaggy

[fimgirl]

Looking at the shadows/reflections I guess you shot this mid-day (ish). If so, there's your problem - light. Too harsh and unpleasant colours. Later (the golden hour) would correct this especially if there was a sunset and you could shoot silhouette style.

Composition is a little too tight making the image "messy/fussy. No main focus point to lock in the viewer.

I think you did OK under the prevailing conditions but chose the wrong time of the day.

As it stands, try black and white and work the sky for a bit of drama.

Hope this helps

[shaggy1969]

Just checked the data and you were spot on,12.20 pm.

The raft that I was on belongs to our neighbours Sister and so I will definitely be going there again.I think next time though I will use their long boat and try to get myself

into a less cluttered area and maybe the lower angle will result in some better shots.That will be a mega challenge seeing as there are hundreds of those rafts in a small area and usually the boats there need bailing out as you paddle.

Thanks for the tip about trying it in B/W,that could be the solution.Next time I am feeling inspired I will give it a go.

[fimgirl]

It's not an absolute rule but over here shooting outdoors between 10.00 am and 3.00 pm is "challenging" to the point of avoiding it. Obviously overcast days, interiors etc fall outside of this guideline.

[MJP]

It's not an absolute rule but over here shooting outdoors between 10.00 am and 3.00 pm is "challenging" to the point of avoiding it. Obviously overcast days, interiors etc fall outside of this guideline.

I use a combination of good quality rubber lens hood and a B+W Variable ND 1-5 stop filter. When I've got time I'm going to do a thread on filters, step rings and hoods.

I know. Exciting stuff!

[Assurancetourix]

The horizon ( line ) in the middle of the photo;

and it's a mess in here...

Not a bad photo ...with a little crop but not sure it's better

[Assurancetourix]

Don't know which free program to use for a beautiful crop; I use Irfan view but the result isn't good ..and beautiful;

do u have one and where to download ?

[TSF]

I use Picasa3 for cropping and other image adjustments. Find it very fast and easy to use, can run through a batch of 20-30 images in a matter of minutes making minor adjustments to exposure & composition.

I agree with Assurancetourix some cropping of the foreground improves the composition of this image.

Edited October 30, 2014 by TSF

[shaggy1969]

Thanks Monsieur AT and TSF,always nice to get the thoughts and opinions of others and how they see things.I must admit that I kinda like the foreground with the reflections of the boom arms in the water,but I suppose it would be a boring world if we all thought the same wouldn't it.

I have also used Picasa in the past and as TSF mentioned it is a fast and easy program to use......and it's free

FG,for some reason or other I didn't see the edited B/W version you posted yesterday,will definitely give it a go....maybe even leave in that red/blue bit on the door

of the main raft.

Thanks everyone for your tips and ideas so far,am never to proud to admit failure or learn something new.

[TSF]

Thanks Monsieur AT and TSF,always nice to get the thoughts and opinions of others and how they see things.I must admit that I kinda like the foreground with the reflections of the boom arms in the water,but I suppose it would be a boring world if we all thought the same wouldn't it.

I have also used Picasa in the past and as TSF mentioned it is a fast and easy program to use......and it's free

FG,for some reason or other I didn't see the edited B/W version you posted yesterday,will definitely give it a go....maybe even leave in that red/blue bit on the door

of the main raft.

Thanks everyone for your tips and ideas so far,am never to proud to admit failure or learn something new.

I d/l your photo and converted it to B&W then saturated it and banged up the contrast, but after doing it I thought the pic looks better in color. The red & blue on the door of the shack is a the most attractive area of the image (attractive inasmuch as it draws the eye to it) however, converting it to B&W but retaining the color on the shack would also make an interesting pic.

This is a good thread and I hope we have many more such discussions looking at the merits (and lack of) of each others photos.

[Ace of Pop]

Well, it looks nice to Me. But then im a purist, dont like these smarty pants who take rubbish, then enhance it to look superb.One or 2 here do it, so i never hit the like tab.Its so obvious to many genuine snappers here. ITS CHEATING.!!!.

[shaggy1969]

Thanks Monsieur AT and TSF,always nice to get the thoughts and opinions of others and how they see things.I must admit that I kinda like the foreground with the reflections of the boom arms in the water,but I suppose it would be a boring world if we all thought the same wouldn't it.

I have also used Picasa in the past and as TSF mentioned it is a fast and easy program to use......and it's free

FG,for some reason or other I didn't see the edited B/W version you posted yesterday,will definitely give it a go....maybe even leave in that red/blue bit on the door

of the main raft.

Thanks everyone for your tips and ideas so far,am never to proud to admit failure or learn something new.

I d/l your photo and converted it to B&W then saturated it and banged up the contrast, but after doing it I thought the pic looks better in color. The red & blue on the door of the shack is a the most attractive area of the image (attractive inasmuch as it draws the eye to it) however, converting it to B&W but retaining the color on the shack would also make an interesting pic.

This is a good thread and I hope we have many more such discussions looking at the merits (and lack of) of each others photos.

It's a pity you didn't save your edit and post it TSF,always nice to see what other people can do with editing software.

Thanks for taking the time and effort to have a go anyway.

[shaggy1969]

Well, it looks nice to Me. But then im a purist, dont like these smarty pants who take rubbish, then enhance it to look superb.One or 2 here do it, so i never hit the like tab.Its so obvious to many genuine snappers here. ITS CHEATING.!!!.

Thanks AoP.I do appreciate someone who is not afraid to speak their mind.....and you certainly did that

I'm afraid that I would be classed as one of the 'cheaters' though because I also use some software to edit my photos.In my case it a more of a necessity because I am such a bad photographer at this time and make many mistakes with my camera settings that I need the software to try and salvage the photo.Photo editing is also an form of art in my opinion and there are many good example from many of the members on this forum.....why have some thing good when you can have something great instead.That's the direction I am heading for,albeit on a wonky path.

BTW,I should warn you that the following post contains heavily edited images by me...don't say I didn't warn you.

[Tywais]

One thing that would have probably helped a lot is a polarizing filter to reduce the reflections from the water which makes an already busy photo look more busy. Also, if your camera supports filters, a UV filter should be on all the time. It protects the lens and it filters the UV out which can effect the blue by shifting it to purple slightly. However, I believe most digitial sensors have UV cut filters on them already and it was more important with film as the dyes were often quite sensitive to UV.

Some post processing software has polarizing plugins that you can play with after the fact or you can do faux polarizing with the software but will never look quite as good as the real thing as there is already loss of information due to the reflections.

My faux polarization mod. It doesn't help the water reflections too much doing it this way as I mentioned.

[shaggy1969]

Taking a slight twist on FG's advice about trying a B/W edit of the photo,I ended up with a kinda two tone peachy colour.I did try it in B/W first but due to lack in editing skills it just turned out into a dark,murky bigger mess than it was before.......here goes then (and please try and control the sniggering )

A slightly cropped version.........

and now for the totally OTT double framed with peachy vignette.......

I can take it.....give it to me,both barrels, point blank.

[Tywais]

Something else that can be done if you have a stable platform where you can put it on a tripod and that is use long exposure, 10 seconds or more if possible. Set ISO to the lowest level, aperture to f/16 - f/22 depending what you need to get several second exposure. This will make the water perfectly smooth (butter effect) without the ripples showing. On a bright day though you probably need a neutral density filter to achieve this, but it is a nice effect.

[shaggy1969]

One thing that would have probably helped a lot is a polarizing filter to reduce the reflections from the water which makes an already busy photo look more busy. Also, if your camera supports filters, a UV filter should be on all the time. It protects the lens and it filters the UV out which can effect the blue by shifting it to purple slightly. However, I believe most digitial sensors have UV cut filters on them already and it was more important with film as the dyes were often quite sensitive to UV.

Some post processing software has polarizing plugins that you can play with after the fact or you can do faux polarizing with the software but will never look quite as good as the real thing as there is already loss of information due to the reflections.

My faux polarization mod. It doesn't help the water reflections too much doing it this way as I mentioned.

raft_mod.jpg

Hi Tywais

We must of been posting at exactly the same time.

I like your version also and many thanks for you taking the time and effort to do some editing.I know that you have it busy enough anyway.

I reckon that filters would be the way to go and I am interested to what MJP has to say in his upcoming new thread.....as long as they aren't

expensive ones.I was looking at the original image today and thought that the image still could of been a good one if there was now wind that

day.a perfect reflection of the blue skies and clouds in the water......dream on eh!

[Forethat]

Something else that can be done if you have a stable platform where you can put it on a tripod and that is use long exposure, 10 seconds or more if possible. Set ISO to the lowest level, aperture to f/16 - f/22 depending what you need to get several second exposure. This will make the water perfectly smooth (butter effect) without the ripples showing. On a bright day though you probably need a neutral density filter to achieve this, but it is a nice effect.

Well...as always, everything depends on what you're trying to do, but shooting at f22 gives a slight disadvantage in that you'll lose sharpness. Landscape photography is often dependant on sharpness so for this reason I tend to stay away from anything that high. Obviously you know your own gear and I know mine, but my gear (I shoot Canon) gives optimum sharpness in the f8-f13 range. If I for some reason need a longer exposure I stack ND filters. a couple of 10-stop NDs usually does the trick...

[Tywais]

Something else that can be done if you have a stable platform where you can put it on a tripod and that is use long exposure, 10 seconds or more if possible. Set ISO to the lowest level, aperture to f/16 - f/22 depending what you need to get several second exposure. This will make the water perfectly smooth (butter effect) without the ripples showing. On a bright day though you probably need a neutral density filter to achieve this, but it is a nice effect.

Well...as always, everything depends on what you're trying to do, but shooting at f22 gives a slight disadvantage in that you'll lose sharpness. Landscape photography is often dependant on sharpness so for this reason I tend to stay away from anything that high. Obviously you know your own gear and I know mine, but my gear (I shoot Canon) gives optimum sharpness in the f8-f13 range. If I for some reason need a longer exposure I stack ND filters. a couple of 10-stop NDs usually does the trick...

I agree it is a compromise to go that far, f/22, as you bump into diffraction limiting. This is only if you don't have a ND filter and want to give it a test run as to how it works. "A couple of 10-stop NDs"? Just 1 10-stop ND and your exposure times are very long plus not able to see anything so you have to preset focus and framing before putting it on. But two of them, that is extremely long exposures on a normal day and noise will start being an issue plus some sensors may overheat. Never heard of that high of NDs being used before unless you are shooting a solar eclipse.

[Ace of Pop]

Well, it looks nice to Me. But then im a purist, dont like these smarty pants who take rubbish, then enhance it to look superb.One or 2 here do it, so i never hit the like tab.Its so obvious to many genuine snappers here. ITS CHEATING.!!!.

Thanks AoP.I do appreciate someone who is not afraid to speak their mind.....and you certainly did that

I'm afraid that I would be classed as one of the 'cheaters' though because I also use some software to edit my photos.In my case it a more of a necessity because I am such a bad photographer at this time and make many mistakes with my camera settings that I need the software to try and salvage the photo.Photo editing is also an form of art in my opinion and there are many good example from many of the members on this forum.....why have some thing good when you can have something great instead.That's the direction I am heading for,albeit on a wonky path.

BTW,I should warn you that the following post contains heavily edited images by me...don't say I didn't warn you.

I dont mean to sound harsh , but to me its like Rembrandt finishing off my painting.I didnt know the rules early on ,and got a Mod Smack for posting nice pics sent to me, or from the Web.Doctoring is about the same to me, it aint your pic.!! . Guess im just an old Brownie 125 chap.

[TSF]

@Shaggy:

Very much like what you have now done with the image, especially the double framed with vignette.

I did try post my edit of your pic but it showed only as a thumb, not a full sized image like you have. But I'm a newbie on this forum so I'm not sure how many things work.

[Tywais]

@Shaggy:

Very much like what you have now done with the image, especially the double framed with vignette.

I did try post my edit of your pic but it showed only as a thumb, not a full sized image like you have. But I'm a newbie on this forum so I'm not sure how many things work.

You can look at my pinned guide on the methods you can use to post images - http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/614326-posting-images-guidelines/

[TSF]

@Shaggy:

Very much like what you have now done with the image, especially the double framed with vignette.

I did try post my edit of your pic but it showed only as a thumb, not a full sized image like you have. But I'm a newbie on this forum so I'm not sure how many things work.

You can look at my pinned guide on the methods you can use to post images - http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/614326-posting-images-guidelines/

Many thanks for that link Tywais. I've read the guide. Any pics I'll upload to this forum will always be from my own computer, so they will always be displayed as thumbs. The only way to have a pic displayed as a full sized image is to use the 2nd method?

[Tywais]

Many thanks for that link Tywais. I've read the guide. Any pics I'll upload to this forum will always be from my own computer, so they will always be displayed as thumbs. The only way to have a pic displayed as a full sized image is to use the 2nd method?

Yes, the only way for a full sized image to display is from an external image link. Flickr has a free account with 1 TB space which several of us use. Gives you a backup as a side benefit.

[TSF]

Many thanks for that link Tywais. I've read the guide. Any pics I'll upload to this forum will always be from my own computer, so they will always be displayed as thumbs. The only way to have a pic displayed as a full sized image is to use the 2nd method?

Yes, the only way for a full sized image to display is from an external image link. Flickr has a free account with 1 TB space which several of us use. Gives you a backup as a side benefit.

Thanks again Tywais, it's good to learn how things work here.

Very good forum btw.

[shaggy1969]

@Shaggy:

Very much like what you have now done with the image, especially the double framed with vignette.

I did try post my edit of your pic but it showed only as a thumb, not a full sized image like you have. But I'm a newbie on this forum so I'm not sure how many things work.

HI TSF

Thanks for your kind comment.The second image was only meant as a bit of tongue and cheek really and after reading AoP's comment about Rembrandt

then it fits in quite nicely since every great work of art needs a good frame around it,(in no way meant to disrespect AoP,just a bit of fun)

I read in a later post of yours about posting full screen images.I use G+ in combination with Picasa to upload my large images,it is really quite simple and if

you need any help then I would only be too happy to help.Seeing as you are already familiar with Picasa then maybe it is a possible option for you.

There are of course many other sites out there that do the same thing but I have no experience with those,but I know other members on this forum use sites

such as Flickr and I am sure that they would lend you a hand to help get set up and running.

Hopefully we will see some of you own images on the Photo Forum in the not too distant future.

[shaggy1969]

I dont mean to sound harsh , but to me its like Rembrandt finishing off my painting.I didnt know the rules early on ,and got a Mod Smack for posting nice pics sent to me, or from the Web.Doctoring is about the same to me, it aint your pic.!! . Guess im just an old Brownie 125 chap.

Nothing wrong with being Old School AoP,everyone is entitled to their own opinions and I respect that.To tell you the truth I wish that I didn't have to alter my

images in any way shape or form and that I could get the perfect result every time 'in camera'.Unfortunately I am not that skilled a photographer and have to

rely on editing software to repair my own mistakes.Thankfully these days there is such software around because I have now been able to salvage precious

family photos into a good viewable condition....that is very special to me.

If I may I will give you an example of a really badly overexposed photo that I took and also the Post Edited copy that I did.See which one you think is better.

Original

Edited version

The second image is a lot closer to what I saw that day (and is not up for evaluation only as an example)

On a side note I would like to personally say how pleased I am that I started this thread. I have picked up a good few helpful tips for helping me become a

better photographer (e.g time of day,filters that could be used and correcting tools).Thank you guys, I really appreciate it.

'

[rhythmworx]

What you have to remember Shaggy is that when it's cloudy the sun is out in the heavens just as much as when it's not cloudy and beaming sunlight.

The clouds when overcast act as a giant diffuser pretty much the same way a soft box works, scattering the light which for a female portrait shot of a face under that light is ideal, nice and soft less shadows/wrinkles shown etc...

Shooting a landscape in them conditions you are basically shooting into a diffused light source, a tripod and 2 different exposures would help...meter the light for the sky, the sky will look OK but your landscape too dark, then meter for the landscape and the sky will be overexposed.

Doesn't matter what camera you have the same will apply.

You can layer them and mask off the under or over exposed area.

IMO the 1st shot above isn't too bad regarding the conditions, I think if maybe you used EV compensation at maybe -1 you would end up with a similar photo as the edited one.

Edited October 31, 2014 by rhythmworx

[Forethat]

Something else that can be done if you have a stable platform where you can put it on a tripod and that is use long exposure, 10 seconds or more if possible. Set ISO to the lowest level, aperture to f/16 - f/22 depending what you need to get several second exposure. This will make the water perfectly smooth (butter effect) without the ripples showing. On a bright day though you probably need a neutral density filter to achieve this, but it is a nice effect.

Well...as always, everything depends on what you're trying to do, but shooting at f22 gives a slight disadvantage in that you'll lose sharpness. Landscape photography is often dependant on sharpness so for this reason I tend to stay away from anything that high. Obviously you know your own gear and I know mine, but my gear (I shoot Canon) gives optimum sharpness in the f8-f13 range. If I for some reason need a longer exposure I stack ND filters. a couple of 10-stop NDs usually does the trick...

I agree it is a compromise to go that far, f/22, as you bump into diffraction limiting. This is only if you don't have a ND filter and want to give it a test run as to how it works. "A couple of 10-stop NDs"? Just 1 10-stop ND and your exposure times are very long plus not able to see anything so you have to preset focus and framing before putting it on. But two of them, that is extremely long exposures on a normal day and noise will start being an issue plus some sensors may overheat. Never heard of that high of NDs being used before unless you are shooting a solar eclipse.

Stacking 2 of them works fine in daylight conditions especially when I shoot at f11, though it wouldn't make sense during sunset or sunrise, I agree completely. The overheated sensor....I have never been able to provoke a warning with my body despite 20min exposures, but Canon 7D is notorious for the overheated sensor issues so I know this problem exist.

[Ace of Pop]

I dont mean to sound harsh , but to me its like Rembrandt finishing off my painting.I didnt know the rules early on ,and got a Mod Smack for posting nice pics sent to me, or from the Web.Doctoring is about the same to me, it aint your pic.!! . Guess im just an old Brownie 125 chap.

Nothing wrong with being Old School AoP,everyone is entitled to their own opinions and I respect that.To tell you the truth I wish that I didn't have to alter my

images in any way shape or form and that I could get the perfect result every time 'in camera'.Unfortunately I am not that skilled a photographer and have to

rely on editing software to repair my own mistakes.Thankfully these days there is such software around because I have now been able to salvage precious

family photos into a good viewable condition....that is very special to me.

If I may I will give you an example of a really badly overexposed photo that I took and also the Post Edited copy that I did.See which one you think is better.

Original

Edited version

The second image is a lot closer to what I saw that day (and is not up for evaluation only as an example)

On a side note I would like to personally say how pleased I am that I started this thread. I have picked up a good few helpful tips for helping me become a

better photographer (e.g time of day,filters that could be used and correcting tools).Thank you guys, I really appreciate it.

'

My friend has a posh camera, and you can improve like that "In Camera" , so easy i can do it, but im a few Thou Bht short of buying one.!!! Cannon IS something or other. Il try next time to enhance mine with my ADC 3.Brace yourself for a chuckle Chaps.