Jump to content


Photo

Dawn Glow On The Bloodvein - Need Your Feedback


  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

#1 Kerry Gordon

Kerry Gordon

    <3 SDP

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 578 posts
  • Lenses:Rokinon 12mm f/2
    Fujinon 16-55mm f/2.8
    Fujinon 35 mm f/2
  • Camera Body or Bodies:Fujifilm Xt-2
    TRIPOD:
    Sirui T-025X
    HEAD:
    Arca Swiss Monoball p0 with RRS Quick Release

Posted 13 January 2018 - 09:49 AM

I need some feedback.  I have two versions of the same core image and would really like to know which one you prefer and why.  Both images are composed of a blend of two long exposure shots, one at 30 sec and the other at 1/5 sec.  The first shot is mostly all the 30 sec image except a slight blending around the lower left and front just to bring a bit of texture into the water.  The second image is the 30 sec for the land/background and the 1/5 sec for the water and the rocks (though, as you can imagine, long exposure doesn’t affect rocks much.)  Other than that, they are both processed pretty much the same way although I used a little less clarity in the first image to keep it a little more “dreamy” looking.  Maybe they both have their place.  Or maybe neither work.  Anyway I’d certainly appreciate your feedback.

Attached File  Dawn-Glow-on-the-Bloodvein-lx.jpg   678.64KB   0 downloads

Attached File  Dawn-Glow-on-the-Bloodvein.jpg   791.75KB   0 downloads

 



#2 MarkM

MarkM

    <3 SDP

  • Stunners
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 688 posts
  • LocationOrange County, California
  • Lenses:AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm f/4G ED VR
    AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8E ED VR
    AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8E FL ED VR
    AF-S Nikkor 200-500mm f.5.6E ED VR
  • Camera Body or Bodies:Nikon D500
    Nikon D750
    Sony RX100 M4

Posted 13 January 2018 - 10:11 AM

Kerry, first things first...What a beautiful scene! The sun and its light is so pretty and gives a warm, peaceful glow. And the composition is spot on.
As for preference, this is a tough call. I love the second image over the first due to the details in the foreground water. On the other hand, the smoothed foreground water in the first causes the rocks to become prominent and distinct from the smooth foreground water, an effect I really like. I like the flow rate of the water to the left of the rocks better in the 2nd than the first...my preference for just a big more detail. If there were a 3rd option with the first image and prominent rocks/smoothed water foreground, but with the left-side water with the details from the second image, I’d prefer that. With two choices, I go with the first because the rocks are distinct from the smoothed foreground water and my eye quickly goes into the scene, to ultimately enjoy that background sunlight!

#3 elcab18

elcab18

    Master Photographer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,013 posts
  • LocationSo Cal
  • Lenses:Nikon 12-24
    Nikon 16-35
    Nikon 50
    Nikon 24-85
    Nikon 70-200
    Nikon 105 micro
    Nikon 200-500 f 5.6
  • Flashes:Yongnuo YN 568 EX
  • Camera Body or Bodies:Nikon D610
    Nikon D500

Posted 13 January 2018 - 03:18 PM

Kerry for me there is certainly enough to look at to make them worthy...they work for me. I like the second one (bottom), I like the detail in the rocks and the lighting more through the bottom half, especially the bottom left of the shot.  I can see the effects of a long exposure and also a shorter exposure in the moving water, very interesting, I like it a lot! Well done.



#4 Reciprocityrules

Reciprocityrules

    Comfortably Numb

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 967 posts
  • LocationChina & U.S.
  • Lenses:Olympus:
    12-40mm f/2.8
    40-150mm f/2.8
    60mm f/2.8 Macro
    300mm f/4
    MC-14 1.4x TC
    Kenko Ext. Tubes 26mm
  • Flashes:Yongnuo YN-660
  • Camera Body or Bodies:OMD EM5 Mark II
    OMD EM1 Mark II

Posted 13 January 2018 - 06:50 PM

I prefer the second image.  The fog or mist is a big part of this photo.  The first image tends to carry that mist into the foreground.  When we are in a foggy or misty environment, the fog or mist becomes more prevalent the more of it we have to look through; it appears to be more dense the further away we look.  To me, the second image illustrates this providing a more natural, less overwhelming mist effect in the foreground. 


Jonny


#5 John W

John W

    Master Photographer

  • Stunners
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,165 posts
  • LocationMaryland - Eastern Shore
  • Lenses:Nikon 200-500 5.6
    Nikon 16-80 2.8-4
    Nikon 500mm f4E FL
    Nikon 50mm f1.8
    Nikon 1.4III extender
  • Camera Body or Bodies:Nikon D500
    Vangurad Actus Plus 283AT Tripod
    Feisol CT-3371 Rapid tripod
    Induro Git 404L series tripod
    Gitzo GM 4552L Monopod
    Really Right Stuff BH-55 Ball Head
    Wimberley WH-200
    Mongoose 3.6 Gimbal
    Induro GHB - 1 Gimbal

Posted 13 January 2018 - 08:02 PM

Kerry for me there is certainly enough to look at to make them worthy...they work for me. I like the second one (bottom), I like the detail in the rocks and the lighting more through the bottom half, especially the bottom left of the shot.  I can see the effects of a long exposure and also a shorter exposure in the moving water, very interesting, I like it a lot! Well done.

#2 easily. - Wow, awesome image. Beautiful.


  • elcab18 likes this

#6 David_MC

David_MC

    <3 SDP

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 517 posts
  • LocationOklahoma
  • Lenses:Canon EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM
    Canon EF-S 24mm f/2.8 STM
    Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM
    Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II
    Tamron SP 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DI VC USD
  • Flashes:Canon 430EXII
  • Camera Body or Bodies:Canon 7D

Posted 13 January 2018 - 11:15 PM

Both images are fantastic, however I must also go with #2. It’s the best compromise of getting the feathery water and some action around those rocks.

#7 geedee

geedee

    Dedicated SDP Member

  • Stunners
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,746 posts
  • Lenses:Nikon 16-35 VR f4 50mm f1.4 70-200 VR II f2.8 x2 converter
    18-70 f3.5-4.5DX (kit for D70s)
    Tamron 150-600 f5-6.3
    Cannon 50mm f1.8
  • Flashes:Nikon SB 910
  • Camera Body or Bodies:Cannon AE1
    Nikon D70S D800

Posted 14 January 2018 - 07:47 AM

The second image works best for me too Kerry as I like the water to look like water in the scene you have captured. It seems logical that the sun showing through the mist will create a degree of softness which is counteracted by the level of sharpness of the rocks thus while there is more contrast in that respect for ME it appears a more balanced image.... But then what do I know about ART..!! (-:



#8 Kerry Gordon

Kerry Gordon

    <3 SDP

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 578 posts
  • Lenses:Rokinon 12mm f/2
    Fujinon 16-55mm f/2.8
    Fujinon 35 mm f/2
  • Camera Body or Bodies:Fujifilm Xt-2
    TRIPOD:
    Sirui T-025X
    HEAD:
    Arca Swiss Monoball p0 with RRS Quick Release

Posted 14 January 2018 - 10:27 AM

Kerry, first things first...What a beautiful scene! The sun and its light is so pretty and gives a warm, peaceful glow. And the composition is spot on.
As for preference, this is a tough call. I love the second image over the first due to the details in the foreground water. On the other hand, the smoothed foreground water in the first causes the rocks to become prominent and distinct from the smooth foreground water, an effect I really like. I like the flow rate of the water to the left of the rocks better in the 2nd than the first...my preference for just a big more detail. If there were a 3rd option with the first image and prominent rocks/smoothed water foreground, but with the left-side water with the details from the second image, I’d prefer that. With two choices, I go with the first because the rocks are distinct from the smoothed foreground water and my eye quickly goes into the scene, to ultimately enjoy that background sunlight!

Thanks, Mark and for the feedback too.  As I've stepped away from it, I'm feeling more in line with the majority - that the faster shutter speed for the water and rocks makes for a more dynamic image.  The best part of the image, for me, was the diffuse light and that was a complete mistake.  I never intended to shoot this scene at 30 sec.  I must have inadvertently turned my control dial to "T" for one shot before I realized it and readjusted.  But I learned something from it, namely that at a very long shutter speed, with mist moving, any light light shining through will diffuse in a very pleasing manner.  It kind of does something similar to what has become very popular these days in post processing - the Orton effect.  And though way over used, in my opinion, it can add a nice soft glow if used sparingly.


Kerry for me there is certainly enough to look at to make them worthy...they work for me. I like the second one (bottom), I like the detail in the rocks and the lighting more through the bottom half, especially the bottom left of the shot.  I can see the effects of a long exposure and also a shorter exposure in the moving water, very interesting, I like it a lot! Well done.

Thanks, Doug.  With a little time to step back I agree with you.


I prefer the second image.  The fog or mist is a big part of this photo.  The first image tends to carry that mist into the foreground.  When we are in a foggy or misty environment, the fog or mist becomes more prevalent the more of it we have to look through; it appears to be more dense the further away we look.  To me, the second image illustrates this providing a more natural, less overwhelming mist effect in the foreground. 

A helpful analysis and I agree.  Thanks for the feedback.


#2 easily. - Wow, awesome image. Beautiful.

Thanks John.  Always nice to hear.


Both images are fantastic, however I must also go with #2. It’s the best compromise of getting the feathery water and some action around those rocks.

Thanks David.  I agree, the action around the rocks makes for a more dynamic image.


The second image works best for me too Kerry as I like the water to look like water in the scene you have captured. It seems logical that the sun showing through the mist will create a degree of softness which is counteracted by the level of sharpness of the rocks thus while there is more contrast in that respect for ME it appears a more balanced image.... But then what do I know about ART..!! (-:

Thanks for the feedback Geedee.  Very helpful.



#9 pthomsen

pthomsen

    Post Master

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 79 posts
  • LocationHughson, CA
  • Lenses:Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 DC HSM Art
    Nikon Nikkor 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED AF-S VR ED DX
    Nikon AF‑S DX Nikkor 18‑55mm f/3.5‑5.6G VR
    Bogen Manfrotto 3001 Tripod with Manfrotto MHXPRO-BHQ2 XPRO Ball Head
  • Flashes:None
  • Camera Body or Bodies:Nikon D3100
    Nikon D5500
    iPhone 7 Plus

Posted 14 January 2018 - 10:50 AM

First of all: Great shots! The light is lovely, and gives a warm feel, to an otherwise distinctly cold-looking subject. Brrrr! :-)

 

I like both shots a lot, but if I had to pick one, I'd pick neither, if that makes any sense. I would like to see a combination of the long and short exposures, where the foreground water is from the LE shot, and the background water (before the rocks, and most of the water to the left of them) is from the short exposure.

 

I feel like the short-exposure foreground water is distracting to those gorgeous, shiny rocks, but the featheriness of the LE version of the fast-moving water somehow diminishes the liveliness of the shot.

 

If it's OK with you, I can try to blend the two images in photoshop, to show what I mean.



#10 Kerry Gordon

Kerry Gordon

    <3 SDP

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 578 posts
  • Lenses:Rokinon 12mm f/2
    Fujinon 16-55mm f/2.8
    Fujinon 35 mm f/2
  • Camera Body or Bodies:Fujifilm Xt-2
    TRIPOD:
    Sirui T-025X
    HEAD:
    Arca Swiss Monoball p0 with RRS Quick Release

Posted 14 January 2018 - 11:29 AM

First of all: Great shots! The light is lovely, and gives a warm feel, to an otherwise distinctly cold-looking subject. Brrrr! :-)

 

I like both shots a lot, but if I had to pick one, I'd pick neither, if that makes any sense. I would like to see a combination of the long and short exposures, where the foreground water is from the LE shot, and the background water (before the rocks, and most of the water to the left of them) is from the short exposure.

 

I feel like the short-exposure foreground water is distracting to those gorgeous, shiny rocks, but the featheriness of the LE version of the fast-moving water somehow diminishes the liveliness of the shot.

 

If it's OK with you, I can try to blend the two images in photoshop, to show what I mean.

By all means, I'd love to see what you come up with.



#11 Roderick

Roderick

    Master Photographer

  • Stunners
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,199 posts
  • LocationDublin, Ireland
  • Lenses:Centon 500mm f8.0 Mirror (!)
    Sigma 24-105 f4 DG OS HSM A
    Tamron 150-600mm f5-6.3
    Samyang 14mm f2.8 manual
  • Camera Body or Bodies:Nikon D750
    Sony NEX-6

Posted 14 January 2018 - 11:42 AM

Blimey, Kerry - a beautiful vision gloriously rendered :)

I choose the second photo.  The smoothness of the water is very nice in the first image, but I prefer the structure and detail in the water and rocks in the second.



#12 pthomsen

pthomsen

    Post Master

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 79 posts
  • LocationHughson, CA
  • Lenses:Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 DC HSM Art
    Nikon Nikkor 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED AF-S VR ED DX
    Nikon AF‑S DX Nikkor 18‑55mm f/3.5‑5.6G VR
    Bogen Manfrotto 3001 Tripod with Manfrotto MHXPRO-BHQ2 XPRO Ball Head
  • Flashes:None
  • Camera Body or Bodies:Nikon D3100
    Nikon D5500
    iPhone 7 Plus

Posted 14 January 2018 - 04:50 PM

Here is a very rough idea of what I was thinking. I couldn't get the images to line up perfectly in PS, but the main area of interest is the water to the left and behind the rocks.

 

merged-kerry.png
 
My $0.02...



#13 Kerry Gordon

Kerry Gordon

    <3 SDP

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 578 posts
  • Lenses:Rokinon 12mm f/2
    Fujinon 16-55mm f/2.8
    Fujinon 35 mm f/2
  • Camera Body or Bodies:Fujifilm Xt-2
    TRIPOD:
    Sirui T-025X
    HEAD:
    Arca Swiss Monoball p0 with RRS Quick Release

Posted 15 January 2018 - 02:15 PM

Here is a very rough idea of what I was thinking. I couldn't get the images to line up perfectly in PS, but the main area of interest is the water to the left and behind the rocks.

 

merged-kerry.png
 
My $0.02...

 

I appreciate your effort and see where you're going with this but I'm not sure that, for me, at least, its an improvement.  I find that I much prefer the more active and textured water.  But again, thanks for taking the time and giving me this feedback.



#14 TrailEx

TrailEx

    Geek

  • Stunners
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 155 posts
  • Lenses:Canon 24-70 F/4
    Canon 100-400 F/4.5-5.6 IS II
    Rokinon 24 F/1.4
    Rokinon 14 F/2.8
    Laowa 60mm F/2.8 2X Macro
  • Camera Body or Bodies:Canon 5D Mark IV
    Canon 6D

Posted 17 January 2018 - 02:16 AM

I actually really like pthomsen's edit... I love image #1, but it blurs all the detail from the waterfall on the left away. Although Image #2 is really dynamic and interesting, I like the smoothed foreground water a little more. So the edit with the smooth water but detailed waterfall is perfect to me.



#15 Kerry Gordon

Kerry Gordon

    <3 SDP

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 578 posts
  • Lenses:Rokinon 12mm f/2
    Fujinon 16-55mm f/2.8
    Fujinon 35 mm f/2
  • Camera Body or Bodies:Fujifilm Xt-2
    TRIPOD:
    Sirui T-025X
    HEAD:
    Arca Swiss Monoball p0 with RRS Quick Release

Posted 17 January 2018 - 09:36 AM

I actually really like pthomsen's edit... I love image #1, but it blurs all the detail from the waterfall on the left away. Although Image #2 is really dynamic and interesting, I like the smoothed foreground water a little more. So the edit with the smooth water but detailed waterfall is perfect to me.

I understand what you're pointing to but to me the result is an incoherent image - it lacks probability.  By that I mean that there is something "wrong" where the water is fast and flowing at the top and sides and suddenly becomes  dead calm in the front.  I may not be aware of the inconsistency at a conscious level but there is something that is not quite right, that is out of balance and jars my eye.  Anyway, that's my story and I'm sticking to it  :P






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users