Running Low
I was really pleased with the feedback on yesterday's post. Your honest feedback is very helpful and your software tips have been great lately. Thanks.
The weather really has not cooperated this week, so I've not taken many photos. Normally I would go out in sucky weather, but I've been working all weekend. Because I'm new to photography, I haven't a large selection of previous work. Therefore today's photo comes from that trip to Stanley Park I took with Bethany a couple of weeks ago.
I learned a lot of lessons about exposure that night, so I will certainly be trying that area again. I tried to rescue some of the mistakes with some goofy artistic tricks. This was one such attempt. Ironically, one bit of feedback I got yesterday suggested that perhaps I rely on Photoshop too much. That may be true, and today's picture is no exception. I am learning to take a photo that is good in it's own right. Presumably, the better I get at this, the less I will need Photoshop as a crutch.
For interest sake, below is the original photo. It's fine, I guess...
f2.7 / 8.0 sec. Thanks for telling me how to find EXIF data! Anything else I need to include? I wouldn't use these settings again, I would use a smaller lens opening.
posted by Bethany at 3:16 PM
19 Comments:
I agree about the smaller aperture, but it is still a fine shot. I like the blue; from what I saw of the original, it looked fine, as well. EXIF data: you may want to include the camera you use, the focal length, and the ISO. Regards, Brent
I like both of these. The blue is really interesting. Very nice.
Great shots! I love night shots even when slightly overexposed or blurred...they are interesting!
About using too much Photoshop. I whole heartedly disagree with that...it's all a matter of what you like and what you want your pictures to look like! Some photos may need no extra touches to be presentable, however if you don't like it as is, Photoshop it till your heart's content!! I visit some photoblogs where the photographers spends a very long time in his post process work to give the photo a feel he wants despite the image being pretty much flawless as is! Keep on experimenting...if you're happy with what you've created, post it! That's that!
Rookie,
It will take time to devlop your own voice. While I prefer the original, some folks have really made a go with postprocessing. Keep on experimenting. I really like this shot (but I really like Vancouver -- Canucks are a little disappointing, however.) (I would add the ISO to the EXIF data.)
I like the original in this case, but I love seeing things that people work on with photo shop. It's all very interesting!
Very nice blue toning. I like the original as well. The blue version feels more futuristic!
Really like the blue, the oranges that night shots sometimes give are overdone sometimes.
Eeeecccck why the blue image. You went form a darn darn very good shot to a shot that "photoshop killed". Why oh why oh why.
I see you have very itchy fingers when it comes to photoshoping your work. NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT. As I have told soo many people, Photoshop or whatever editing softwares should be used to enhance ones images, NOT TO CREATE THE IMAGE. Learn when to say STOP. This image is fine. Learn when to say START, This image needs editing. Learn with the force and success as a prosumer will be yours :)
Now looking at the image, someones tripod not as sturday as they wanted it to be? Have you tried using a remote switch for your night shots, it further eliminates any camera shake. Like the attempt though. Good shot the original.
Suby
I happen to like the icy blue tones, I think the blue works better with the slight softness in the image detail
Thanks for stopping in so often to my blog and for all the wonderful comments.
To answer your question, I use all different settings and take ton of shots. I have a tendency to use spot metering and/or exposure compensation to get the results I am trying for.
I went back and editted the 3 posts from my sunrise shots in Sandy Hook to include my EXIF data. So if you want to know what settings I used for each shot, you can find the info on the posts now.
Those shots were not particularly long exposures, although I did do several that were long exposures, up to 30 seconds. I wanted to do some bulb shooting, but I need to get some accessories (remote or remote shutter release cable (the cable is cheap but requires an additional accessory that is a bit expensive)) in order to accomplish bulb exposures without camera shake, and it's just not in my budget at the moment.
WOW! The blue one is gorgeous & the original is awesome! Very commercial worthy. ; )
Big stunned smooch,
The Tart
The blue one is very "cinematic"...Terminator or Escape from New York.
I am to lazy to carry a tripod so get my long exposures resting the camera on something, not always possible of course.
I like both pictures as well. There are just different moods in them - the blue one being cooler and the original being warmer and more inviting to me. I guess it just depends on what you want to say with them...
I like blue one of couse original too :)
Nice Vancouver's night illumination.
amazing light and reflection....great capture:-)
The two shots are wonderful...
I like both these images, very good!
while i love the original image ... i'm erring on the side of preferring the blue version! .. .. futuristic
;)
what city is that?
Post a Comment
<< Home