[SI] Dusk or Dawn is available mid day!

Bruce wrote:
mark as ignored

Because there is obviously zero relevance, right?

Pete A wrote:
Paul Furman
Superb. You didn't need the EXIF info - that lens stamps its hallmark on
its images.

fellow-180mm-f/2.8mm-shooter-hug.mov :-)


Crop suggestions: remove left edge to eliminate the
distracting bright line and similarly for the top (above the two people
mid-left). Remove the dark object to the right of bottom-centre.

That's his clown-shoe toe!

:-)

I'll comment more later... thanks!

On 9/16/2011 11:36 PM, tony cooper wrote:
On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 21:12:02 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

On 9/16/2011 4:09 PM, tony cooper wrote:
On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 13:47:18 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

Absolutely no disrespect to any of you, I've learnt a heck of a lot more
useful stuff from local art groups, galleries, self-employed pro.
photographers, and the feature editors of publications than I've ever
learnt from camera clubs

Depends on the club.
Generally, camera clubs are a good place to learn the basics. CC
competition "standards" are more craft than art. But one must understand
the rules before one can break them successfully.


Every camera club is different, but my time has been well-spent
attending the meetings. I've learned more about what *not* to do than
what I should do.

The critiques bring out the flaws more than they compliment the good
aspects. When you see how a photograph can be improved by cropping,
you learn not include the extraneous in the next submission. In
general, you learn *why* a particular photograph isn't as pleasing as
you think it should be or why the judges aren't pleased with it.

We try to emphasize the positive.

Who "we"? Our critiques are from at least one, if not two, non-member
judges and one or two member judges. The images are graded without
the grader knowing who shot the image.

All the judges usually (but not always) compliment the image one way
or the other, but then they say why it was a 7 instead of a 10.


While we have competitions using outside judges, we also have critiques
by members, which are not scored as competitions.





I will pass on one tip I learned for quickly setting a gray point. It
takes longer to read, than do:
Duplicate the base layer;
blur it: filter! blur ! average;
create a curve adjustment layer'
click on the center eye dropper and touch it to the blurred layer. It
will turn 18% gray'

delete the blurred layer and the base image will reflect the gray point
setting;
then set your black and white points.
Note: this also works well with a levels adjustment layer.



--
Peter

On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 18:40:58 -0400, Bowser wrote:
: The Dusk or Dawn gallery is posted, and it's a very healthy gallery,
: too. Some nice shots in there. Take a look, and offer a friendly
: critique, if you dare.
:
: http://www.pbase.com/shootin/duskdawn

Well, it's been longer than I can remember since I've contributed extensive
comments, so I guess it's my turn to step up to the plate.

Bowser 1
This is a pretty picture, and Bowser is careful with the horizon, the
importance of which in pictures involving reflections is often overlooked. I
wish, though, that he had shifted his aim a bit to the left; the reflection of
the sunset on the water at the left edge seems truncated.

Bowser 2
Very nice. The composition works, and the lighting evokes sunset in an
appealingly subtle way.

Bowser 3
A nice homey scene to a Bay Stater like me. We've got prettier bridges and
more photogenic sites, but this works as a photographic contribution to the
"Ashcan School" (of which more later). The backlighting makes various
elements, notably the left end of the bridge, look murky, but the Mandate is
what it is.

Irwell
This one isn't my thing, partly because I can't really figure out what or
where it is. But the lighting is sort of nice, and the time of day is correct.
This is a picture (there are several in this exhibit) that is not helped by
the black background. Shoot-In regulars soon discover the importance of making
the background work for, not against, them …

Irwell 2
… as in this one, where the black background seems to complement the picture.
Nice composition and lighting. The grass looks oversharpened, but in this case
the technique seems to work.

Irwell 3
Nothing grabs my attention in this picture except the car and its shadow,
which I think it would have been better off without.

EricS
It's an OK scene, if a bit of a cliché, and like Bowser, he got the
reflections right. The foreground foliage (also a cliché, but I've used it
myself) borders on being too intrusive, but notice how well it works with the
black background.

PeterA 1
The more I look at this, the less I dislike it, but my eyes still keep trying
to get the water in focus. I guess it doesn't quite work for me, although it
incorporates some intriguing colors. (How much of the color is genuine?)

PeterA 2
The subject matter I can take or leave, but the photographer's meticulous
attention to the composition makes this picture work. Every element is exactly
where it ought to be. It's technically correct too, under difficult
conditions.

PeterA 3
I don't like this one as well. The foreground boats are hard to pick up, and
there's too much glare in the sky. More broadly, it's hard to tell what the
actual subject is.

BobCoe 1
It's an understatement to say that this one hasn't been a hit with the SI
reviewers. But I was on my way to Philadelphia to visit my daughter; my wife
already had two of her submissions in the camera; and I was running out of
ideas. (Running out? Hell, I hadn't had one yet.) So I took what I could get.
Put it down as my contribution to the Ashcan School (about which there's an
interesting article in this month's "American Artist"). It's not an Edward
Hopper, but it'll have to do.

BobCoe 2
I think this one's pretty good, although I guess you have to understand the
location (indoors in a giant greenhouse) and lighting (sunset) to see the
connection to the Mandate. Admittedly the subject lacks context, and the
technique isn't going to put it into any plant guides.

BobCoe 3
It took a lot of jacking up the shadows to make this one presentable, and I
almost didn't include it. (Martha wanted me to submit my picture of the
reflecting pool, which she thought was better than hers; but I thought hers
was better and talked her into submitting it instead.) But this one does meet
the mandate, and the dwindling light wasn't being kind to the scenery outside.
So in it went.

MarthaCoe 1
Somebody called this one overexposed, and the point was well taken. I went
back and looked, and I had to drop the exposure half a stop to get rid of the
"blown highlights" alert. It's my fault; I was the last to monkey with it,
cloning out an electrical wire that cut across the top, and I should have
noticed. Somebody also said it would have been better with the lights off.
Trust me, it wouldn't. I see that building almost every day, and it would have
been way too dull without the lights.

MarthaCoe 2
I told Martha this picture wouldn't work, because she had left her telephoto
lens at home that day. I was wrong; the lens she used was fine for the job.

MarthaCoe 3
Someone suggested bleaching the cyan out of the roof. (I forget exactly why;
maybe he thought it looked artificial.) But you'd have to take it out of the
pool too, and it would have destroyed the effect of the blue light from the
sky on the left side of the roof beside the orange light from the sunset on
the right.

EricS 2
The sunset and the pool work reasonably well together, but the black
background squeezes this picture almost into oblivion. Some pictures just
can't be displayed on Pbase with an artificial border, and this is one of
them.

EricS 3
A classic example of being in the right place at the right time. Without the
foreground reflection, which may have lasted all of thirty seconds, this is
just another mediocre sunset picture. (Some may say it is anyway, but I like
it.) Depending on how you wanted to frame it, you could crop some off the left
without doing any violence to the composition.

TimConway
I like this, particularly the colors on the low-hanging clouds. The foreground
foliage doesn't do it much good, though - particularly the weeds near the
waterline.

Paul-Furman
The overtruncation at the bottom ruins what would otherwise have been a very
well executed picture.

DanP
I have a hard time seeing why this is a keeper. The photographer, sitting in
the co-pilot's seat, tried to grabshoot a nice sunset, but accidentally used a
slow shutter speed. Or am I missing something?

DanP 2
Good sunset pictures are either easy or impossible, depending on whether
you're there or not. This is a good sunset picture. I'd have been tempted to
hack down that bush, and I might take a little off the top; but otherwise it's
fine as it stands.

Otter
There are a lot of competing elements in this picture, but they work pretty
well together. I guess my only quibble is the brightness of the light in the
upper left corner. Did you experiment with toning it down a little?

SavageDuck 1
Very nice, especially the unusual cloud formation; you'd need a meteorologist
to explain that, I guess. How did you get such a bright foreground? The Exif
says you didn't use flash.

SavageDuck 2
This one doesn't move me. I see the point, but it's just too bland.

SavageDuck 3
Another picture with very interesting lighting. As I recall, one or two
reviewers thought the fog was too dominant; I don't.

AlanB
It's OK, but the bottom half comes off as murky and boring. Pbase's black
background offers no assistance.

AlanB 2
Again OK, but you let the Hasselblad dictate the aspect ratio, and it looks
cramped. I'd rather see more of the barge (or pier, or whatever it is) or none
of it.

PeterChant 1
This would probably be a good picture on a light-to-medium gray background (or
if the foreground figures were just a tad brighter). The black background
swallows it.

PeterChant 2
Nice capture; hard to see how to improve it. Well, maybe I'd have jacked the
shadows a little.

PeterNewman
Nice classic lighthouse, with excellent lighting. It's a little too truncated
at the top, but that can't be helped. But here's something you can do: The
fragment of the top roof contributes little and makes the picture look
truncated on the right. Clone it out, along with the barely visible edge of
the upper-story wall. BTW, at that time of day, why wasn't the light turned
on?

PeterNewman 2
I guess it's dusk if you say it is, but one sure can't see that - or much of
anything else. It's not a picture I would have gone to the trouble to make;
but if you're into abstracts, I think it works pretty well.

PeterNewman 3
Another picture I wouldn't have bothered to take and process. And unlike the
previous one, it isn't particularly attractive. It might work as a CD album
cover or something. Or send it to one of those Brooklyn galleries that like
garish modern.

Bob (who agrees with those who thought this was a good Shoot-In)

On Sat, 17 Sep 2011 11:58:15 -0400, Robert Coe wrote:
: On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 18:40:58 -0400, Bowser wrote:
: : The Dusk or Dawn gallery is posted, and it's a very healthy gallery,
: : too. Some nice shots in there. Take a look, and offer a friendly
: : critique, if you dare.
: :
: : http://www.pbase.com/shootin/duskdawn
:
: Well, it's been longer than I can remember since I've contributed extensive
: comments, so I guess it's my turn to step up to the plate.
: ...
: EricS 2
: The sunset and the pool work reasonably well together, but the black
: background squeezes this picture almost into oblivion. Some pictures just
: can't be displayed on Pbase with an artificial border, and this is one of
: them.

I meant, of course, to say "*without* an artificial border". Damn.

Bob

On 2011-09-17 08:58:15 -0700, Robert Coe said:

On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 18:40:58 -0400, Bowser wrote:
: The Dusk or Dawn gallery is posted, and it's a very healthy gallery,
: too. Some nice shots in there. Take a look, and offer a friendly
: critique, if you dare.
:
: http://www.pbase.com/shootin/duskdawn

Well, it's been longer than I can remember since I've contributed extensive
comments, so I guess it's my turn to step up to the plate.

Comments always appreciated.



SavageDuck 1
Very nice, especially the unusual cloud formation; you'd need a meteorologist
to explain that, I guess. How did you get such a bright foreground? The Exif
says you didn't use flash.

Thanks.
As to the strange cloud formation, it isn't cloud at all. What it is,
are dissipating aircraft vapor traiIs along with the clouds.
Now to the foreground, I cheated. It is a 5 exposure HDR. Without that
it would have been a stereotypical Sunset with a silhouette foreground.
I wanted something different.
Here is what you would have got otherwise.
http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/DNC_9531w.jpg


SavageDuck 2
This one doesn't move me. I see the point, but it's just too bland.

I had been trying to get a decent dawn shot for several days, but the
light always seemed too dull and as you stated "bland". Finally on that
morning I had an idea of capturing one of the oil pumps doing its work
in the morning light and I got trapped in that frustrating morning
river fog. So.......


SavageDuck 3
Another picture with very interesting lighting. As I recall, one or two
reviewers thought the fog was too dominant; I don't.

The fog was there making an incredible light diffuser at that moment,
and the arc of the surf line fading into the fog just made the the
whole thing work at the instant I hit the shutter. I am planning to
take a drive over the hill to the coast to make a comparable shot in
clear air, in the next few days.


Bob (who agrees with those who thought this was a good Shoot-In)

Once more thanks for the comments. Feed back, positive, or negative is
always interesting and can only lead to finding someway to improve the
final result.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On Sat, 17 Sep 2011 09:29:53 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

On 9/16/2011 11:36 PM, tony cooper wrote:
On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 21:12:02 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

On 9/16/2011 4:09 PM, tony cooper wrote:
On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 13:47:18 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

Absolutely no disrespect to any of you, I've learnt a heck of a lot more
useful stuff from local art groups, galleries, self-employed pro.
photographers, and the feature editors of publications than I've ever
learnt from camera clubs

Depends on the club.
Generally, camera clubs are a good place to learn the basics. CC
competition "standards" are more craft than art. But one must understand
the rules before one can break them successfully.


Every camera club is different, but my time has been well-spent
attending the meetings. I've learned more about what *not* to do than
what I should do.

The critiques bring out the flaws more than they compliment the good
aspects. When you see how a photograph can be improved by cropping,
you learn not include the extraneous in the next submission. In
general, you learn *why* a particular photograph isn't as pleasing as
you think it should be or why the judges aren't pleased with it.

We try to emphasize the positive.

Who "we"? Our critiques are from at least one, if not two, non-member
judges and one or two member judges. The images are graded without
the grader knowing who shot the image.

All the judges usually (but not always) compliment the image one way
or the other, but then they say why it was a 7 instead of a 10.


While we have competitions using outside judges, we also have critiques
by members, which are not scored as competitions.

I think it's a little different when you have member-to-member
critiques on a face-to-face basis. Members tend to be more
complimentary and more gentle in critiquing in that situation.

Our critiques are by judges only, and the judges don't know whose
photo it is.



--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

On 2011-09-14 13:36 , Savageduck wrote:

#3; Down at the coast at San Simeon State Beach, shot from the pier,
with the light filtered through very thick marine layer fog.

That last one is probably my fav. out of this SI. The pattern of the
foam within a near perfect curving band disappearing into the fog is
very interesting. Draws the eye around. Limited color palette enhances
the image.

Also interesting is the scale effect. At a quick glance one might
assume that the photographer is standing in the surf ... but then I see
the couple walking and the image gets a fresh look.

AlanB:
old; Nice filtered light through the clouds, with the minutes before
dark capturing the vastness of that expanse across the valley.

Thanks. That was the idea.

#2; Nice, interesting color and reflections on the water. I know this is
Ektachrome, but did you also use any other filters?

No. Over the course of 30 minutes the colors changed very dramatically.
A sharply graded 1 stop grad over the top, and extend the exposure by
a stop would have brightened the bottom up... didn't think to do so.

That shot is one of the most saturated on the roll.

--
gmail originated posts filtered due to spam.

On 2011-09-16 10:01 , tony cooper wrote:

I don't understand Alan's "Fairplay" view. Awful lot of uninteresting
foreground.

I took it that way to suggest the evening vista. While you (plural) may
not appreciate this approach, it does (somewhat represent) the scene
with its pool of light in the corner and some sky reflection off of the
meandering river (would have been nice to have enough elevation to
capture the meander more in full - alas).

Interesting color in the red shot.

I think so.

--
gmail originated posts filtered due to spam.

On 9/17/2011 11:58 AM, Robert Coe wrote:


snip

PeterNewman
Nice classic lighthouse, with excellent lighting. It's a little too truncated
at the top, but that can't be helped. But here's something you can do: The
fragment of the top roof contributes little and makes the picture look
truncated on the right. Clone it out, along with the barely visible edge of
the upper-story wall. BTW, at that time of day, why wasn't the light turned
on?


thanks, I realized the truncation problem after submission.

PeterNewman 2
I guess it's dusk if you say it is, but one sure can't see that - or much of
anything else. It's not a picture I would have gone to the trouble to make;
but if you're into abstracts, I think it works pretty well.


Yes, it was taken at dusk. The sausage & peppers were in a street
vendor's cart, and the moon was just there. I've been playing with the
polar coordinates filter. Some shots are interesting, most are junk.


PeterNewman 3
Another picture I wouldn't have bothered to take and process. And unlike the
previous one, it isn't particularly attractive. It might work as a CD album
cover or something. Or send it to one of those Brooklyn galleries that like
garish modern.


You made an interesting comment. That particular area is an art colony
in a transition towards gentrification. One of the local galleries has
requested images. However, I was trying not to overdo the effect. I am
playing with bringing the sky back to normal.

Bob (who agrees with those who thought this was a good Shoot-In)


--
Peter