Barbados Rocks

[cmulcahy]

Greetings:

This is my first post. I am just getting into photography and could certainly use some feedback. I'm tough so be honest.

Here are two pictures with different DOFs.



These were shot with a Digital Rebel XTi. Both are at ISO 100. The first is 1/30 sec at F/25. The second is 1/640 sec at F/5.6.

Thoughts on these?

Thanks for the feedback!

[GB1]

Greetings and welcome to PR.

The first thing I noticed is the interesting angle you shot them at. You got out there to get your shot - good effort. The composition is also well done, showing the rocks, middle distance buildings, and the infinite ocean and sky in decent proportions.

There are several technical things I could suggest to make the shots better.

The first thing is to use a tripod because both photos, and esp the top one, seem 'soft' (not sharp) to me. This really limits how far your image can go. You might be able to sharpen them up a little using software, but I'd suggest starting with as sharp an image as possible, and that often means a tripod. The VR lenses are supposed to help with this too, though I've never used one.

Next is to watch the level of the horizon. The top one looks tilted, though it isn't super bad.

Both shots might be a tad bit underexposed. This depends though - sometimes a scene looks better darker, esp of a storm. I wish there was more contrast in the sky so that the clouds stood out better. I bet that was the way it was, but you might be able to selectively adjust the contrast in the sky using a mask and software.

Artistic wise, I think you were experimenting with the aperature and that as an expt it was fine. But there really isn't anything there on the rocks at all and it seems a bit missing. This is esp true with the shallow DOF shot: seems like you intentionally blurred the bg to emphasize something in the foreground, but there simply isn't anything (a subject) there (I guess the ground squirrels or surfers are never there when you need them). The buildings are OK but not all that pretty or interesting compared to the weathered rocks.

Hope this helps and that you post some more shots.
GB

[Frog]

That's the way to learn.
Which one do you like best?
I really can't add anything to GB's critique.
I think you need a deeper depth of field and it would have been better if the building and/or lamposts were the ones in focus as they are the points of interest and where the viewer's eye goes.
Keep shooting.

[readingr]

I'd like to add to Gb's comments and you need to look at the contrast of the foreground with the background. In sharp shot the foreground stone blends into the background rocks thanks to the colouring so moving to give them separation will help loads. You need this separation to give the photo depth between foreground and background.

Another thing is to consider using a ND grad filter or blending two exposures a shot for the foreground and another for the sky.

As for DOF I like the second with the buildings blurred but the foreground rock needs to be more interesting.

Roger