re-introduction
- This topic has 18 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated May 29, 2008 at 4:28 pm by
.
-
Posts
-
Hello .. Been a while since I was last on this forum, for some reason it faded out of focus for me. Well, I’ve re-discovered it and plan on being around a bit. I thought i’d say hi. The fantastic “you can do it” attitude around here inspired me to take my camera out with me and actually get a couple pics published! Not bad for a hack! 😉
Please feel free to checkout my portfolio (so far) and give me any feedback.
I saw some of your gallery was titled “Experimenting with Tone Mapping”. What is tone mapping?
Basically, what I did was to fake an HDR image from a single image and process it for display. Personally, I think the effect can be very cool, but like most very distinctive styles it might be best in moderation?
Little more info – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tone_mapping – “Tone mapping is a technique used in image processing and computer graphics to map a set of colours to another; often to approximate the appearance of high dynamic range images in media with a more limited dynamic range.”
I agree with Aaron that you have some great stuff going.
Hey Corey –
I notice a few things that I might do differently and I’ll explain them, but I want to say from the get-go that I like the shot and my comments aren’t intended as anything other than constructive criticism.
We have a few distracting things going on. Â First, as you no doubt know better than me, the human eye is always drawn (first) to the brightest part of a picture. Â That’s going to be the white skies, which are “clipped” or blank data spaces. Â They were the first thing I noticed.
Second, the edges of the clipping aren’t graceful enough to make the effect work like I think you want it to. Â I have the sense that you are going for a bit of an infra-red feel; high contrast with very bright light color spaces and subtle shades in the low tones. Â That’s a great idea but the gear you’re using isn’t meant for it and it let you down with a ragged, clipped edge where the mountains transition. Â It looks like a video-game background.
In terms of a print layout, sometimes white skies work great, because they let the text run right down to the contours of the subject if you get a good graphic designer to lay it out. Â In this shot, the mountain climbing to the right of the frame might interfere with that layout by giving a “sharp shoulder” to the whole image.
Third, the lady is looking up and over the camera rather than at it; it reduces what would otherwise be a warm and engaging shot somewhat and makes the audience feel like a voyeur rather than a participant.
Fourth, I’d throw a little fill flash up under her cap to avoid the death’s eye-socket issue.
Last, and this is both a positive and a negative, the fish being right up in the camera’s grill would draw irritated comments and/or letters from many anglers who have seen this particular visual trick one time too many. Â I just offer that up from experience of what a photo editor will be thinking rather than because I really think it’s an image flaw.
The things I like about the photo are just as varied, but maybe a bit unspecific. Â I like the cold tones; the snow. Â I like the sharpness of the fish’s face but I would have tightened the f-stop to bring her face into focus as well. Â I love the wedding ring glinting on her finger. Â Great fly in mouth, and I generally like the receding position of the fish’s tale, which gives the image movement and depth. Â I might have lowered the shutter speed slightly (which would be required in any case to get that deeper depth of field) in order to make the water appear like cotton. Â
Good shot! Â If you have the original still available with a little data in the sky I think it might be worth re-processing to give it a shoulder on the mountains and submitting for publication.
Zach
Awesome feedback Zack! Thanks. I will re-precess this shot and post the results! I couldn’t agree more with you about the flash .. I feel like that is really my ‘next step’!
I wanted to say thanks again for all the comments and criticisms .. Its great to get the feedback and it has made me aware of a few more things to look for in my photos. A good flash and a softbox was recommended by another friend and it has gone to the top of my list!
This specific photo, actually all of the photos that I took that day, was about seeing what I could get the new lens (10mm sigma fisheye). I really wanted to push that “fish up in your grill” feel. Do people really dislike that or do they just feel like the photographer is ‘cheating’?
Personally, I’m not a huge fan of the G&G. However, I do see that it has its place and I will need to be able to shoot it! An interesting thing about most of my shots from this day, is that there was someone else there taking the G&G witha point and shoot. So, I really was in more of a voyeurs position. I dig the “feel” it gave these shots, but I can see how it might not be the most commercial viable.
I went ahead and edited the image to attempt to implement some of the suggestions. Please feel free to let me know what you think.
v2 – All I did was add a blur to the edge of the mountains .. I think this improves the shot a ton and it is one of those “not seeing the forest for trees” and “devil in the details” things that I simply overlooked.
v3 – kept a little blue in the sky, did a quick ‘chop on the mountain, and made the color a little softer (maybe to much red), and lightened under the hat.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.