the west coast

[Brian001]

sorry for the lack of posts, i have been away in victoria bc for the past while...what do you all think of this picture?

any comments welcome

[Mr Yuck]

gorgeous shot, the small boat in the lower right really adds, exposure is perfect. One small thing that's easily correctable with the computer is the crooked horizon.

I also notice a bit of grain, slower film or a lower ISO is something else I would recommend when possible.

[Greg McCary]

Nice picture. I don't know if I am seeing the grain. Looks more like a mist coming of off the lake. I agree the level horizons are a must most often. I also might have placed the fisherman more torwards the lower third of the picure...
Greg

[Brian001]

Nice picture. I don't know if I am seeing the grain. Looks more like a mist coming of off the lake. I agree the level horizons are a must most often. I also might have placed the fisherman more torwards the lower third of the picure...
Greg

the lake is called the pacific ocean, and there was no mist, just a little bit of fog in the valley on the far right though...it is a grainy shot. I still gotta play around in photoshop and ill post a new picture with level horizon and a couple other adjustments later on

[Herriot]

Love it, just three things to say

horizon, horizon, horizon....

Really looking forward to seeing the updated post.

Herriot

[Jaedon]

my first thought was... what the heck are they doing out there in that WEE tiny boat?

Nice shot. I agree with the horizon but I think the grain actually adds to the shot. It gives it more of a historic feeling.. kind of like the photojournalism feel.. gritty and real.

[Brian001]

is there a way to straighten the horizon without cutting off too much of the picture?

the boat was already low in the picture how it was, but now i think it reduces the effect the boat has on the picture. anyway here it is with a straight horizon






this is the original, feel free to edit and repost, just as guidlines say remove from your gallery

[Loupey]

Gorgeous shot.

I agree in that the horizon definitely needs to be level.

I also agree that the boat is too close to the edge in the second version.

Not exactly easy to go back and have a reshoot


When you see something like this, milk it for all you've got. Different compositions, different angles, different exposures, .... Of course I'm assuming that you don't already have more with more space around the bottom.

[Greg McCary]

I don't know if you like people editing your photos, but you can easily lasso the boat, move it up and then clone stamp the water. If you like I will show you my edit..
Greg

[Brian001]

Gorgeous shot.

I agree in that the horizon definitely needs to be level.

I also agree that the boat is too close to the edge in the second version.

Not exactly easy to go back and have a reshoot


When you see something like this, milk it for all you've got. Different compositions, different angles, different exposures, .... Of course I'm assuming that you don't already have more with more space around the bottom.

haha, im an idiot....i forgot about the original....ok, ver. 3 coming up

[Brian001]

alright...wow i feel dumb right about now but here is another version



tell me your likes, dislikes...do you guys lke the warmin filter i placed on here...should i post the original for comparison so you guys can give me some tips of where to crop and whatnot?

[Greg McCary]

Much Better.
Greg

[Brian001]

there we go, level horizon and all

[gahspidy]

Your latest version is very good. I think you got it. It's one heck of a crop, but if the resolution is there so it holds up, then why not. Good looking image.

[Ronnoco]

I notice visually and in my photo software as well that you have vertical banding in your image. What is causing that?

Ronnoco

[trog100]

a perfect example of what can be done with a pretty poor photography for websized image critique presentation..

this is not photography.. its simply pretending to be one by clever use of a desktop computer..

learn how to take something vaguely resembling the presented image in the first place and u are there.. and u might even get paid for the results..

exactly what i dont like about current trends.. take a lousy wide angle image.. crop a small chunk out and with the help of a desktop computer produce what appears to be a very good photograph..

ten out of ten for the crop and image manipulation.. two out of ten the for the "photograph"..

trog

[Brian001]

a perfect example of what can be done with a pretty poor photography for websized image critique presentation..

this is not photography.. its simply pretending to be one by clever use of a desktop computer..

learn how to take something vaguely resembling the presented image in the first place and u are there.. and u might even get paid for the results..

exactly what i dont like about current trends.. take a lousy wide angle image.. crop a small chunk out and with the help of a desktop computer produce what appears to be a very good photograph..

ten out of ten for the crop and image manipulation.. two out of ten the for the "photograph"..

trog

alright, this is the critique forum, so i wont bash you for that....but take the thought that ran through my head at the time of taking tha image...that sihlloutte of the small boat would look good set against those mountains alone in a big ocean...so i snapped the picture, i chose the wide angle o i could photoshop the position of the boat into a more appropriate postition...still with my telephoto lense at full zoom this is the tightest image i could get.

so no this isnt shitty photography cropped and altered into a decent image, this is a vision of a decent image taken, then put to life in photoshop.

nice try though. :thumbsup:

[EOSThree]

a perfect example of what can be done with a pretty poor photography for websized image critique presentation..

this is not photography.. its simply pretending to be one by clever use of a desktop computer..

learn how to take something vaguely resembling the presented image in the first place and u are there.. and u might even get paid for the results..

exactly what i dont like about current trends.. take a lousy wide angle image.. crop a small chunk out and with the help of a desktop computer produce what appears to be a very good photograph..

ten out of ten for the crop and image manipulation.. two out of ten the for the "photograph"..

trog

I say it again:
Cropping, burning, dodging, color balancing, filtering, on and on has been done in the darkroom for ages. Ansel Adams was a Master at darkroom work. This is nothing new to photography, it's just available easily for everyone with the advent of digital and PS. I have no problem with someone enhancing a photo in the darkroom, digital or wet.
Now that I have that off my chest, 90% or better of my photos are straight from the camera, with a little sharpening and maybe the odd straightened horizon.

[trog100]

sorry to sound a little harsh.. but we live in the days when a so called "photograph" can be created without going near a camera at all.. there has to be point where a photograph become so manipulated with a desktop computer it ceases to be a photograph and becomes simply a computer generated "image"..

this point has to be defined if we want to keep the art of photography alive.. one criteria i use is does the finished product pass muster seem at a decent size and will it still print okay at a decent size and it has to vaguely resemble what came oiut of the camera in the first place would be another criteria..

relying on a high mega pixel count and cropping small chunks of whatever seems the most interesting afterwards dosnt count as photography to me.. sorry..

i also critique a photgraph as a photograph.. which in essence means i allow for the limitations of the camera.. a skillfully used piece of imaging software knows no such limitations..

i might well accept the arguement that anything goes for the sake of art but not if the piece of art wants to still be considered a photograph and be critiqued as a photograph as opposed to a computer generated image..

i need to define in my own mine where photography stops and computer generated imagery begins if no one else does.. i see a diffence and to be honest find it difficult to accept that no one else seems to care.. he he

trog

ps..

[gahspidy]

trog, as I said, it is a heck of a crop, but cropping like this has been done before digital was in play. It may have meant that only an 8x10 or smaller print might be able to come out of it, but nevertheless, it has always been done. Especially if the photographer has a vision in mind when shooting. This is photography. We all know it is best to have the crop in camera as best as it can be, but there are times when we just cannot get it there and we must work with it afterwards.

[MarcusK]

One hell of a crop indeed...a crop that was nicely seen.... love the photo! If i were you i would have swam out to get a better photo (hahaha...just kidding )
I love the loneliness it gives, as well as the proportions.... aren't we small???

Trog: I know what you are saying....but i have to disagree with you...since photography is not about the equipment first second and last.... with all the technology available today.... any intellectually-challenged person can go out and take pictures... odds are, with enough pics, they are bound to take the perfect shot... Doesn't make them photographers....

But to remain honest with myself as well as others, i must agree with you on the issue, where computer imaging software, has turned most photographers (sometimes me too ) a little more lazy.... we tend to say "it's ok, i'll fix it later" as opposed to knowing exactly what you want and doing it right away...Mind you, there are many situations where the tech. is an extension...

This however, is no such case... a photographer saw an image... he zoomed in his mind... this image would have been lost if computer software was unavailable.... he took the shot... cropped it....and did a little tweaking....

Although i must say Brian, you could have fixed the settings on the camera for better colors...no??

Marc

[Brian001]

Although i must say Brian, you could have fixed the settings on the camera for better colors...no??

Marc

haha, im still learning how to press the shutter button, as a "youngin" with his first dsrl im still figuring it out, give me time...and im heading back out there end of july so well see if i get an equally opportune moment...untill then, ill keep tweaking in photoshop, and messing around with my camera :thumbsup:

[Mr Yuck]

the lake is called the pacific ocean, and there was no mist, just a little bit of fog in the valley on the far right though...it is a grainy shot. I still gotta play around in photoshop and ill post a new picture with level horizon and a couple other adjustments later on

More specificially, it's called the Straight of Juan De Fuca

IMO the photoshop is very well done and worth the effort, having been to victoria, I know that Washington is very hazy looking when you look across the water, and when I take the ferry across to Port Angeles, my images get better and better as I get closer to Washington. (no offense, but Olympic Peninsula > Vancouver Island)

The photoshop to get closer is proof of that

But if you can get such an image without going through US Customs, more power to you :thumbsup:

Computer generated images = Bryce, or 3d studio max, photographs can be cropped, tweaked flipped upside down, lit on fire or converted to black and white, it's still a photograph in my view.