Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 21

Thread: Punggol Sunset

  1. #1

    Default Punggol Sunset

    Hello everyone!



    450D's my first SLR, and I took it for a 'ride' at Punggol last week. This photo was edited in photoshop before posting, and I think I over saturated the whole picture? I want to know what you guys think of this photo, and also on how this picture can be improved. Thanks!
    Last edited by HTCahHTC; 15th May 2008 at 03:47 PM.

  2. #2

    Default Re: Punggol Sunset

    care to share the settings of the photo? it looks characteristically soft, that's why i'm asking.

    other than that, the composition - while an attempt is there, it is not good, in my view. the rocks are all bundled together, that can work but here they are a mass of blackness. but other than that i would think the pp here isn't overdone, if that's what you're really interested in. better to care more about composition and technique first thoguh.

  3. #3

    Default Re: Punggol Sunset

    Quote Originally Posted by night86mare View Post
    care to share the settings of the photo? it looks characteristically soft, that's why i'm asking.

    other than that, the composition - while an attempt is there, it is not good, in my view. the rocks are all bundled together, that can work but here they are a mass of blackness. but other than that i would think the pp here isn't overdone, if that's what you're really interested in. better to care more about composition and technique first thoguh.
    here's the settings...
    Shutter Speed: 1/100
    Aperture: F3.5
    ISO: 200
    Focal Length: 18mm

    ok, so the composition ain't good. hmmm. guess i should have find a better spot. wat about technique? I don't really understand by the term 'technique'. sorry ya, but thanks alot for the comment.

  4. #4

    Default Re: Punggol Sunset

    Quote Originally Posted by HTCahHTC View Post
    here's the settings...
    Shutter Speed: 1/100
    Aperture: F3.5
    ISO: 200
    Focal Length: 18mm

    ok, so the composition ain't good. hmmm. guess i should have find a better spot. wat about technique? I don't really understand by the term 'technique'. sorry ya, but thanks alot for the comment.
    well in general, punggol is a very cluttered place. i usually end up frolicking very close to the water's edge to simplify things, at the cost of salty tripods and wet shorts, etc. be careful with your camera though.

    another way of doing it is to find something really big to fill up the foreground - generally landscapes work better with a prominent foreground, say, a huge log - there are loads of those lying around usually, for whatever reason.

    yes, the aperture setting here (f/3.5) explains the softness. you should stop down (i.e. use f/8 or f/11) for this setting here, as you *need* the depth of field. as a result your shutter speed might increase. if you cannot manage to handhold it, use a tripod. also, best to keep the iso as low as possible - reason being that landscapes usually work well sharp, and without noise. having a low iso, using a small aperture, and then accepting whatever shutter speed that should be set as a result is best. although you can have exceptions in situations.

  5. #5

    Default Re: Punggol Sunset

    Quote Originally Posted by night86mare View Post
    well in general, punggol is a very cluttered place. i usually end up frolicking very close to the water's edge to simplify things, at the cost of salty tripods and wet shorts, etc. be careful with your camera though.

    another way of doing it is to find something really big to fill up the foreground - generally landscapes work better with a prominent foreground, say, a huge log - there are loads of those lying around usually, for whatever reason.

    yes, the aperture setting here (f/3.5) explains the softness. you should stop down (i.e. use f/8 or f/11) for this setting here, as you *need* the depth of field. as a result your shutter speed might increase. if you cannot manage to handhold it, use a tripod. also, best to keep the iso as low as possible - reason being that landscapes usually work well sharp, and without noise. having a low iso, using a small aperture, and then accepting whatever shutter speed that should be set as a result is best. although you can have exceptions in situations.
    Thanks alot for these valuable informations. Appreciated!

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    tampines
    Posts
    70

    Default Re: Punggol Sunset

    Quote Originally Posted by night86mare View Post
    well in general, punggol is a very cluttered place. i usually end up frolicking very close to the water's edge to simplify things, at the cost of salty tripods and wet shorts, etc. be careful with your camera though.

    another way of doing it is to find something really big to fill up the foreground - generally landscapes work better with a prominent foreground, say, a huge log - there are loads of those lying around usually, for whatever reason.

    yes, the aperture setting here (f/3.5) explains the softness. you should stop down (i.e. use f/8 or f/11) for this setting here, as you *need* the depth of field. as a result your shutter speed might increase. if you cannot manage to handhold it, use a tripod. also, best to keep the iso as low as possible - reason being that landscapes usually work well sharp, and without noise. having a low iso, using a small aperture, and then accepting whatever shutter speed that should be set as a result is best. although you can have exceptions in situations.
    its a good explanation of the technique...The big aperture cause your shutter speed increase and further that, the rock a bit under exposed..

  7. #7
    Member sunboi80's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    West of SG
    Posts
    743

    Default Re: Punggol Sunset

    Quote Originally Posted by mrhello88 View Post
    its a good explanation of the technique...The big aperture cause your shutter speed increase and further that, the rock a bit under exposed..
    Actually i just tot the rocks in the foreground are ok, to me, it conveys the mood quite well sunset->sad... it's only the rocks between the foreground and background that are eh.. spoiling the picture, 1 big mess but that's not your fault.

    Oh ya, i dun see the sun...

    I think the picture could help with smaller apertures, a tripod and a cloudless day...
    Last edited by sunboi80; 16th May 2008 at 11:12 AM.
    ;) L-plate Photog: I come, I see, I shoot

  8. #8

    Default Re: Punggol Sunset

    Quote Originally Posted by mrhello88 View Post
    its a good explanation of the technique...The big aperture cause your shutter speed increase and further that, the rock a bit under exposed..
    actually, i photoshop the picture that caused the rock to be underexposed. maybe i should try using dodge tool on the rocks... thanks!

  9. #9

    Default Re: Punggol Sunset

    Quote Originally Posted by sunboi80 View Post
    Actually i just tot the rocks in the foreground are ok, to me, it conveys the mood quite well sunset->sad... it's only the rocks between the foreground and background that are eh.. spoiling the picture, 1 big mess but that's not your fault.

    Oh ya, i dun see the sun...

    I think the picture could help with smaller apertures, a tripod and a cloudless day...
    LOL. still, everyone's talking about the underexposed rocks. i'll do something about it. thanks! and, i don see the sun too -.- but it's still a sunset, aint it? haha.
    anyway, my aperture was at it's smallest possible, and i was using a tripod. lol

  10. #10

    Default Re: Punggol Sunset

    Quote Originally Posted by HTCahHTC View Post
    LOL. still, everyone's talking about the underexposed rocks. i'll do something about it. thanks! and, i don see the sun too -.- but it's still a sunset, aint it? haha.
    anyway, my aperture was at it's smallest possible, and i was using a tripod. lol
    there is some misconception here that you should correct.

    f/stop number, i.e. f/1.4, f/2.8, f/3.5, etc

    the number is INVERSELY PROPORTIONAL to the size of the aperture. this is confusing, and i don't understand why it is that way, but i'm sure you can find an explanation on google, i can't be bothered.

    you are right, you need a *small* aperture here, but you are using a -large- one.

    stop down to f/8 or f/11. that will give you a reasonably small aperture.
    Last edited by night86mare; 16th May 2008 at 07:12 PM.

  11. #11
    Moderator catchlights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Punggol, Singapore
    Posts
    22,019

    Default Re: Punggol Sunset

    small aperture means the "hole" smaller, not the number.

    and night86mare already given you many valuable suggestions, take note.

    you can try other pre set WB for sunset, it will give better results than auto WB.

    you shoot it with tripod, you should able to tell the horizon is tilted from the monitor and correct it to make another exposure.

    If you didn't notice, you also can correct it using photoshop.
    Shoot to Live, Live to Shoot
    www.benjaminloo.com | iStock portfolio

  12. #12

    Default Re: Punggol Sunset

    Quote Originally Posted by night86mare View Post
    there is some misconception here that you should correct.

    f/stop number, i.e. f/1.4, f/2.8, f/3.5, etc

    the number is INVERSELY PROPORTIONAL to the size of the aperture. this is confusing, and i don't understand why it is that way, but i'm sure you can find an explanation on google, i can't be bothered.

    you are right, you need a *small* aperture here, but you are using a -large- one.

    stop down to f/8 or f/11. that will give you a reasonably small aperture.

    -.- oh ya. i got confused. sorry. lecturer just revised with us today, and i still get confuse when people say small aperture meaning smaller f number. ok, i've cleared the misconception, and it's up in my head. sorry and thanks. i sure am dumb -.- lol

    Quote Originally Posted by catchlights View Post
    small aperture means the "hole" smaller, not the number.

    and night86mare already given you many valuable suggestions, take note.

    you can try other pre set WB for sunset, it will give better results than auto WB.

    you shoot it with tripod, you should able to tell the horizon is tilted from the monitor and correct it to make another exposure.

    If you didn't notice, you also can correct it using photoshop.
    i've taken note, thanks!
    Last edited by HTCahHTC; 16th May 2008 at 07:46 PM.

  13. #13

    Default Re: Punggol Sunset

    Always double confirm with those saying small aperture, ask, is it the f stop value u are talking abt. Then things will be clearer.
    My Humble Flickr --> The pavement of my thoughts

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Clementi
    Posts
    10,596

    Default Re: Punggol Sunset

    Quote Originally Posted by night86mare View Post
    there is some misconception here that you should correct.

    f/stop number, i.e. f/1.4, f/2.8, f/3.5, etc

    the number is INVERSELY PROPORTIONAL to the size of the aperture. this is confusing, and i don't understand why it is that way, but i'm sure you can find an explanation on google, i can't be bothered.

    you are right, you need a *small* aperture here, but you are using a -large- one.

    stop down to f/8 or f/11. that will give you a reasonably small aperture.
    The reason why the number is inversely proportional to the diameter of the aperture is simply this:

    f/stops are a measure of the the ratio of the focal length to the diameter of the aperture. For instance, the physical size of a f/4 aperture opening on a 200mm lens is

    f (focal length) = 200mm
    200 / 4 = 50mm

    Hence, the physical diameter of the aperture opening is 50mm, when the lens is set to f/4, at 200mm.

    Similarly, you can equate this to why at 18mm, when your lens is set to f/3.5, it is of a larger diameter than if you set your aperture to f/11, because 18/3.5 > 18/11

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Pasir Ris
    Posts
    458

    Default Re: Punggol Sunset

    Quote Originally Posted by night86mare View Post
    well in general, punggol is a very cluttered place. i usually end up frolicking very close to the water's edge to simplify things, at the cost of salty tripods and wet shorts, etc. be careful with your camera though.

    another way of doing it is to find something really big to fill up the foreground - generally landscapes work better with a prominent foreground, say, a huge log - there are loads of those lying around usually, for whatever reason.

    yes, the aperture setting here (f/3.5) explains the softness. you should stop down (i.e. use f/8 or f/11) for this setting here, as you *need* the depth of field. as a result your shutter speed might increase. if you cannot manage to handhold it, use a tripod. also, best to keep the iso as low as possible - reason being that landscapes usually work well sharp, and without noise. having a low iso, using a small aperture, and then accepting whatever shutter speed that should be set as a result is best. although you can have exceptions in situations.
    boss,

    correct me if i am wrong. but i tot big aperture can work some time. it just depends on where is being focused.

    remember my sunset shot at krabi? it was shot using f/5 @ 1/200. (http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=353031)

    do u think it will still work if the TS focus it on the far away sun and by doing so will have the forground oof and thus not drawing the attention away from the sunset?

    jay the learning

    PS - to TS, please let me know and accept my sincere apology if you are offended tat i hijeck ur thread.
    Last edited by Killer_Jay; 19th May 2008 at 11:56 PM.

  16. #16

    Default Re: Punggol Sunset

    Quote Originally Posted by Killer_Jay View Post
    boss,

    correct me if i am wrong. but i tot big aperture can work some time. it just depends on where is being focused.

    remember my sunset shot at krabi? it was shot using f/5 @ 1/200. (http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=353031)

    do u think it will still work if the TS focus it on the far away sun and by doing so will have the forground oof and thus not drawing the attention away from the sunset?

    jay the learning

    PS - to TS, please let me know and accept my sincere apology if you are offended tat i hijeck ur thread.
    your sunset shot of the boat?

    that is different, there you focus to infinity, also very hard to get oof.

    here, it is a wide view, most landscape shots, you want sharpness and depth from front to back, therefore small aperture is needed. definitely you can try with foreground oof, but i wager that 80% of the time it will not work well, since people want to see more than just blur in the foreground

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Pasir Ris
    Posts
    458

    Default Re: Punggol Sunset

    Quote Originally Posted by night86mare View Post
    your sunset shot of the boat?

    that is different, there you focus to infinity, also very hard to get oof.

    here, it is a wide view, most landscape shots, you want sharpness and depth from front to back, therefore small aperture is needed. definitely you can try with foreground oof, but i wager that 80% of the time it will not work well, since people want to see more than just blur in the foreground
    hmm... maybe i go try and see how it turn out.

  18. #18

    Default Re: Punggol Sunset

    Quote Originally Posted by Killer_Jay View Post
    hmm... maybe i go try and see how it turn out.
    heh, well i have an example actually, had my tripod, but got lazy and didn't want to wait so long for a long exposure, so took the picture with f/8.

    this one here.

    it looks fine at websize. a bit larger, and gone-case, you can see a 100% of the sky here:

    100% crop

    and this is with aggressive sharpening.

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Pasir Ris
    Posts
    458

    Default Re: Punggol Sunset

    Quote Originally Posted by night86mare View Post
    heh, well i have an example actually, had my tripod, but got lazy and didn't want to wait so long for a long exposure, so took the picture with f/8.

    this one here.

    it looks fine at websize. a bit larger, and gone-case, you can see a 100% of the sky here:

    100% crop

    and this is with aggressive sharpening.
    nice photo. i get wat u mean.

  20. #20

    Default Re: Punggol Sunset

    Did you use unsharpen tool to sharpen the whole image? Somehow can see noise in the picture. A landscape Apert normally dont fall below 8. That explain why the rocks and the relevant object nearer to you are sharp but blurer as distance goes further from your shooting point.

    If you are gonna take photo there again. Use your 18mm, get a tripod to do the 1sec and above exposure shot

    The following setting are

    Aperture,ISO, Shutter, EV
    F8 / 100 / +1 / 0.0
    f14 / 100 / +2-3 / 0.7
    f14+ /100 / 3+ / optional

    The above setting work only under dark places and night shot. So the rock/sand is not under exposed plus the it can gather light from the shipyard and the reflection in the sea.

    Aperture,ISO, Shutter, EV
    F8 / 100 / 50+ / 0.0
    F8+ / 100 / 50+ / 0.0+

    Try this setting next time for your picture. See any improvement. Yup, Just a humble opinion of mine.

    You can go http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=262904

    Our fellow CSER work. Very inspiring.
    Last edited by 2nd-Hamsterlord; 20th May 2008 at 11:54 AM.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •