tylerwind

Thanks for the comments! I appreciate each and every one of them! About the "blurriness" of this image...that has been a topic of much debate when I've posted the other night shots of this bridge from the same vantage point. I've gone back each time and looked at the original file and the problem is in my resizing/lack of sharpening and not the original focus. I know little to nothing about post-processing and know absolutely nothing about sharpening...all I do is convert the RAW file as it was shot (original settings) and then save it as a smaller size. Apparently this makes the image look blurry, especially the ones of this bridge (not sure why, but the difference is far more pronounced on the bridge shots). There could possibly be a little bit of softness from the 35-80mm lens, which I've been told is not the best lens in the world. But, I usually stop it down to f/8 to try to use the "sweet spot" and since the original files look better, I'm assuming my post processing is 99% of the problem. Thanks again for all the help and input!

Any thoughts or comments are greatly appreciated! I would especially

welcome any comparisons to the similar compositions in the same

folder that differ primarily in the ratio of natural:artificial

light. Thanks for viewing my work!

Bob--I'm flattered that you think my shots are good enough that you would like to get advice from me. You are not bothering me at all--I'm always glad to help. Vincent Tylor and David Clapp (among others) did the same thing for me (and continue to do so, since I'm no where near there class still!) and I'm excited to be able to pass along what I've learned. Do you have a link to the filter you got? If you do, send it to me so I can look and see what you have and then I can better advise you on how to best use it. Please feel free to ask whatever else you may want to know--I'm happy to help!

Bob--Also, it is worth noting that polarizers have no effect when they are pointed directly at the sun. So, for sunrise and sunset they do not help you. They also take away 2 stops worth of light. Sometimes I'll put them on for sunrise and sunset and use it to my advantage because they allow me to prolong my exposure, which can be useful to blur certain objects to smooth out the water in a shot, which would be choppy if I used a faster shutter speed.

Bob--Neutral density filters and polarizers are unrelated. Polarizers act to "polarize" light, meaning they filter some out to make things more clear. They will remove some "haze" that you see in shots--they make the sky a deeper blue, clouds more distinct, and remove glares. Neutral density graduated filters are "neutral" meaning they do not change anything in the picture. All they do is hold back light in certain parts of the shot. So, let's say the sky is 2 stops brighter than the foreground in a shot. You will put on a ND grad filter which is completely clear at the bottom (so all the light gets through coming from the foreground), in the middle of the filter it is "graduated" meaning it gradually increases density. Then, finally, at the top of the filter, it is "denser" allowing less light through. So, if you shoot the shot with a 2 stop ND grad filter, you have subtracted 2 stops from the sky while not taking anything away from the foreground. Therefore, the exposure is equal and you get a good shot. If you have no filter, if you expose the sky correctly the foreground is too dark and if you expose the foreground correctly the sky will be burnt out from too much exposure. Do you follow me there? If you google "neutral density graduated filters" you can probably find some more in depth explanation and also some example pictures. Let me know where you are in understanding things.

I tell you...I just can't recognize good shots. I got some of my lowest ratings in months of my last few posts which I thought were great and then I post this, which I thought was a weak, borderline even postable shot and my ratings are way up...I just stink at recognizing what people will like. While that is bad, it probably means that my best shots are tucked away on DVDs waiting to be posted. :)

Thanks for the comments...glad some people like this shot. To be honest, I was kind of on the fence about even posting it.

 

Bob--This most definitely has ND filters. As a matter of fact, I think it has 3 stops worth of ND grads! I still shoot every composition without any filters but the more I shoot the more I find Vincent Tylor is right (as always), EVERY sunrise or sunset shot is better without an ND grad filter. If you want, I can try to posted the unfiltered shot I took of this composition so you can see the difference. I used the filter well here so you can't see any lines but if you think about how many stops are separating the sky and beach, given the fact that I have a well exposed sky and the sand has at least some detail, you can figure out that I had to use some sort of filter or blending. Let me know if you have more questions or if there is anything I can do to help you!

Any thoughts or comments are greatly appreciated!

Any thoughts or comments are greatly appreciated!

Thank you for your comments, Harry! To answer your question, yes, the tower is really tilted. I forget the number of degrees, but it is falling into the ocean. A stabilization project just started a few weeks ago to stabilize and restore this historic lighthouse. If you're interested, you can read about the lighthouse, it's stabilization/restoration, and the tilt at www.savethelight.org. Thanks again for your kind remarks!

Ashley Stone, July 09, 2007; 10:30 P.M.

 

You never stop getting better do you? This picture is beautiful! Impressed as always!

 

Bob Belanger, July 11, 2007; 09:22 P.M.

 

Tyler,

 

This is the balance I was talking about...

 

Thanks for taking the time to review some of my shots. I am relatively new to PN and I'm also new to DSLR. So, my goal is to get as much input from others on this site as I can. You certainly have a nice protfolio and I really appreciate your input. Thanks for your time. Cheers.

 

Tyler Wind, July 11, 2007; 10:45 P.M. (edit | delete)

 

Thanks Bob! I have many compositions similar to this one so I'll go back and review them more critically. Thanks again for the input--definitely appreciated! I hope a few of my comments gave you some "food for thought." I find that even if I don't agree with a comment it is still helpful because it gets me thinking. Keep up the good work and I'll be back to review more of your shots soon--I hope you'll do the same for me!

 

Bob Belanger, July 11, 2007; 11:20 P.M.

 

Tyler,

 

I'll be back. I am interested in these types of shots. I am looking for filters at this time as well, so thanks for that tip. I will be taking some vacation time at Cape Cod later this summer. I'm already starting to think about some shots. Fortunately, on the "outer Cape", I can get sunrise and sunset shots over the ocean in the same day.

 

And keep the comments comming. I often times don't comment a reply on my shots, but I will try to keep a dialogue when it's topical. Since I'm still on the learning curve, many of the shots that you commented on were "practice" shots. For example the Beaver Pond sunset was practice for the Farm Island sunrises. These were shots I took at my mom's cabin on Moosehead lake. I still have lots to learn and I hope to see more shots like yours for inspiration. Best Regards

 

Any thoughts or comments are greatly appreciated!

Gary...I can already see from today's postings alone that your true strength is composition. This as well as your composition on the bridge are near flawless (especially the bridge). I like this shot very much as well. Keep up the good work...I'm at the hospital operating all day today but I will be by to check out your portfolio because I'm certain I will learn much from just viewing your work.

Gary--This is WAY underappreciated in the ratings! I love this shot and your night twist on things is great. I admit that I'm a sucker for these old iron truss, cantilever bridges. If you're interested, I have Charleston, SC's old bridges of this type in my "Charleston" folder. Unfortunately they tore them down last year, which I think was a shame. Anyway, I have enjoyed this shot more than any other today and thank you for sharing it with us. Very good night/low light work--well done my friend! I'll be by to your portfolio soon (as I'm sure you must have many other great shots I can enjoy and learn from as well) and hope you'll do the same for me and my shots!

 

PS--Where is this bridge?

Ashley Stone, July 09, 2007; 10:31 P.M.

 

WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOW! I want this! BEAUTIFUL...I dont even think that describes it!

 

Any thoughts or comments are greatly appreciated!

Any thoughts or comments are greatly appreciated!

JK--You hit the nail on the head with many of the thoughts I've had with this shot. I do like the lighthouse/horizon higher in the shot. When I was shooting, I saw the cloud divisions and figured I'd include them in most compositions and crop later. As you know, I like colorful skies to it breaks my heart to crop out the layers of color in the sky but I believe you are right--it is a better composition that way. I have a crop exactly how you stated which I thought I posted but just realized I did not--I'll get it posted. I also agree about the vegetation to the right...I also cropped that out in the other version. I'll get it posted so please check back in a day or two (I'm on call all night tonight and will work until mid-day tomorrow then sleep). I'll definitely be by to rate your photos...ratings don't tell you much BUT, it does keep your picture visible on top rated photos which gives you exposure and gets more comments. Posting for ratings is good as long as you don't expect objective ratings. Take care buddy!

Bob--Yes, I have been working on this shot and the lighting for months now. I go out about 15 minutes before the sun goes down and leave about 45 minutes to an hour after it's gone. Even then, the best shot are generally my last ones. I like that time because you can get a good mix of natural and artificial light. I have found that there is a window of only a few minutes when your exposure will come out correctly in regards to the natural and artificial light. I honestly don't think it's possible to look at a scene and pick the exact moment. I think the only way is my method--start shooting when you know it's too early and don't stop until you know it's too late. Another tip I got from my mentor was keep shooting until all color is gone--you'd be surprised how many of my best shots were taken as the "one last click" before I left a sunset! Those multiple minute exposures allow the camera to see color that we can't see. I believe this shot was about 30 seconds but taken at ISO 400. I turned up the ISO for 2 reasons: 1) I wanted to get more frames shot so was willing to make that compromise in return for having more room for error and miscalculation (I like to shoot a variety of compositions, with a variety of filters, in a variety of positions, all with bracketing...so, keeping moving and getting a decent number of shots instrumental to my success). The second reason is when I was shooting longer exposures (a minute or so) the clouds were moving so much that I didn't really care for their effect. So, I sped up the ISO to decrease my shutter speed and make the clouds more distinct. Thanks for your comments!

Very basic composition, but a very nice shot! I like your depth of field here. Maybe a little more exposure to get a tad more detail in the birds but that's about it. Great work!

Just as another opinion, I kind of think this shot may be better without the reflections on the water. In my (humble) opinion, I feel the mallard gets lost in them. A polarizer would probably make the duck POP out a bit more, this is assuming your goal was to highlight this guy and not make him blend in. It would also saturate the colors on this bird a bit more. But, I know from experience this is easier said than done...I've shot this same bird with the same result. I think if you cut some glare with a polarizer you would see the ducks legs and make it more of a "portrait" of the duck, but that's just one little opinion. People like Steve obviously feel the opposite way so take it with a grain of salt. As with your other shots though, great composition. You really do a wonderful job of framing and composing...you have quite a talent for that!

A great composition with really, really tough lighting. I'm no post processing expert, but if you could use "dynamic range increase" to darken the highlights slightly and get a tad more detail in the shadows I think this would be even better. Also, I can't tell for sure, but it looks like the foreground may be just a tad bit out of focus. I'm no expert at this either, but I know the best shots of this nature usually are done with a hyperfocal distance so the foreground is tack sharp. Once again though, overall a great shot and a truly wonderful composition...the winding of the path is terrific!

Bob--Very nice shot! I like your composition a lot. A few "food for thought items" (not necessarily "better," just different). I think you need a ND grad filter or multiple exposures and photoshop blending for this. One of the best photographers on photo.net told me EVERY sunset shot needs an ND grad filter. I didn't believe him at first, but have come to see his point now that I have some. Secondly, it is a little dark on the left. Again, an ND grad, especially if you try angling it, would probably even out the exposure a bit. Overall though, a wonderful shot!

Bob--No offense taken at all! I greatly appreciate your time and thoughts. Regardless of your experience, you have a valuable opinion that I'm sure is shared by many other objective people. I understand what you are saying about the sand. I was kind of thinking of making this one of the classic shots where a trail leads your eye to a main subject but this isn't turning out like I picture it in my head. I think it's because of the focal length. I wondered for a year how people took those pictures until I got my wide angle lens. Suddenly, I saw how they obtained a strong foreground and the "path" through the picture effect. I think I'm too close to the sand for the viewer to tell that it is a path...it sort of looks like a beach instead of a winding path. Please check out the other crops and compositions that I posted in the same folder from this shooting session. I have many other frames that differ as well. Please let me know if you see anything that is closer to the composition you have in mind. I shoot a ton of frames when I get to a spot so I have many, many compositions. I think this may just be a tough setting for the shot I have in mind because of the distance the lighthouse is away. However, I'm sure there are many pleasing compositions that can be shot and I appreciate your help in identifying them! Thanks for your thoughts and opinions...I have to do some reading for surgery tomorrow now but I will certainly stop by your portfolio and do my best to return the favor when I have a spare minute.

Hey Bob...thanks for your comments! I appreciate your input. When you say "come in closer" do you mean zoom in or walk up closer to the sea oats? I elected this focal length and distance because I was going for a "lead your eye down the trail to the lighthouse" wide angle type appeal while at the same time trying to have a long enough focal length that the lighthouse isn't too small. It is a tough goal since the lighthouse it about 1/3 of a mile from me where I am. About the horizon...I think you may be right, there could be a slight tilt. However, be careful judging things by this lighthouse, it REALLY is tilted several degrees! It is falling into the sea, which is why they just started stabilization of this historic structure last week. If you get this, please clarify if you think I should move closer to the sea oats or just zoom in more--I am very interested in your composition ideas. Thanks again for your input.