Metadata:
Canon Powershot S30 at about 40mm EFL.
Exposure Triad: 15s, f4.5 & ISO ????
Also used a tripod with remote timer release.
So why hasn't National Geographic called yet?
Monday, December 6, 2010
Brisbane City Lights
Here's one of my very first digital photos ever taken. I was so impressed with this that I thought I had a Pulitzer Prize winner in my hands...
Metadata:
Canon Powershot S30 at about 40mm EFL.
Exposure Triad: 15s, f4.5 & ISO ????
Also used a tripod with remote timer release.
So why hasn't National Geographic called yet?
Metadata:
Canon Powershot S30 at about 40mm EFL.
Exposure Triad: 15s, f4.5 & ISO ????
Also used a tripod with remote timer release.
So why hasn't National Geographic called yet?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Hi Steve,
ReplyDeleteMaybe you can suggest a better way to reply, but I'll give this format a try first.
The good:
* I like the lights going into the water and streaming towards the viewer, and the flow of lights from left to right.
* It looks clear at the resolution you've provided, but a higher res one might be better critique for sharpness and chromatic aberration issues. What resolution is your monitor? I'd aim for 1200 pixels across. I use a 1600x1050 pixel monitor at home, and a 1920x1080 in the office.
* I really like your tag line "So why hasn't National Geographic called yet?". Brilliant!
The bad:
* I don't like the blank black section in the bottom third. Did you try cropping that part out and just having a wide panorama shot instead?
Disclaimer: I'll only put this disclaimer up once and you can take it for granted after that, but I'm no genius at photo composition and have a lot to learn. I'm just commenting from what comes to mind immediately upon seeing your photo. My comments may be reasonable or they may be totally off the mark but I'm trying to be helpful. Feel free to tell me where my comment is not accurate.
Cheers dude!
Regards
Craig.
Hi Craig,
ReplyDeleteArt is subjective. There's no need for a disclaimer in this blog. Brutally honest comments are expected. Also your response format is fine. As long as you can communicate your point, anything should be ok.
Extra pixels don't make much of a difference. However if you want comments about sharpness, CA etc, I would suggest including with your post some 100% crops from the image. Also label them so, that way I'll try to avoid critiquing the bad cropping...
However I'm a little confused about your comment about the "blank black section in the bottom third". I'm not sure what you're referring to. It appears to me that the bottom left and right corners have light and detail in them. I would agree that a more panoramic crop would be better. Perhaps next time, I would shoot this with a wider lens and add a little more in the foreground and on the sides.
steve
Hi Steve,
ReplyDeleteI meant the bottom left hand 1/3rd of the image. It doesn't have much in it, and the section above the trees is mainly black and the trees themselves are very dim. The right hand bottom 1/3rd has a bright pergola in it which I like, but because the left hand 1/3rd isn't as bright it felt like something was missing there a bit.
I like your idea about a couple of 100% crops if looking at CA and sharpness. That would do the trick.
I think you are right that either a more panoramic crop or more of the foreground (lit up a bit more evenly across the bottom) would improve this image.
Regards
Craig.
Ps: My wife and I rarely agree on art, which is why I'm not allowed to buy any of it on my own :)
Hi Steve,
ReplyDeleteAfter having another closer look at the bottom right hand side, I notice the grass from the top of the cliff.
I think I'd like to see that across the bottom of the entire image to make it feel like I'm actually there, and standing on something solid, while looking at the city lights.
Regards
Craig.
Ps: My monitors are probably not calibrated very well either so some images are likely to look different depending on which one I'm looking at.
Hi Steve,
ReplyDeleteAfter a quick test in photoshop, I do like the looks of a wide panorama crop of that photo.
Regards
Craig.
Hi Craig,
ReplyDeleteNormally I would have cropped it to a 3:1 panoramic too, but it's only a 3 megapixel image and since the foreground had some interesting light I thought I would leave it in.
I see what you mean by the left corner being a little dark. It does make the corners a little unbalanced.
steve
Hi Guys,
ReplyDeleteI've always like this picture. Not real sure what I'd do to improve it. However one thing I notice when I look at it, is some aberration in the black sky around the top of the buildings (especially on the right hand side). Not sure how you'd fix that sort of thing. Possibly a better lens, or perhaps it could be cleaned up in photoshop or something?
Interestingly I didn't notice Craig's observation about the dark patch from the river when I first looked at it, but after going back, it stands out quite prominently. As mentioned, wider picture would probably be great here.
One thing I do like about it though, is the flow of the river going through the picture. Not sure whether you lose much of that when cropping it down.
On a side note, is it possible to embed pictures in the comments? It would be good to see where or how you guys would crop the image, and I'd also embed a picture of the aberration that I can see.
Geoff,
ReplyDeleteGood to see you've finally joined us.
The aberration you speak of is colour cast. I was using a 3MP compact camera but a better lens probably wouldn't have made a difference. Correct white balance would have and in this case post processing can help.
Unfortunately as far as I know, we can't post images in comments. However for this image I've written a post on my other blog talking about the colour cast in this image and how to go about fixing it in Lightroom. There are some before and after images over there too.
If links work here is a link. Or if that doesn't work here is the link again.
http://justanotherphotographyblog.blogspot.com/2010/12/before-and-after.html
steve