A Moving Singapore

Gosu_John · 17th July 2005

Sheares Bridge, Singapore.
(Click on image for true photo.)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notice how the clouds move away from you. I waited for the clouds to move into position before capturing this moment. It seems as the city is pulling away, away from us. A surreal sense of urbanisation and the whole bing-a-bongs of negative effects of globalisation could probably fit into this explanation but I leave that to your imagination. I had a few shots of the same location just seconds after this, and the massive clouds had already moved, blown by the wind, to wherever it may carry them. I've learnt that good photography hinges largely on precision timing and the ability to react fast to a situation.

All comments/opinions are more than welcome.

AReality · 17th July 2005

i think bad choice of cloud, there are better clouds out there...

SniperD · 17th July 2005

hmm... too under. try playing around with your curves a bit. You are losing details despite the surrealism you are trying to protrait

LittleWolf · 17th July 2005

Originally Posted by Gosu_John

Notice how the clouds move away from you.

It is a still image, I don't see anything moving ...

Quote:

A surreal sense of urbanisation and the whole bing-a-bongs of negative effects of globalisation could probably fit into this explanation but I leave that to your imagination. I had a few shots of the same location just seconds after this, and the massive clouds had already moved, blown by the wind, to wherever it may carry them.

Is this meant as a satire? Maybe you should rethink how the transcendental cognitive aspects of the extroverted shubedoos of trade deficits could be integrated in a more concise and cohesive way, even if that means thinking out of the box and expressing your true self in this integrated individualism hub.

Concerning the image, I think it would look much nicer if the perspective was corrected (i.e. let verticals appear vertical).

AReality · 17th July 2005

Originally Posted by AReality

i think bad choice of cloud, there are better clouds out there...

if u really want better clouds, stack some ND filters.

Ah Pao · 17th July 2005

The use of your wide-angle caused several 'leaning towers', giving a disturbing feeling that the buildings are going to collapse. Either minimise it or go all the way and exaggerate it. Your picture is "not here, not there".
I can't really make out the buildings on the left side of the picture due to the sky blending into the buildings.

Quote:

I've learnt that good photography hinges largely on precision timing and the ability to react fast to a situation.

Happy you managed to learnt about this part of taking good photographs!

eikin · 17th July 2005

somehow a larger image may have justified what you wanted to show. it's so small now and i don't feel the negativity you want to portray (somehow the lighting condition makes the scene looks more positive than negative also?

)

LolliPoP · 18th July 2005

My personal preference, i prefer to see cloud in
blue (or/and white).

tucker · 18th July 2005

hi, despite the criticism.
I pretty much enjoy this picture less for the convergence which ya might want to correct it slightly.
but isn't the convergence that marries the image to it's 'moving' title? (or so I thought, I like to think that this is a very sweet move to use e distortion of wide angles to show movement) not to mention the effect it played on the clouds too.

no issue with the shadow details, I suspect difference in monitor calibration is playing the trick. instantly my eyes are drawn to the cityscape which is clearly the subject interest thanks to the spliting guide from the sky, perhaps ya might want to tone e contrast down slightly?

the waves in the river basin helps create a feel or direction and dynamics.

again, I enjoyed this picture, perhaps for it's listed 'imperfections'.
btw, visited 'le jardin secret' nice too

~Arcanic~ · 18th July 2005

hmm.. i can kinda see the clouds "moving" to a certain extend actually...

not sure if others see it this way.. there's actually a little leading line between the darker and brighter patch of clouds.. but it took me a while to see the sense of movement though..

agree with SinperD on the lost of details part though.. a bit too dark..

denniskee · 18th July 2005

may i suggest the use of grad nd 4 filter to reduce the contrast?

nemesis32 · 18th July 2005

I liked it as it is...but it's true that some details are lost. Also, the distortion of the lens are quite pronounced.

OT abit, some of you guys mentioned that he shd use ND filter, wouldn't it be possible to replicate the use of ND filter on PS?

Gosu_John · 18th July 2005

Thank you very much for the comments and pointers.

AReality: could you care to explain why it is a bad choice of clouds? Are you saying these clouds are not taken well? or I should move to another location to shoot clouds?and how would stacking ND filters help to achieve better clouds?

SniperD: thank you for the suggestion perhaps a longer exposure would be better effect and remove the 'dark' feeling

LittleWolf: they aren't really moving away from you, but I thought they had a sense of movement away from the user because of the perspective of the shot like it was drawing away from the viewer, that was the intention

AhPao: I was afraid that people would react to the darkness, and the perspective like I said above was a purposeful intent to create a drawing away effect. perhaps brighter photo would be better?

eikin: it wasn't meant to be negative hehe

lollipop: sorry but I don't understand what you mean, your comment has left me more confused than resolved

tucker, arcanic: thank you for seeing what I saw and wanted to show in the photo. what you have said is exactly what I wanted to show!

desnniskee: how does a ND filter reduce contrast? i thought it reduced glare?

nemesis32: i agree with you on the details being lost. perhaps I shouldnt have burnt it too much!

thank you for the comments again and please keep them coming! the comments have made me realise there is a blur line between technicality and creativity haha

eikin · 19th July 2005

i see ... i must have got a wrong impression from the writing

globalshooter · 19th July 2005

Low Contrast! lack details

my 2cents worth

tucker · 19th July 2005

ya're welcome.
I'm kinda looking forward to go shooting with ya sometime.

waiting to see more of ya works
btw, I wondered what's with the issue of lacking in details anyway?

denniskee · 19th July 2005

hi Gosu_John

1) to reduce glare, circular polarizer is used. not ND filter.

2) ND (Neutral Density) filter reduce light going through, hence, you can either open the aperture hold the shutter speed, or prolong the exposure with the same aperture. both will give the same exposure value.

eg. shooting portrait, you want blurr background, ie shallow depth of view. if the camera max shutter speed is 1/2000, assuming the exposure is f8, 1/2000 on your 50mm lens, camera to subject distant is 3meter, background is only 1meter to the subject. @ f8, the background will be in focus. but you cant shoot @ f4, cause that will need shutter speed of 1/8000.

so you use a ND4 filter to reduce 2 stop. so now you can use f4, 1/2000 to shoot and get the shallow DOV you want.

3) Graduating ND, as the word Graduating implies, light going through a GND8 filter drops from -2 stop to -1/3 stop.

for more detail, you can download cokin filter system brochure for free
http://www.cokin.fr/ico13-V700.html

shojibake · 19th July 2005

The nd filters will help give you better saturation and that's it, i don't think you'd want to stop down just to get longer exposure times or less dof. I like the picture the way it is. The scale of the picture definitely affects the opinion of the pic. If it was in a larger format and in print, i'd bet there'd be more positive comments. Looking at it, i wouldn't say i had any sense of urban ennui though, just a sense of fleeting moments.

denniskee · 19th July 2005

Originally Posted by Gosu_John

desnniskee: how does a ND filter reduce contrast? i thought it reduced glare?

hi Gosu_John

i recommended "Grad ND" filter, not "ND" filter.
the diff. between the 2 filters is :
1) "ND" filter reduce the exposure value for the whole scence.
2) "Grad ND" filter gradually reduce the exposure value for certain portion of the scence. ie. if the contrast between the afternoon sky and the landscape is greater than what the selected recording medium can take, than you place the darker portion of the "Grad ND" filter on the sky portion, the portion where the filter will gradually clears up will be on the landscape. Hence the contrast is reduce.

nemesis32 · 19th July 2005

Hi denniskee... i am not sure if Gosu_John uses digital... but if he did, no need to use Grad ND filter as well right?

It can be replicated in PS....

17th July 2005	#1
Gosu_John Member Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 499	A Moving Singapore Sheares Bridge, Singapore. (Click on image for true photo.) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Notice how the clouds move away from you. I waited for the clouds to move into position before capturing this moment. It seems as the city is pulling away, away from us. A surreal sense of urbanisation and the whole bing-a-bongs of negative effects of globalisation could probably fit into this explanation but I leave that to your imagination. I had a few shots of the same location just seconds after this, and the massive clouds had already moved, blown by the wind, to wherever it may carry them. I've learnt that good photography hinges largely on precision timing and the ability to react fast to a situation. All comments/opinions are more than welcome. __________________ in praise of shadows

17th July 2005	#2
AReality Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 4,395	i think bad choice of cloud, there are better clouds out there... __________________ . The Visual Journalist

17th July 2005	#3
SniperD Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Behind the viewfinder... Posts: 5,954	hmm... too under. try playing around with your curves a bit. You are losing details despite the surrealism you are trying to protrait __________________ EYE-DEAS

17th July 2005	#7
eikin Moderator Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: 東京 Tokyo Posts: 10,920	somehow a larger image may have justified what you wanted to show. it's so small now and i don't feel the negativity you want to portray (somehow the lighting condition makes the scene looks more positive than negative also? ) __________________ APAD

18th July 2005	#9
tucker Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: singapore Posts: 409	hi, despite the criticism. I pretty much enjoy this picture less for the convergence which ya might want to correct it slightly. but isn't the convergence that marries the image to it's 'moving' title? (or so I thought, I like to think that this is a very sweet move to use e distortion of wide angles to show movement) not to mention the effect it played on the clouds too. no issue with the shadow details, I suspect difference in monitor calibration is playing the trick. instantly my eyes are drawn to the cityscape which is clearly the subject interest thanks to the spliting guide from the sky, perhaps ya might want to tone e contrast down slightly? the waves in the river basin helps create a feel or direction and dynamics. again, I enjoyed this picture, perhaps for it's listed 'imperfections'. btw, visited 'le jardin secret' nice too Last edited by tucker; 19th July 2005 at 12:51 AM.

18th July 2005	#8
LolliPoP Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Somewhere Posts: 149	My personal preference, i prefer to see cloud in blue (or/and white).

18th July 2005	#10
~Arcanic~ Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Westy Posts: 2,688	hmm.. i can kinda see the clouds "moving" to a certain extend actually... not sure if others see it this way.. there's actually a little leading line between the darker and brighter patch of clouds.. but it took me a while to see the sense of movement though.. agree with SinperD on the lost of details part though.. a bit too dark..

18th July 2005	#11
denniskee Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: bukit batok Posts: 4,212	may i suggest the use of grad nd 4 filter to reduce the contrast? __________________ photography makes one sees things from all angles.

18th July 2005	#12
nemesis32 Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Singapore Posts: 3,483	I liked it as it is...but it's true that some details are lost. Also, the distortion of the lens are quite pronounced. OT abit, some of you guys mentioned that he shd use ND filter, wouldn't it be possible to replicate the use of ND filter on PS?

19th July 2005	#14
eikin Moderator Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: 東京 Tokyo Posts: 10,920	i see ... i must have got a wrong impression from the writing __________________ APAD

19th July 2005	#15
globalshooter Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 138	Low Contrast! lack details my 2cents worth

19th July 2005	#18
shojibake Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 385	The nd filters will help give you better saturation and that's it, i don't think you'd want to stop down just to get longer exposure times or less dof. I like the picture the way it is. The scale of the picture definitely affects the opinion of the pic. If it was in a larger format and in print, i'd bet there'd be more positive comments. Looking at it, i wouldn't say i had any sense of urban ennui though, just a sense of fleeting moments.