a night photo


Status
Not open for further replies.

night86mare

Deregistered
Aug 25, 2006
25,541
0
0
www.pbase.com
#6
Er, for a low ISO setting (low sensitivity to light) that's a lot of light?
Just guessing, plus the tree doesn't seem equally lighted~
 

Stoned

Senior Member
May 7, 2004
4,378
0
0
30
Changi
www.photo.net
#7
The highlights. The tree and the house make an interesting subject though. Consider a reshoot.
 

Jeanette.z

New Member
Aug 13, 2006
133
0
0
Melbourne
www.flickr.com
#8
Stoned said:
The highlights. The tree and the house make an interesting subject though. Consider a reshoot.
yap, how do you reckon I can improve when reshooting
other then the aperature (last time was 2.2)?:D
 

willyfoo

Senior Member
Jan 18, 2002
2,048
0
0
43
North
willyfoo.com
#9
Skip the bottom part... and don't be afraid to tilt the camera.. you can try using the lines along the front wall..
 

#11
How's this. Was just playing around. Hope you like it



Let me know if you want it taken off.

p.s. Hmmm afer a second look, the building might be a little too dark. Oh well.
 

Slivester

Deregistered
Nov 9, 2004
1,028
0
0
Woodlands
humors.deviantart.com
#13
bluroom said:
How's this. Was just playing around. Hope you like it



Let me know if you want it taken off.

p.s. Hmmm afer a second look, the building might be a little too dark. Oh well.
Erm, thats slightly over-done. The contrast on the light exposed portion is lesser than the brightness.
 

Jeanette.z

New Member
Aug 13, 2006
133
0
0
Melbourne
www.flickr.com
#16
:bigeyes: wait till that sb return me my tripod....then can go back and reshoot.
thanks guys...but the PSed version a bit over for me but it does give me some idea of how the reshooting can be;p
 

night86mare

Deregistered
Aug 25, 2006
25,541
0
0
www.pbase.com
#18
lastboltnut said:
I dun think so, it was a long exposure, look at the moving clouds.:)
Ah yes now that you mention it..

The main reasoning was the uneven exposure of light heh.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom