Punggol Sunset + Views on PP

[Synchroni]

Hi all,
I guess there are quite a number of such posts already, nevertheless just to share and learn from everyone here.

The intention of this shot was to capture the atmosphere near dusk, not actually dusk at that moment.

Setup
Camera: 450D, Tamron 17-50 F2.8, normal UV filter
ISO: 200,
Aperture: F2.8
Exposure: 1/3200 sec
Focus length: 17mm

Post Process
Re-align horizon and min. crop, adjusted the curves and add some saturation. No HDR.

Criticizes and comments on the photo as hard or soft as you wish. No issue.

 

[Synchroni]

Posted in the wrong section. Up for criticizes and comments. Feel free....

 

[Synchroni]

Hmmm… Nobody wants to comment on this photo…
maybe I should criticizes my photo 1st…

- shouldn’t take landscape using F2.8… create unnecessary dof…
- “Photoshoot” not “photoshot”

 

[mrericlee]

How did you take the picture at 1/3200 sec?

I am surprised you can get that much light at such a fast shutter speed?

 

[Elgaris]

You should have reversed the settings... smaller aperature and slower shutter speed However your photo seems alright to me, the borders seem very grey though, perhaps it'll be good to increase the contrast in those areas.

 

[night86mare]

You should have reversed the settings... smaller aperature and slower shutter speed However your photo seems alright to me, the borders seem very grey though, perhaps it'll be good to increase the contrast in those areas.

guys, i don't mean to sound anal, but this is the critique corner (this is directed to mrericlee). you can be amazed, you can also find out how he did it, i can tell you - he pressed the button and it came out that way.. but at least take this section seriously, it is named so for a reason.

i am not sure what elgaris refers to as borders, or greyness. care to clarify?

in any case, my take on the picture - beautiful sky which was wasted. the dynamic range during sunset required is wide as can be - something that your digital sensor cannot handle - either you need to take hdr here (whether photomatix or manual blend - google the term hdr please if you don't know what it is).. or you need the use of a gnd, at least if you want something with any form of decent foreground composition.

the foreground here, as i see it, is a mass of unattractive black. it has no shape, it has no form, it spoils the sky by being there.

even if you don't have the know-how, or the equipment mentioned, just shoot the sky, it is good enough to stand alone - if you must, include the treeline.

as you can see, there are darkening of the corners here, this is caused by a syndrome called vignetting, due to the fact that you have been shooting a) wide open, b) underexposed the image deliberately for the sky ; thus it shines through very obviously. read up on what vignetting is, if you do not know, and realise that you ahve to stop down to maybe f/8 or f/11. this will have the benefit of increased dof, which is not so visible here, but print out the phtoograph and i'd wager you'd see a certain amoutn of softness, since you seem to be shotoing wide open... and also incidentally lessens the vignetting.

cheers.

 

[Synchroni]

How did you take the picture at 1/3200 sec?
I am surprised you can get that much light at such a fast shutter speed?

guys, i don't mean to sound anal, but this is the critique corner (this is directed to mrericlee). you can be amazed, you can also find out how he did it, i can tell you - he pressed the button and it came out that way.. but at least take this section seriously, it is named so for a reason.

Yes, mrericlee, AV mode just pressed and came out that way... F2.8 might be the reason.

Hi Night86mare, yes, and that's the reason for me to post here. Serious comment so i can see more clearly on my photo and learn... sometime just blinded by my own photo need another person to guide me. And Thanks for your effort to explain.

You should have reversed the settings... smaller aperature and slower shutter speed However your photo seems alright to me, the borders seem very grey though, perhaps it'll be good to increase the contrast in those areas.

... i am not sure what elgaris refers to as borders, or greyness. care to clarify?

I wasn't on tripod... handheld.. slower shutter speed might cause handshake... but i admitted that i wasn't perpare for the shoot and its should be smaller aperature..
Hi Elgaris your greyness maybe is what night86mare said vignetting

in any case, my take on the picture - beautiful sky which was wasted. the dynamic range during sunset required is wide as can be - something that your digital sensor cannot handle - either you need to take hdr here (whether photomatix or manual blend - google the term hdr please if you don't know what it is).. or you need the use of a gnd, at least if you want something with any form of decent foreground composition.

yes hdr would really bring out the range... but personally i dont really like hdr that much... dont want tiwst too much... but who knows one day i might love it... as i still learning...
gnd might be a good choice... haven't really got that...

the foreground here, as i see it, is a mass of unattractive black. it has no shape, it has no form, it spoils the sky by being there.

Agreed to some extent... if you see closely on the left there are 2 persons made it worse...

even if you don't have the know-how, or the equipment mentioned, just shoot the sky, it is good enough to stand alone - if you must, include the treeline.

yap. dont have the know-how, nor the equipment, but i believe every person have different view, the massy black may not look good but there are some who think it is nice to include the rock in.... anyway its a good point. Point noted will see more before i click that button...

as you can see, there are darkening of the corners here, this is caused by a syndrome called vignetting, due to the fact that you have been shooting a) wide open, b) underexposed the image deliberately for the sky ; thus it shines through very obviously. read up on what vignetting is, if you do not know, and realise that you ahve to stop down to maybe f/8 or f/11. this will have the benefit of increased dof, which is not so visible here, but print out the phtoograph and i'd wager you'd see a certain amoutn of softness, since you seem to be shotoing wide open... and also incidentally lessens the vignetting.

cheers.

Both wide open and underexposed deliberately appiled here.
Yes. agreed, i also noticed the softness due to the F2.8 which is bad...

Thanks everyone here for your comments.
I’m glad to receive your time spend.
Some points are agreeable, some points are personal. Anyway it’s what photography is all about…. IMO Enjoyment is more important for hobbyist…

 

[Shawn]

Hi,

Some points to note when taking landscape shot, or rather my personal notes:

1) Always, always use a tripod for optimum stability, you don't want an image ruined by handshake.

2) Usually, you would want to shoot f8 and smaller for landscape shots, and perhaps even f11-f22 when the situation warrants it, such as when you wanna maximise the DOF to encompass both foreground and background.

3) Experiment with different methods of post processing, angles, and what not, and... yes, lastly, the sunset after a huge downpour usually holds a nice surprise

Other than that, i think Nightmare has covered some of my other thoughts.

 

[Synchroni]

Hi,

Some points to note when taking landscape shot, or rather my personal notes:

1) Always, always use a tripod for optimum stability, you don't want an image ruined by handshake.

2) Usually, you would want to shoot f8 and smaller for landscape shots, and perhaps even f11-f22 when the situation warrants it, such as when you wanna maximise the DOF to encompass both foreground and background.

3) Experiment with different methods of post processing, angles, and what not, and... yes, lastly, the sunset after a huge downpour usually holds a nice surprise

Other than that, i think Nightmare has covered some of my other thoughts.

Hi,
Yes, sunset after a huge downpour would really give the impact... This photo was taken after a downpour, not a huge one.
yap understand the baisc of smaller aperture, my mistake to keep it at F2.8 which make no sense.

Thanks. Point Noted.

 

[cheguthamrin]

yap. dont have the know-how, nor the equipment, but i believe every person have different view, the massy black may not look good but there are some who think it is nice to include the rock in.... anyway its a good point. Point noted will see more before i click that button...

I dont agree to include the rocks - I would have trimmed / cropped off about 30% from the bottom, and perhaps for a 16:9 dimensions. The sky is more attractive than the dark blobs of the rocks.

 

[Synchroni]

I dont agree to include the rocks - I would have trimmed / cropped off about 30% from the bottom, and perhaps for a 16:9 dimensions. The sky is more attractive than the dark blobs of the rocks.

Hi Cheguthamrin,
you dont agree to include the rocks? I guess you mean you dont like the rocks in the photo. Agreed that the skiy is more attractive that the rocks and it might be a good idea to cropped off the bottom 30%.

and it will look like the following

hmm:think:

 

[ssping83]

agree with night86mare about too much foreground interest lost in the darkness.. prefer the cropped version.. though slightly (just slightly) a bit more rocks will be better imo..

 

[calebk]

agree with night86mare about too much foreground interest lost in the darkness.. prefer the cropped version.. though slightly (just slightly) a bit more rocks will be better imo..

I think it is at a balance now.

More and you just see more of a black mush at the bottom. The detail is gone, so they don't serve any real purpose except create negative space within the image, which in turn, creates an "emptiness" at the bottom of the image to throw it off-balance with the sky.

 

[Synchroni]

agree with night86mare about too much foreground interest lost in the darkness.. prefer the cropped version.. though slightly (just slightly) a bit more rocks will be better imo..

I think it is at a balance now.

More and you just see more of a black mush at the bottom. The detail is gone, so they don't serve any real purpose except create negative space within the image, which in turn, creates an "emptiness" at the bottom of the image to throw it off-balance with the sky.

Thanks sspring and calebk,
understander better when calebk explained on the "detail is gone", "create negative space" and "emptiness at the bottom".... guess that is the -ve part of not using HDR
Anyway even after HDR, the rock might not look interesting compare to the sky...

 

[ArcticFox]

The sky is nice but, there are too many underexposed details. The solution is.......don't shot the bottom (crop it) or try HDR?

 

[Synchroni]

The sky is nice but, there are too many underexposed details. The solution is.......don't shot the bottom (crop it) or try HDR?

ya man... viewing at own photo... always blinded by the nice thing...
thanks for pointing out...
i guess have to train to step back as a 3rd person to view and examine....
this doesn't only applied for photography only... and its hard...

 

[Andrew Hoi]

Hi all,
I guess there are quite a number of such posts already, nevertheless just to share and learn from everyone here.

The intention of this shot was to capture the atmosphere near dusk, not actually dusk at that moment.

Setup
Camera: 450D, Tamron 17-50 F2.8, normal UV filter
ISO: 200,
Aperture: F2.8
Exposure: 1/3200 sec
Focus length: 17mm

Post Process
Re-align horizon and min. crop, adjusted the curves and add some saturation. No HDR.

Criticizes and comments on the photo as hard or soft as you wish. No issue.

Hi Synchroni,

You have captured a beautiful sky, very nice color too!!
Yes, the pitch black shadow at the fg is quite disturbing to a certain extend.
Imo, this image may benefit more if its taken in a portrait format, so that the beautiful sky will be emphasized n contrary the pitch black fg will be minimized.
If you are serious about landscape photography, dont leave home without a tripod.

 

[dingzyangz]

A lot of potential in this picture. the sky was great. the initial crop i felt was better but it was the underexposed foreground that destroyed the pic. try playing with the Shadow/Highlight slider.

 

[crucio]

yes a crop excluding those unexposed rocks will do. try using a GND filter or do HDR if you wanna include the rocks.

 

[Synchroni]

A lot of potential in this picture. the sky was great. the initial crop i felt was better but it was the underexposed foreground that destroyed the pic. try playing with the Shadow/Highlight slider.

Thanks dingzyangz. Have tried Shadow/Highlight but can't bring out the detail on the foreground ... i guess HDR will be a better choice...