Do you know what % of your shots are with various FL's

Started 5 months ago | Discussions thread
SilvanBromide Senior Member • Posts: 2,613
Re: Do you know what % of your shots are with various FL's
2

terryreid wrote:

SilvanBromide wrote:

terryreid wrote:

SilvanBromide wrote:

terryreid wrote:

I pulled this up tonight on 500px...

So, Terry... Where can we view this 500px collection of yours? ; )

It sounds like you are making fun of me I hope not.

Not my intention at all Terry. Just noticed that your the stats you posted indicated a decent sized body of work, but was not aware of having seen a link to it, so I thought I'd be 'cheeky' and ask. Glad I did.

What program do you use for HDR I see you use it a lot

I have mostly used LR, C1 and PS. These days I am doing most light adjustments in C1 but at least 2/3rds of the images on my 500px page were done in LR.

I tried on a couple of these one or two it turned out well like the Red Ferrari 288 GTO but the orange Koenisegg not so much. It was a poor capture but a $4.1M one off car so I posted it for my car buddies.

To my mind, it helps to keep some of the deepest shadows (i.e. have them approaching black), and to have enough highlight tones to balance at the other end of the tonal range. Otherwise things can end up looking somewhat flattened and unnatural - but of course it depends on what you're going for.

https://500px.com/trstahly

I am an amateur enthusiast who got back into photography two years ago after a 30 year absence and used PS and raw editor. Going to learn LR & C1 in the near future.

I appreciated having a look over your pics. Some very nice shots there. I liked "Heading out to Fish off Fort Lauderdale" and "Winwood Walls in Miami" in particular. And the "Child Climbing French Canyon" shot and "Sunset the Golden Hour" also caught my eye, among others.

I have taken several hundred thousand photos in the mean time with RX100's and basic Sony SLR's but nothing serious other than my equipment we sell at my company and mainly trips, events with good framing and composition but thats about all. Use to use Nikormats in 1971 then F3, 4 & 5 and then lost interest.

When I found out what kind of IQ was available a few years back I fell in love with this hobby again.

Know what you mean. The detail that comes back from the current crop of Sony sensors is a joy, and they're an inspiration really...

I would welcome constructive criticism and tips on what I should work on etc. Most of these are with minimal PP but I am determined to learn how to be very proficient with LR & C1 and just set up a studio where I will be tethering to C1.

I think sometimes focusing on the 'meaning' of the visual elements can distract us from considering the effect of the picture as an image, FWIW. Sometimes looking at composition as a somewhat abstract pattern of shapes and colors can be a good way to see past distractions. For example, in your second "Zoolights Lincoln Park Zoo" image, you've centered (vertically) the dragon lights and their reflection - natural enough to see those as the 'point of interest'. But in fact half the magic of the pic is the improbable contrast of the dragon and the sky and the excitement of the color transition between the two. To my eyes, having more sky and less water would have given you a better balance between the 'pools of colour' (and would incidentally give you an approximate 'rule of thirds' composition in the vertical plane made up of sky/trees&dragon/water.

Take all that for what it is or isn't worth - and we're somewhat at a tangent to your thread topic. But always happy to exchange notes about image making. : )

Meanwhile, getting into PP does open up a lot more scope for crafting the outcome. It's a deep rabbit hole, but I'm sure you'll enjoy exploring it. : )

Thanks and you're right on the Zoolights pic. I do this with little training or thought more from my eye and gut and frame things the way I like them. I try and to use the rule of thirds since I started 45 yrs ago and a couple other things. I am often surprised how nice some images come out that I maybe didn't expect as much from and conversley often disappointed in what I thought at the time was the pic of all timeLOL. But as I gain more experience I pretty much know I got a good shot more of the time.

I went back to the original and cropped it the best I could I was trying to keep the reflection in the pond in play but clipped it some in my re edit. It was so cold my fingers were numb that evening so I was taking pics between warming up my fingers.

Funny I ike the pic of the kid in the canyon too but you are the first to even mention it I was always puzzled on why nobody else likes the capture. I feel it really shows off the sharpness and pop of the 100STF and was captured a moment with the little boys concentration balanced with some neat lines and colors.

Question when you have the sky and trees you want in the frame and want to get the bulk of the relections in the pond how should I have framed this I was fairly tight when shot not a lot of room for re-framing. Looking at it here I should have aligned the horizon to horizontal or a little more but then I clip more of the reflection. Then there is the width of the Dragon this one has me a little perplexed.

Thanks

original I posted in 500px

edited after your suggestions

-- hide signature --

-Terry

I think the balance is more satisfying after your crop (FWIW, per the EXIF, the image you cropped is not the same shot as the original posted in your gallery).

I notice that you took the original shot at 31mm FL with the 16-35 GM. Given the width of the dragon, s/he doesn't have much 'breathing space' in the original image (and even less in the crop). That would have been helped if you'd zoomed out a little (maybe 25-ish) and would have allowed a bit more sky and water so the trees and reflections would be more fully included.

Too late to do that now, of course, but when framing the shot, esp with the r3 which has plenty of pixels to play with, "if in doubt go a bit wider" can be a good policy.

To my eyes, there are some comparable things going on in some of the other shots on your 500px page. That is, sometimes your POI is somewhat cramped in the frame and a bit more context might help. Of course I can't really say for sure without knowing what was outside of the borders of a given crop, so it's just a general observation FWIW. There's generally a sweet spot between having the prominent feature/POI totally filling the frame and having it too remote - it's a matter of finding the most satisfying balance that adds context and breathing room without overwhelming and losing the subject.

In fact one of the things I thought worked well with your "Child Climbing French Canyon" pic is that you managed to get so much space and context into the shot without the child becoming 'lost' in the frame - and the fact that the area (surrounding space) we see is mostly where the child seems to be headed adds to the sense of action and 'story' in the image (prodding the viewer's imagination, as it were). In fact the shot goes even further in the 'breathing space' direction than strictly necessary, and you could perhaps have cropped a little (mostly from from the top and right) without losing the essential strengths of the image.

Anyway, just a few thoughts to throw 'into the mix'. And of course some of what we're discussing has to do with FL choices as well, so it's even semi on-topic (hanging by a thread, perhaps)! ; )

-- hide signature --

Former Canon, Nikon and Pentax user.
Online Gallery: https://500px.com/raycologon

 SilvanBromide's gear list:SilvanBromide's gear list
Sony Alpha a7R III Sony FE 35mm F1.4 Sony FE 85mm F1.4 GM Sony a6500 Sony FE 35mm F2.8 +24 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow