Berry Water Wheel Revisited

[Greg McCary]

It was cloudy today so I thought that it would help the lighting. Is this better?
Greg

[afdlips]

i prefer the second one. the only problem is the lack of detail in the woods in the back. this location has a lot of potential, so keep trying. perhaps on a cloudy but not overcast day, make an HDR.

[Greg McCary]

Thanks, getting detail out of the wood is tough. I don't think that it is lean prospective either, I think that the wheel is just turned slightly toward the hill. I haven't ironed out all of the details with HDR but wasn't sure if it would work on a image like this, I thought that it combines two exposers, one for the sky and one for the foreground?
Greg

[Coastal Flyer]

Greg,

This looks like a terrific place for a photo in about 4 months- when the trees are full of leaves or in 7 months when they are changing colors. Great idea though, I really like the reflection.

CF

[Tyson L. Sparks]

Great shot Greg, I relly like this one.

[Austriana]

I definitely like the second one best...the first one has too much water, I think. I even think that it'd look good with less than it has...the relfection looks nice, but may be unnecessary.

I love the location and the wheel, but I'm not digging the trees. I'd love to see this in the fall (spring as well, but mostly the fall).

Overall, however, I like the picture.

[MarcusK]

Greg, i really like the composition, but i do have a couple of issues here:

1- The woods section is washed out... as opposed to the color of the rest (Wheel - building - water)

2- The Blown out bit at the top left is bothersome too...

These are the only 2 things i really have to say here, because this is a nice location taken nicely....

Cheers,
Marc

[Greg McCary]

CF, This one is easy enough to get back to and I will probably reshoot in the spring and also the fall. A group of photographers were here at the same time I was and they informed me that the green color to the pond is best this time of year.
Tyson, Thanks I am glad you like it.
Austriana, I agree I like he second one best.
Markus, Thanks for your input I find your critiques very accurate and helpful, my histogram was going nuts on this one, I feel a little snow would have helped, but we don't see much around here any more.
Greg

[ravenmore]

I like the crop better in these. When I cropped the other I was trying to leave the whole wheel in the water, but it works if you abandon that idea. For some reason I like the the shadows though of the first attempt.

This is a great subject for hdr. You just bracket 3 (or more) exposures and then use hdr software to adjust tone mapping to get maximum detail from the shadows and highlights. The effect can be heavy handed or rather subtle. Check out this link if you want for some more info: http://www.petemc.net/hdr-guide/#whatishdr - there are some really nifty examples there.

[Greg McCary]

Thanks for the tips on HDR, I have experimented with it, flying by the seat of my pants, and I see it's potental. I will go back to the wheel again and bracket some shots and see what I can come up with....
Greg

[ZL4life]

Come back on a sunny morning or evening, just see what happens.

[swmdrayfan]

Greg, there's nothing I can add that hasn't already been said, but I'm in definate agreement on going back to the place again. The possibilities are many and varied.
John

[Tyson L. Sparks]

I think I would try a UV and or a CIRCULAR Polarising filter, I hear it cuts down on glare. I don't have either yet so I'll have to buy a few filters and give it a try myself.

[Greg McCary]

I think I would try a UV and or a CIRCULAR Polarising filter, I hear it cuts down on glare. I don't have either yet so I'll have to buy a few filters and give it a try myself.

Thanks Tyson, I almost always use one but don't think that I did here because of the cloudy day. It's hard to get to the wheel late in the evening because the campus locks the gate around 5PM...
Greg

[Rivman]

Much more impressive than the previous versions Greg.
The colour in the second shot with the partial reflection does it for me !
Looking forward to the seasonal takes.
Perseverance does pay off ? :thumbsup:

[gahspidy]

Greg, much improved! Persistence pays off! You framed this well by getting rid of the extraneous elements and including only the bare neccessities. Less is more . . .
Even though the sky is blown, there is not too much of it here and so this still works for me. I prefer the second, bottom. The first looks over sharpened and exposed.
Your pictures have a tendency to appear wahed out and needed contrast boost, and not sure why. For this image, I would increase the contrast and possibly boost the saturation as well.
Good work, and if you do intend to get back there at a different time of the year, I am sure the next attempt will be even better than the good work you have done now.

[Greg McCary]

Gary, I have noticed since I have been shooting in RAW, that I have had to boost the contrast about +8-10. Maybe it's a adjustment I am making in RawShooter???
Greg

[gahspidy]

Gary, I have noticed since I have been shooting in RAW, that I have had to boost the contrast about +8-10. Maybe it's a adjustment I am making in RawShooter???
Greg

Greg, yes, shooting in RAW format requires post processing as absolutely nothing is done to the file in camera. Sharpening is needed as well as some boost in contrast. Perhaps give it a curves adjustment rather than using the contrast adj. It's more effective.

[Greg McCary]

Gary, I know now why they call it RAW...
Greg

[ravenmore]

Greg, I know I've mentioned it once before, but I think an hdr version would be absolutely gorgeous. Sorry, going through an hdr phase lately.

[trog100]

i think u are wrong about nothing being done to the image in raw.. a straight raw to jpeg conversion should maintain the cameras basic settings.. raw gives the ability to alter them before the conversion thats all..

plus there is no point in shooting raw unless u are going to do something with the raw data other then just convert it to jpeg..

without clever user adjustment it will not produce a better image.. in fact if shooting raw is the reason for your images being washed out.. it will poduce an inferior image..

it strikes me there are a whole bunch of folks out there shootong raw without faintest idea of why they are doing it..

trog

[gahspidy]

i think u are wrong about nothing being done to the image in raw.. a straight raw to jpeg conversion should maintain the cameras basic settings.. raw gives the ability to alter them before the conversion thats all..

plus there is no point in shooting raw unless u are going to do something with the raw data other then just convert it to jpeg..

without clever user adjustment it will not produce a better image.. in fact if shooting raw is the reason for your images being washed out.. it will poduce an inferior image..

it strikes me there are a whole bunch of folks out there shootong raw without faintest idea of why they are doing it..

trog

trog, nothing is done to the image in RAW format, although the cameras settings are tagged onto the RAW image data, but not applied. Shooting in Jpeg loses much of the files potential, although great quality pictures can still be had in High quality jpeg setting. Jpeg has advantages such as small files sizes, as well as not needing to work as much in PP. RAW is great for someone like me who wishes to get everything I can out of an image and am not pressed so hard for time.For someone who does not wish to do much PP, Jpeg is a good solution.
Here is a good article that compares the two file types and their advantages and disadvantages.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tu...aw-files.shtml

[trog100]

the point i was trying to make is when a straight conversion is done the conversion software has to use some base settings.. if the user gives it those base settings it will use those.. if not it has to get them from the image file..

the other point i would like to make is that a lot of newcomers to dslr are being conditioned to believe raw is the only way..

"if u want to take more than snapshots raw is the only way".. kinda rubbish i hear too often annoys me..

i am gonna stick my neck out here and say raw might in some circumstances allow an experienced picture taker to tweak a smidge more out of some images..

but in the hands of an inexperienced user the end result will be inferior to jpegs straight from the camera..

as u have probably gathered by now i dont shoot raw.. he he

i form my own conclusions.. part based on what i read and part based on what i experience..

my conclusions about raw versus jpeg are simple.. if u know what u are doing and really need the small amount of extra image quality that raw might produce and are prepared to put up with the disadvantages use it by all means..

for the average picture taker its a waste of time.. and for a novice it has only negative value.. they would be better off shooting lots of jpegs learning how to take nice pictures and only when they really need the potentially extra image quality and know how to get it.. think about raw..

trog

[Greg McCary]

I disagree Trog, I shot Jpeg for awhile before I every tried Raw. My camera is an Evolt 500 8MP. The RAW file that my camera produces is 13.5MP or so . The RAW file can be tweaked and tuned with amazing results compared to a Jpeg. I can tell it's a much higher quality format, and I want to get the most out of my camera, but just for general chaseing kids around the back yard I'll stick to jpeg.
I also hope one day to be better than just a novice. You are right that a beginner might shot jpeg first. But if one is to get serious and wants a high quality image a RAW file is the way to go.
Greg

[trog100]

i dont put u in the novice class greg.. never meant to imply that i did.. but my approach to a shot like your waterwheel..

would be to take at east twenty shots from different heights.. angles.. frames.. then select the best.. with a modicum of luck i would expect to get results that didnt need much amazing tweaking and tuning..

one advantage with my approach is it teaches one how to take nice pictures.. yours makes u in the end good at the amazing tweaking and tuning.. which with the greatest of respect i havnt seen much evidence of so far..

dont get me wrong here.. i like your shot and your choice of subject.. so how about some amazing tweaking and tuning the much higher quality format enables u to do..

show me some and i might believe that u are correct as opposed to mistaken..

trog