C&C: Basque Country and Zaragoza (Spain)

[franct]

Hi all!

I would like to share some pictures of my trip to Basque Country and Zaragoza last January. On my website you can see many more pictures of the trip:

https://francescobonino.smugmug.com/Travels/Euskadi/

All the pictures have been taken with Sony A7 II, Sony-Zeiss 16-35 f/4 and Tamron 28-75 f/2.8

C&C are welcome!


Foggy night in Zaragoza


Rural landscape of Basque Country


Stairway to San Juan de Gaztelugatxe


Maman spider and Guggenheim Museum


Nervion River in Bilbao

--
My website: https://francescobonino.smugmug.com/
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/frascoboni
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/francesco.bonino

 

[sabrina81]

The thumbnails look pretty, but the files are so large, I gave up after viewing the first one at original size (48 seconds to load). You could make it easier on viewers by outputting at a lower quality level. Example: Your first image is 16.8 MB. That could be saved at 2.9 MB without sacrificing image quality or resolution.

What Quality You Should Export Your JPEGs in Lightroom and Photoshop

 

[joeletx]

I think it is the third picture, where Jon Snow met Daenerys for the first time.

 

[lilBuddha]

franct wrote:

All below are opinions and not at all meant to imply you do not take nice images.

Foggy night in Zaragoza

I really like this one! The warm glow, the composition is solid, though I go back and forth on the flash of colour at the tram stop. I do like it, but it sort of takes the image off-balance. Still, that is opinion and the image is quite nice.

Lovely green hills, but naught more than a documentation shot, in my eyes.

Stairway to San Juan de Gaztelugatxe

Nice strong composition. good balance of detail and strong, broad areas (the water). The thrust of the image down one promontory to the next and then to the sun allow the eye to wander without being lost.

Maman spider and Guggenheim Museum

I like the colour, but it is an issue. The spider, being the same colour and values as the museum, becomes clutter. That shot with only the spider or the museum would be brilliant. The position of the spider's body at a point of complexity in the building's architecture make that a bit of a mess and hard to distinguish on thing from the other.

Not that this is a bad image.

Nervion River in Bilbao

Nice angle, but it sparks nothing in me other than it being a shot documenting what you saw.

 

[franct]

Thanks for your comments!

@sabrina81: I thought that the system automatically downsize the images. Next time I will upload files with lower quality level

@lilBuddha: when I uploaded my pictures and asking C&C, I was expect exactly an answer like your. What you write is interesting and insightful. Perhaps the opinion I don't completly agree is about the forth images, because I would like exactly to mix the spider sculpture with Guggenheim Museum and I dont't think is a mess. Anyway, thank you for your comments!

 

[sabrina81]

Thanks for your comments!

@sabrina81: I thought that the system automatically downsize the images. Next time I will upload files with lower quality level

That would help. Image size isn't the problem; file size is the problem. That video I linked to explains about quality levels. In Photoshop level 8 will preserve image quality and keep size down. I don't have LR, but I think a level of 75 to 80% will do the same.

 

[lilBuddha]

Thanks for your comments!

@sabrina81: I thought that the system automatically downsize the images. Next time I will upload files with lower quality level

@lilBuddha: when I uploaded my pictures and asking C&C, I was expect exactly an answer like your. What you write is interesting and insightful.

Perhaps the opinion I don't completly agree is about the forth images, because I would like exactly to mix the spider sculpture with Guggenheim Museum and I dont't think is a mess.

One wonderful thing in creating and viewing images is that we all have different ways of looking at things.

Anyway, thank you for your comments!

No worries

 

[Lenshoodie]

Hi Francesco,

I have to agree with lilBuddha about your images. The stairway is the outstanding picture of your set. The Spider picture is the most difficult to C&C. It is very complicated where you've placed Maman's body and the complicated architecture of the museum - you've said you intended it. Clearly you've put some effort into this, and it's nice to see that you used a tripod and low ISO, but I found that I was peering into the centre trying to distinguish the spider from the museum. Even at a larger size it was not clear. I see what you were trying to do, but I don't think it works here. Perhaps lighting the spider from the back with flashes during the exposure to give a rim light would have separated the two parts?

 

[franct]

but I found that I was peering into the centre trying to distinguish the spider from the museum. Even at a larger size it was not clear. I see what you were trying to do, but I don't think it works here.

Thanks Lenshoodie. Your comment and the one from lilBuddha are very interesting, focusing in something - the difficult to distinguish the spider from the museum - that I haven't considered carefully.

 

[Reilly Diefenbach]

Thanks for your comments!

@sabrina81: I thought that the system automatically downsize the images. Next time I will upload files with lower quality level

@lilBuddha: when I uploaded my pictures and asking C&C, I was expect exactly an answer like your. What you write is interesting and insightful. Perhaps the opinion I don't completly agree is about the forth images, because I would like exactly to mix the spider sculpture with Guggenheim Museum and I dont't think is a mess. Anyway, thank you for your comments!

Nice job and not overprocessed, thanks. Also, this is the landscape forum where it is much appreciated to see the full size jpg. Downsizing abajo!

 

[sabrina81]

Thanks for your comments!

@sabrina81: I thought that the system automatically downsize the images. Next time I will upload files with lower quality level

@lilBuddha: when I uploaded my pictures and asking C&C, I was expect exactly an answer like your. What you write is interesting and insightful. Perhaps the opinion I don't completly agree is about the forth images, because I would like exactly to mix the spider sculpture with Guggenheim Museum and I dont't think is a mess. Anyway, thank you for your comments!

Nice job and not overprocessed, thanks. Also, this is the landscape forum where it is much appreciated to see the full size jpg. Downsizing abajo!

You do understand that I'm not talking about downsizing the image ... don't you?

 

[Selene]

I really like the third shot. It is an interesting place, and you captured it nicely.

 

[Reilly Diefenbach]

Thanks for your comments!

@sabrina81: I thought that the system automatically downsize the images. Next time I will upload files with lower quality level

@lilBuddha: when I uploaded my pictures and asking C&C, I was expect exactly an answer like your. What you write is interesting and insightful. Perhaps the opinion I don't completly agree is about the forth images, because I would like exactly to mix the spider sculpture with Guggenheim Museum and I dont't think is a mess. Anyway, thank you for your comments!

Nice job and not overprocessed, thanks. Also, this is the landscape forum where it is much appreciated to see the full size jpg. Downsizing abajo!

You do understand that I'm not talking about downsizing the image ... don't you?

Lowering quality also affects the picture.

 

[sabrina81]

Thanks for your comments!

@sabrina81: I thought that the system automatically downsize the images. Next time I will upload files with lower quality level

@lilBuddha: when I uploaded my pictures and asking C&C, I was expect exactly an answer like your. What you write is interesting and insightful. Perhaps the opinion I don't completly agree is about the forth images, because I would like exactly to mix the spider sculpture with Guggenheim Museum and I dont't think is a mess. Anyway, thank you for your comments!

Nice job and not overprocessed, thanks. Also, this is the landscape forum where it is much appreciated to see the full size jpg. Downsizing abajo!

You do understand that I'm not talking about downsizing the image ... don't you?

Lowering quality also affects the picture.

Show me a significant (noticeable) qualitative difference:




As originally posted, 16.8 MB




Lower quality level, 2.86 MB

 

[Reilly Diefenbach]

Thanks for your comments!

@sabrina81: I thought that the system automatically downsize the images. Next time I will upload files with lower quality level

@lilBuddha: when I uploaded my pictures and asking C&C, I was expect exactly an answer like your. What you write is interesting and insightful. Perhaps the opinion I don't completly agree is about the forth images, because I would like exactly to mix the spider sculpture with Guggenheim Museum and I dont't think is a mess. Anyway, thank you for your comments!

Nice job and not overprocessed, thanks. Also, this is the landscape forum where it is much appreciated to see the full size jpg. Downsizing abajo!

You do understand that I'm not talking about downsizing the image ... don't you?

Lowering quality also affects the picture.

Show me a significant (noticeable) qualitative difference:


As originally posted, 16.8 MB


Lower quality level, 2.86 MB

Way too dark, not a good candidate. Here's a better one:




80% vs 100%

 

[sabrina81]

Way too dark, not a good candidate.

OK, here's a bright one. SHOW me a significant (noticeable) difference in image quality:




As originally posted, Photoshop level 12, 26.8 MB




Photoshop level 8, 7.88 MB

 

[Reilly Diefenbach]

Way too dark, not a good candidate.

OK, here's a bright one. SHOW me a significant (noticeable) difference in image quality:


As originally posted, Photoshop level 12, 26.8 MB


Photoshop level 8, 7.88 MB

Sorry to sidetrack this nice thread.

Sabrina, If you're happy with down res, fine. The 80% jpg I put up exported from LR simply doesn't cut it compared to the full res version, and I'm certainly not going to consider anyone else's jpgs definitive. 80% can and does exhibit posterization on close inspection on some pictures. As a landscape photographer, I want always to put up 100% when possible because that is how I roll. Best foot forward and all that.

The DPR sample galleries always have full size, full res jpgs, and I would never hold myself to a lower standard.

 

[sabrina81]

Sabrina, If you're happy with down res, fine.

So you can't SHOW any loss of image quality in those two versions of the same image. I didn't think you could. And I'm reasonably sure that no one else can see any difference in image quality. That was my point from the start, and nothing you've said has shown it to be mistaken. And by the way, it isn't "down res." Resolution of both images is exactly the same. It's only a reduction in the quality level at which the image is saved. And that reduction doesn't reduce image quality.

The DPR sample galleries always have full size, full res jpgs,

Yes, the dpr sample images that accompany camera reviews are always full size/full res jpegs. But they are certainly not saved at the maximum quality level. A dpr sample image with the same dimensions as the OP's images in this thread has a file size of 7 or 8 MB, which means it was probably at about quality level 8 in Photoshop. So my point stands: When posting images in forums, you can get excellent image quality without saving at maximum quality levels and producing ridiculously huge file sizes.

 

[poppyjk]

Sabrina, If you're happy with down res, fine.

So you can't SHOW any loss of image quality in those two versions of the same image. I didn't think you could. And I'm reasonably sure that no one else can see any difference in image quality. That was my point from the start, and nothing you've said has shown it to be mistaken. And by the way, it isn't "down res." Resolution of both images is exactly the same. It's only a reduction in the quality level at which the image is saved. And that reduction doesn't reduce image quality.

The DPR sample galleries always have full size, full res jpgs,

Yes, the dpr sample images that accompany camera reviews are always full size/full res jpegs. But they are certainly not saved at the maximum quality level. A dpr sample image with the same dimensions as the OP's images in this thread has a file size of 7 or 8 MB, which means it was probably at about quality level 8 in Photoshop. So my point stands: When posting images in forums, you can get excellent image quality without saving at maximum quality levels and producing ridiculously huge file sizes.

In the samples you posted, both night city scene and daytime landscape shots, the more highly compressed versions have more compression artifact grain which reduces contrast, color gradation and detail.

The detail of the added compression grain is visible at 100% on a wide gamut calibrated 4K monitor. The overall effect of the grain on the 'fit to window' size is a slight haze which reduces contrast, color gradation and detail.

You either see it or you don't. You either care about the difference or you don't. If your equipment is not capable of presenting the difference, it will not matter to you. But the added compression artifacts are present. I can see the difference and prefer the less compressed photos. Reilly's posted example is just another more obvious case of the compression artifact effect.

I upgraded my internet connection speed to more quickly download the increasing number of beautiful large uncompressed files. You claim the first OP photo took a burdensome 48 seconds to load on your system. It took less than 5 seconds on my system.

--
"Not all who wander are lost." —J.R.R. Tolkien

 

[gavin]

I like your framing on the steps down to the sea