vincetylor

Thank you for your comments on this image. I had worked this location pretty much to completion until finding this particular spot. It was one of those moments we all as photographers look forward to when it seems to all come together at one time. At least that's how I felt when seeing this in my camera. It's as if you get a second wind then, pull out more film and start over again. While I do remember these being longer exposures, I see far too much texture in the water to think it was anything above a couple seconds. There is one spot at the base of the middle rocks that might indicate longer, but it's not that conclusive either. Wish I could say for sure. Guess it doesn't really matter anyway. Thanks again for taking the time. Is always appreciated. Aloha.

What a colorful evening here Walt. The addition of the lone bird is also a nice plus. Best viewed laarge for sure! I do like how you composed this just as is; though I get the impulse (as a photographer) to want to include a little more of the rocks on the bottom. I do see how doing that would come at the cost of some of that blue in the sky however. A bit of a tough call I guess. Though I think I'm still inclined to anchor the bottom a little more with those rocks.

 

This image, for me, represents one reason why I still choose to use 35mm equipment. The selection of quality wide-angle zoom lenses is huge. I believe a wider lens would have helped here even though minimizing the bird to a degree in the process. I can also shoot wide, short, slower, faster, bracket etc all in one shoot, and then have a wider selection to choose from when I do get to the lightbox. I am curious to know how many frames you took from this location Walter. Yes, it is true that none of those 35mm originals that I have would have the same capabilities as your 6x7 tranny Walt, that's a fact. But even so, I have yet to find a situation where my smaller original limited its usage yet. One image was even used for a tractor trailor ad. Something like 10x30 feet. I have considered getting into medium format, but just can't seem to find enough reasons sto give up those 35mm advantages.... at least not quite yet.

 

Yes Kim, I sure do have opinions on Velvia 50 vs Velvia 100. Hands down for me; Velvia 50 still rules. For one, it's noticably warmer than 100. For daytime blues and greens the RVP 100 is too cool for my tastes. I also like the fact I can slow down the action more with the 50 speed verses the 100. Waterfalls in the daytime blur better. Seascapes also get more time to slow down. Since I rarely go beyond 30 seconds I do not have the reciprocity failures that many loathe regarding the 50. I have shot many rolls side by side and no longer even buy the 100. B&H still offers 50, and it's even a bit less. I've also purchased many rolls on e-bay at great prices since quite a few are now into the digital world. Still if 50 does die-out, I will probably be able to live with RVP 100...

 

I've also tried the Kodak 100VS before. The reds and yellows are just about as rich as Velvia 50 in my opinion. The greens and blues are not even close. I ended up using that film exclusively for sunsets like this until it was gone. No more since. Velvia 50 is still the king, at least for me anyway.

 

Nice works as always Walt! Interesting discussion too. Aloha.

Well, I actually favored the vertical crop when putting these together. I think it's the simplest while also maintaining a lot of color. The reverse crop is an unusual image in my mind, but, I also like it because of just that. It's odd, but appealing. The pano seems perhaps just a bit too busy perhaps for me, but does have a lot to offer the one looking in IF the busy-ness is not an issue. I do agree with Barry about the added color from the lilly, but, if something has to go, since it might be considered a bit busy, I would probably point in that direction. Still, when all is said and done, you have plenty of opportunities here. In my opinion, that is a good thing!

 

They have actually brought hummers out here to Hawaii before Walt; they all fly back to the mainland though. Can't figure that one out...

Nice Sepia conversion here. Definitely gives this old structure an aesthetic improvement. I would probably like it a bit more without the guy on the right and his wagon. Nice image overall Alex!

Opinions always appreciated. Thanks.

Panoramic

Vertical Crop

Unusual, reverse Crop. Unorthodox for sure, but I still liked it.

Aloha Walt!

 

Nice to see one of yours on the TRP for a change. Lowballers must have missed it. This image has alot of potential in my mind. The question is, do you crop it, and if so how? My opinion is that there is perhaps too much empty space above and below the feathered visitor. Also with the tree in the background, flowers on either side and green stems in the lower portion, there may be just a bit too much going on, dwarfing the hummer a bit. I played with a few different crops here and found that several (though all quite different) actually appealed to me and could work. I will just put them all up here. One in particular though stands out as the best in my mind. I'd be curious to see, if any of these do appeal to you, which one YOU might find the most effective. I also think because the hummer is not in super sharp focus, that another portion of the scene needs to stand out -aesthetically speaking- to help carry this to its fullest potential. All that said, I still like this original full-framed, uncropped version as well. Nice problem to have actually.

 

By the way, when I lived in the Blue Ridge mountains, I had over five hummingbird feeders. Absolutely my favorite bird on earth. Can you believe there arae none in Hawaii. What a crime...

This one is very nice. The softer pink colors in the water works very effectively in my opinion. Nice, clean, simple composition too. Excellent work here!

Nice soft colors in the sky here and the title truly is appropriate. A "Gateway to Infinity" is what it indeed looks like to me.

 

However, I do have a couple of the more critical thoughts I'd like to share here, Kevin. Most people that know me are aware that I have no problems using colored filters when they can enhance a particular scene. (Though more and more I try to make the scene work without any nowadays). One problem I have encountered however, that I also recognized immediately here with this image, is that you used a split colored filter. Basically where the upper half of the filter is colored and the lower half has no colors at all. The other kind, which I find far more effective is when the entire filter is colored, but the lower portion is much softer or lighter in color. The only time I can use a split filter as you used here, successfully, is for landscapes with no water involved at all. Reflections such as with lakes or other pools of water are completely out of the question. You literally see the sky with color in the upper portion, but no colors in the sky in the reflection itself. They become dead images immediately, and I have unfortunately found this out the hard way. But even these non-reflection water images (as seen here) in my mind have problems. For one thing, anytime you have color in the sky -especially as much as we see here- you will always have a fair measure of that same color in the lower water portion itself, since the water always reflects some of those colors from the sky. Here, we see none in the water at all. Additionally, I can easily see the filter line on the pylons themselves, where they are clearly darker and have an addish red tint. Part of the water also has clearly defined color lines. While this scene itself does look nice Kevin, especially from a quick glance, professionally speaking this would probably not hold up very well at all due to these obvious issues. I would suggest instead using a graduated full-colored filter anytime heading to any body of water. Or, you can use two filters where one perhaps is like this adding another element to the sky only. Though this effect really takes experience in order to pull off effectively and convincingly. Poorly done, the image will be practically useless.

 

My only other suggestion would be to get just a little closer to to the pylons than we see here. The further we can get the viewer "into" the scene, the more effective I think this kind of image works. Though in this case it does look pretty good as you have it now. But in my honest opinion, a few important adjustments can make something like this possibility even better!

Sorry about the wrong tech details Lou Anne, I corrected them. Though from what we see here, this could be just about anywhere. And yes hot and humid summer days were par for the course. That's why we all like going to the beach in the summer.... and that's why I LIVE on an island today. ; )

 

I did catch quite a few different "looks" from this location, D.L. Some may prefer the more colorful sunset ones. I hope to post some others another time. This was just a bit more unique, from my perspective.

 

On a little side note memory; my trusty F-5 bit the dust during this shoot right here. In fact it died before I even finshed getting all that I wanted, which is why I only have a couple like this. Turned out to be internal corrosion; non-repairable. Ended up having to borrow my son's F-100 for another 75 rolls through Washington DC and Shenandoah National park and then Fedexe'd back.

 

Life is often like this...

Thanks for the comments on this. What I was curious about, and seem to have a few answers to, is whether people looking at this for the first time would get that same feeling that I had when actually shooting this location. Here are a few thoughts from some of you that felt familiar:

 

"almost frightening", "very other-worldly, ethereal feeling", "some tunnel that never ends", "misty effect", "great feeling," "Right out of a dream"...

 

These seem to pretty much sum up what I was actually experiencing when standing here late this evening. That is more or less what I was aiming for. I lived 5000 miles away from Ocean City, Maryland and was helping relocate my son Scott, (who'd just turned 18) to this beach town for his first summer away from home. I had come here myself for many special summers when I was his age that was just an outstanding experience to go through. You really grow-up being on your own like that. Guess I sort of put that idea in his head because there we were! Anyway, I was only there for about four or five days altogether with first priority helping him find a summer rental, a job and the lay of the land. So, when I did find a little time to "get out the gear", and you get a dreary day like this, it was somewhat of a downer. I did look for opportunities to find these "moody" kind of images, which of course took me to this location under the pier to begin with. When the fog rolled in, almost instantly here, it was not welcomed, at least not initially. The opportunity did eventually "click" in my mind (yes I can be a little slow) and I ended up being appreciative to have these dreary conditions for an evening. The other four days were picture-perfect! I have some of of my own personal favorites from these few days here. This is the only series edited and scanned so far. Though it does not fully represent what this beach town is really like, at least from my perspective anyway, it does present the diversity to a degree of a place that has many different looks and some really FUN times.

 

Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts.

Thanks.

How's KW? Yep it's a little more pinkish than I wanted. But too much work to do it over today. If I just try magic-wand tooling the accent to change the color, it makes the accent much larger. So, we will just have to live with pretty pink for now.

 

Thanks K.

Uploaded an improved version 6-20-06. Thanks for the feedback.

No Todd, I did not use an ND filter on this image, only the Warmtone polarizer. Actually I rarely shoot at all when conditions absolutely require that I use one. Since I do live here, I can usually wait until I get the conditions I want, which usually mean less than average cloud cover. However when I see the taller cumulous variety, without any grey, I will often reach into my bag and hand-hold one of the two ND filters I carry. When traveling to other islands, as I did here, I am more inclined to use them since I really have little choice but to make the best of conditions that are presented. In this case I did not feel one was necessary due to the minimal amount of clouds in the scene. Something I had been hoping for. It would also have affected the mountain peaks since we are above the clouds. Hope this helps. Thanks again for all (but one) of your comments. Aloha.

New story behind the self-portrait Photo:

 

A certain heartless P-net member, one that I will keep nameless for now (Ken Williams) has taken my original self-portrait posted, (one of myself working tirelessly, VERY hard, in the heat, sweat and under very harsh conditions with tripod and cameras by the way), and instead made it a little Hawaiian Luau with food and music and looking like fun times. Sounds like a good idea actually... though you should all know the truth, that I was really working extremely hard under brutal conditions and suffering greatly...

Yes I remember that photo Walter! It's one of my fav's of yours. In fact part of my comment on yours was this:

 

Vincent K. Tylor , September 25, 2004; 03:11 P.M. (edit | delete)

 

"I've never made it here during the daytime Walt... but will now!"

 

As you can see from that comment, your photograph really started the ball rolling for me to get up there during the daytime (with many pushes from Michele along the way). Eight years of living and photographing the Hawaiian Islands and I never had a real interest to get up there for the daytime shoot. Each and every trip I took prior was strictly for the sunrise image. To get what you see here, took at least three or four trips altogether. What makes this image, for me, somewhat special is the fact you can see some ocean below the clouds, which is rarely the case. Each of the other trips had far more cloud cover than you see here. One time it was practically a wasted trip with no real opportunity for anything at all. The close-up version does take some advantage of those clouds, but again, it's still in the oven so to speak. I will get to it soon, hopefully.

 

Thanks for the motivation Walt, and for all of those taking the time to share an opinion!

 

A hui hou.

Thanks for all of your thoughts on this.

Yes Phillip, you must have been up there before to know all about the "freezing the butt off" experience. Actually in the early morning, for sunrises, with winds regularly near 40mph and temps often near freezing, I have found that the word "suffering" truly takes on new meaning. You see many people (including myself) shivvvvering with shorts and sandals and five t-shirts on. The other interesting thing up this high is that even with the cooler daytime temps you get a very quick intense sunburn. usually the one-sided variety. And additionally, you have to walk rather slowly due to oxygen issues. I've seen people passed out up there before. Can you imagine what it must be like to climb Everest then?

 

Actually Len, Praveen does have a legitimate point here. I too noticed the same thing while editing the image, and wondered about it. My wife also said something about the foreground on her own, when I showed the image to her. (She's been pushing for me for years to get a daytime photograph from this place). However, when I did try a foreground crop, the image truly took a step backwards in my mind. That foreground element adds another dimension to the image in terms of contrast and texture and adds a bit more interest to the scene overall, so I think. The crop definitely made it appear rather average, especially since it loses that portion of brightness which livens up the entire scene. But it was only AFTER the crop attempt that I could see its true value. I do have another one from this place that is much more of a close-up which is scanned but not yet edited. I will post that sometime soon. Thanks again for taking the time... it's always appreciated. Aloha.

Best Viewed Large. Opinions appreciated, thanks.

Respectfully speaking, the composition IS exactly where I feel it should be. Without the ship this would be just another nice sunset image. By putting it farther up top and to the right, as suggested, I believe you lessen the impact of the ship, and thus the impact of the image altogether. The lighting on that old boat really is very good. Nice job here.

Nice to see you back posting images. This one really works for me. The composition angle in and of itself adds a good measure of drama to the scene. The darker sky, sunburst and the almost out-of-view lone person all add to the power. Very nice, Four Eyes!

Well this is one reason why I keep paying up I guess, you get all sorts of ideas, opinions,

facts, crops, color adjustments and for that matter might as well throw in the kitchen sink

at times. Photo.net can help anybody serious about photography to learn and usually to

get better.

 

Unfortunately, in this case, from my own personal perspective, nothing brought to the

table has improved upon the original version posted. I like Lannie and his often very

insightful comments. However the suggestion of "muted washed out sort of a blue" sample

looks rather patheticly horrendous. (I am typing this with a smile on my face Lannie). The

fact that Michael actually likes this "muted washed out sort of death blue" version only

adds to the madness here. David's version is definitely a step in the right direction in my

opinion, but still lacks the darker atmosphere and drama of the original. Still, nonetheless,

the effort is there. These efforts (yes even Lannie's) are how we all can improve... even if

only on what NOT to do...

 

: )

I disagree with a bottom crop on this. The image flows much more freely, offers a greater

measure of interplay between shadows and light, and allows the one viewing to continue

his journey downstream. The image uncropped has much greater mood and atmosphere in

my eyes. Yes the crop is easier or simpler to view, but does that actually make it better?

No way; it is really comparatively boring in my opinion. Sorry Michael this crop does not

improve this for me.

 

Who says there is NO texture in the water? There is plenty of that in this scene. I for one

am not a fan of overly-long exposures since texture usually gets washed right out. Not the

case at all here! A shorter exposure would still look okay, but you would begin to lose that

silky effect, which is what makes these types of scenes work so successfully. There is

plenty of texture and detail and richness throughout the water in this image.

 

I am fine with the chosen composition, though think a little more space on the left would

not hurt. The little sticks protruding up seem to go both ways for me. It can, I guess, add a

little extra element to the scene here, but I also feel it is somewhat of a distraction. If it

were my image, I'd probably clone those out.

 

Overall, this is a successful image from my perspective; one that surpasses many other

attempts at something similar due to a darker richness and interplay of light in the water

that is often lacking when one goes for the longer exposures, or when one shoots an

image like this. The darker atmosphere in this kind of scene is quite unique and makes

this one succeed for me. Very nice work.