Areas in Punggol

[foxguy]

Err, you went into Matilda's House? How did you manage to do so? As for the shots, hehe, i not that level to comment.

hehehehe go there and you will know.
come on i really newb,
come comment one. or have a chat about my shots also can. i ok to share with any one knowleadge.

 

[zoossh]

what you meant by collage? stacking photos on each other?

nope. stitching.

 

[zoossh]

can use some picture i shot to give an example? i dun mind my shots to be edited in anyway.

same to night86mare

please share more on how i can improve.

em. it is difficult, if not possible, to edit composition drastically. try to keep forms and shapes simple and clustered. some of the rocks are pretty scattered here and there and does not stick together.

appreciation of composition is best done with looking at good photographs and looking at their outlines.

 

[Yapster]

hehehehe go there and you will know.
come on i really newb,
come comment one. or have a chat about my shots also can. i ok to share with any one knowleadge.

Haha, i have been there, but didn't manage to find ways to get in. (And ya, no guts to go in too. ;p)

Haha, ok. Talking about the blown highlights in aperture priority mode, you can consider to bring down your EV. This is what i did for my D80. Tends to have overexposed shots without any EV adjustment.

I use to shoot in Manual Mode when i first got the camera. However, after some use, realise i am not so good with the controls (ya, sort of over-ambitious). Cos normally when you shoot, as a newbie, you may assume the exposure of the shot is ok using the LCD. But when you load it onto your computer, you may realise you will have a lot of touch up to do. Underexpose still not so bad, but overexpose will blow your details away.

So maybe you would like to try out Aperture Priority Mode more often and take a look at your the auto shutter speed setting. From there, you will know how to play around with the shutter speed in Manual Mode. Hmm, just what i have been doing till now la. Please point out any mistakes if i did.

 

[Killer_Jay]

Hello,

Ok. Here are the repost of my earlier photos. added a few more of the Matilta's House.

 

[Killer_Jay]

 

[night86mare]

can use some picture i shot to give an example? i dun mind my shots to be edited in anyway.

same to night86mare

please share more on how i can improve.

to be honest i think your shots are already somewhat near their maximum potential, i do not like cropping pictures, so i guess there will not be anything much to add on to the shots.

on a side note, go to eikin's site, click on punggol and look at mathilda house section, his is the best series i have ever seen so far. in fact, just look at all his photos on punggol, really godlike. among other things, anyways.

but some advice:

1) always correct the horizon, it is KEY, unless you have very intentional tilt. if you tilt, tilt all the way if you want to tilt. don't tilt a bit, it looks like you salah then too lazy to correct

2) look at good photos, as zoosshh has said. go to the library, pick up lee frost or joe cornish' books, these are probably two very prominent coastal scape shooters.. but please, please, do not just replicate their ideas in singapore setting.. in some sense i am quite sick and tired of seeing 80,000 joe cornishes and lee frosts on pbase/flickr.. develop your own style and way of looking at things, the main lesson to be learnt is how to arrange elements in the photo - what constitutes a good composition, and what is not so strong.

3) you seem to be trying some very interesting ideas, like in 6.. but unfortunately they do not work, do not be discouraged and keep trying new stuff, but first and foremost, get the composition down pat. that is most important, then the technique, like filters, hdr will all come in

4) one way of starting out and making a strong composition is to keep it simple and sweet. find something to focus on, move around such that you eliminate every other prominent thing. for example, if you wish to take a photo of mathilda house, do you think something with the silly lrt station in the back would be easier to compose, or something without the lrt station in the frame would be easier to compose?

 

[foxguy]

to be honest i think your shots are already somewhat near their maximum potential, i do not like cropping pictures, so i guess there will not be anything much to add on to the shots.

on a side note, go to eikin's site, click on punggol and look at mathilda house section, his is the best series i have ever seen so far. in fact, just look at all his photos on punggol, really godlike. among other things, anyways.

but some advice:

1) always correct the horizon, it is KEY, unless you have very intentional tilt. if you tilt, tilt all the way if you want to tilt. don't tilt a bit, it looks like you salah then too lazy to correct

2) look at good photos, as zoosshh has said. go to the library, pick up lee frost or joe cornish' books, these are probably two very prominent coastal scape shooters.. but please, please, do not just replicate their ideas in singapore setting.. in some sense i am quite sick and tired of seeing 80,000 joe cornishes and lee frosts on pbase/flickr.. develop your own style and way of looking at things, the main lesson to be learnt is how to arrange elements in the photo - what constitutes a good composition, and what is not so strong.

3) you seem to be trying some very interesting ideas, like in 6.. but unfortunately they do not work, do not be discouraged and keep trying new stuff, but first and foremost, get the composition down pat. that is most important, then the technique, like filters, hdr will all come in

4) one way of starting out and making a strong composition is to keep it simple and sweet. find something to focus on, move around such that you eliminate every other prominent thing. for example, if you wish to take a photo of mathilda house, do you think something with the silly lrt station in the back would be easier to compose, or something without the lrt station in the frame would be easier to compose?

thanks a lot for the advice, i will take note. hope to improve out from all the advices

 

[freezemaster]

Is this the one that i went? I am the late guy, if so ill post my pictures here too. but nothing much, missed the sunset

 

[Killer_Jay]

Is this the one that i went? I am the late guy, if so ill post my pictures here too. but nothing much, missed the sunset

bro,

yes, this is the group u joined. hee hee

they closed the other thread. so we have to start a new 1 here. dun worry, just post ur photos here.

actually, there are other things to shoot even u r late for the sunset.

join us again on 24 Nov, this time they gonna shoot birds. so bring along ur super duper zoom lens. hahahhaah

jay the killer

 

[freezemaster]

bro,

yes, this is the group u joined. hee hee

they closed the other thread. so we have to start a new 1 here. dun worry, just post ur photos here.

actually, there are other things to shoot even u r late for the sunset.

join us again on 24 Nov, this time they gonna shoot birds. so bring along ur super duper zoom lens. hahahhaah

jay the killer

Hmmm ill be on holiday from 23th nov to 30th nov.
Looks like i got to give that a miss

 

[Pauche]

Here are mine.... finally....:sweat:
C&C most welcome!

#1

#2

#3

#4

 

[Pauche]

More..........

#5

#6

#7

#8

That's all folks.... your comments please! :sticktong

Rest of the photos here

 

[Killer_Jay]

More..........

#6

#7

That's all folks.... your comments please! :sticktong

Rest of the photos here

bro,

u took these with ur L lens ah? really can see the defferent......... u very bad leh, very poisonous.

and can see the different style between mine and ur series. mine is more groomy and urs is more joyous. hahahhahaha

and hor, no need to stress. somebody still owe us the zoo outing photos.......

jay the "saddist"

 

[night86mare]

bro,

u took these with ur L lens ah? really can see the defferent......... u very bad leh, very poisonous.

and can see the different style between mine and ur series. mine is more groomy and urs is more joyous. hahahhahaha

and hor, u dun have to stress to put up the photos. somebody still owe us the zoo outing photos.......

jay the "saddist"

er

no no no, as much as i respect the quality of l lens, the fact is you would not be able to differentiate the difference between a photo taken with l lens and photo taken without

this is the reasoning why so many people new to the scene straight away go and buy expensive lenses then complain taht they are not getting the results they expect

the fact is, pauche's pictures are strong because of good composition, and good post processing (if any, i won't know). i am not entirely sure what l lens has up other than sharpness. maybe good color reproduction. but in any case, for point a - sharpness, this is not discernible at such small sizes as posted here. for point b, it is my belief that with the correct techniques, and good pp, even a normal lens can give you what a l lens can give you

i am wondering a bit about the distortion though, seems like there is distortion, the horizon is curving. in any case, the first photo you have quoted does employ the rough technique of leading lines, done subtly with the rocks, one in the immediate foreground pointing to the left, then your eyes move to the rocks in the secondary foreground, when then lead you to the background, i.e. the sunset and the sky.

the second i suppose, is a very classic punggol shot. just foreground with relatively orderly arrangement of the rocks, then the sky.

i suppose l lens, based on my description would only have one up in terms of large prints. when it comes to posting on the web, any lens will do, in my humble opinion

 

[Killer_Jay]

er

no no no, as much as i respect the quality of l lens, the fact is you would not be able to differentiate the difference between a photo taken with l lens and photo taken without

this is the reasoning why so many people new to the scene straight away go and buy expensive lenses then complain taht they are not getting the results they expect

the fact is, pauche's pictures are strong because of good composition, and good post processing (if any, i won't know). i am not entirely sure what l lens has up other than sharpness. maybe good color reproduction. but in any case, for point a - sharpness, this is not discernible at such small sizes as posted here. for point b, it is my belief that with the correct techniques, and good pp, even a normal lens can give you what a l lens can give you

i am wondering a bit about the distortion though, seems like there is distortion, the horizon is curving. in any case, the first photo you have quoted does employ the rough technique of leading lines, done subtly with the rocks, one in the immediate foreground pointing to the left, then your eyes move to the rocks in the secondary foreground, when then lead you to the background, i.e. the sunset and the sky.

the second i suppose, is a very classic punggol shot. just foreground with relatively orderly arrangement of the rocks, then the sky.

i suppose l lens, based on my description would only have one up in terms of large prints. when it comes to posting on the web, any lens will do, in my humble opinion

boss,

why i make such comment was becos i know wats was the condition when he took these few shots. and i know that he will have minimal PP on his photos. (think i am the 1 using the most PP among them)

and his rock are so clear whereas mine was pitch dark (no doubt i PP it darker to have the groomy feeling). of cos i can do a stitch if i want to but i really dun wanna too much PP. hee hee

i may be wrong (very high chance) on the L lens but then it will make me ponder how he got those clear rock. no doubt even if i know, i may still choose to darken the rock but it always good to learn. hee hee

jay the learner

 

[night86mare]

you mean, there is no use of filters? highly possible because i am not familiar with the timing at which he took his shots, the sky is still a little blown though

effectively if you expose correctly, i am pretty sure you will be able to get such results too. exif says f/20 for 30 seconds. i'm thinking that nd filters were used at the very least. so in this case it is more of a matter of exposure. also, after a quick look at the photos for your rock photos it seems like they were taken at a much later timing (i.e. night) whereas based on colors in his, it was taken at sunset. if you had done those same shots at sunset, i am sure you would have gotten the details on the rocks as well. anyways, i didn't mean to chide you or anything, was just a friendly post put in a blunt way, hope you don't take it the wrong way.

 

[Killer_Jay]

you mean, there is no use of filters? highly possible because i am not familiar with the timing at which he took his shots, the sky is still a little blown though

effectively if you expose correctly, i am pretty sure you will be able to get such results too. exif says f/20 for 30 seconds. i'm thinking that nd filters were used at the very least. so in this case it is more of a matter of exposure. anyways, i didn't mean to chide you or anything, was just a friendly post put in a blunt way, hope you don't take it the wrong way.

boss,

no lah. dun worry. i am very new and i am really learning. hope u dun mind the words i used sometime a bit strong. pai seh. :embrass:

jay the newbie

 

[night86mare]

in any case, for your sunset timing shots, it is not impossible to achieve such results, either, took one of your earlier fisherman shots.. and used cs 2 to lift the shadows across the picture:

notice that the rough pastel colors of the sky as achieved by pauche are nearly there. however, in this case you have insufficient shadow detail (due to exposure, which is fine, since you wanted to capture the fisherman as a silhouette) therefore your fisherman has become a mess of pixels. also i suppose since his rocks are in the open, towards where the light is, as opposed to your rocks in the above picture.. they would be easier to expose to such an extent. so basically, i'm guessing, if there was not much pp done:

nd filter used, stop down, and exposure for the foreground, not the background, in fact pauche's pictures remind me of imran (can't remember his nickname here, ever, he uses a funny one)'s shot here. oh btw, you have to check out his photoblog, while we're on the topic. it is really good!

 

[Killer_Jay]

in any case, for your sunset timing shots, it is not impossible to achieve such results, either, took one of your earlier fisherman shots.. and used cs 2 to lift the shadows across the picture:

notice that the rough pastel colors of the sky as achieved by pauche are nearly there. however, in this case you have insufficient shadow detail (due to exposure, which is fine, since you wanted to capture the fisherman as a silhouette) therefore your fisherman has become a mess of pixels. also i suppose since his rocks are in the open, towards where the light is, as opposed to your rocks in the above picture.. they would be easier to expose to such an extent. so basically, i'm guessing, if there was not much pp done:

nd filter used, stop down, and exposure for the foreground, not the background, in fact pauche's pictures remind me of imran (can't remember his nickname here, ever, he uses a funny one)'s shot here. oh btw, you have to check out his photoblog, while we're on the topic. it is really good!

boss,

got it. i try to do it on the original file but i still need to stitch 2 photo together to get pauche's result..... :cry:

and thank you for the link. i like his style.

jay the newbie