2nd version, first is way over saturated.
In all honesty, that photo doesnt make me want to look at it more than 3 seconds…What is your subject? The creek? It’s too center…Look up the rule of thirds. Pick a a subject and shoot it, close or far. Your photo just looks like something someone snapped in a hurry.
Take the time to actually frame your image before pushing the shutter.
I don’t get what everyone sees in #6. To me #1 and #5 are the best shots from a pre-postprocess perspective. #1 is the most interesting subject and has a lot of color in it and a nice perspective, and #5 has a deeper meaning you could maybe take from the little kid playing in the big water, and the best sky shot of any of the pics.
But then, I’m not really any good at photography.
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
I don’t get what everyone sees in #6. To me #1 and #5 are the best shots from a pre-postprocess perspective. #1 is the most interesting subject and has a lot of color in it and a nice perspective, and #5 has a deeper meaning you could maybe take from the little kid playing in the big water, and the best sky shot of any of the pics.
But then, I’m not really any good at photography.[/quote]
I find 1. maybe the most interesting and “naturey”.
No 5. has some glaring technical faults unfortunately.
The highlights in the sky have blown out (a common occurence with digital) and the detail will have become irretrievable unfortunately and further post processing usually won’t help.(In fact it can sometimes exacerbate the problem.)
The horizon line very evenly bifurcates the middle of the pic which is kinda bad composing and besides, it’s not straight!
The light is kinda harsh and too contrasty.
The post processing done on it looks a little false and ill conceived.
Yes the boy is standing in the right place to follow the rule of thirds, but is boring and really just looks like a kid standing in a lake staring at it. It looks like a typical touristy grab-shot without too much thought gone into it.
It doesn’t exactly say contemplation, or natures awesome majesty, because the boy doesn’t look contemplative and nature looks a bit ordinary in this pic.
Oops…/rant.
5 and 6. 6 more. 5 is cliche. Just a GD’s opinion.
Up contrast and brightness accordingly on 6.
Go for this effect. The changes are subtle compared to your revisions. I upped the contrast, brightness and saturation.
This photo would smash with a wide angle lens. If you regular access to this place, buy/rent a wide angle and re-shoot this with better lighting/different time of day.
You seem to enjoy shooting landscapes. One basic rule of landscape photography is that you should always shoot within 1 hour of sunrise/sunset. The light is much better at those times and gives you better exposure and detail in your landscapes. I would re-shoot some of your landscapes during those times, see what results you get with better light. Try to get it right in-camera before you worry about post-processing.
Edit: Of the ones you posted, I like the first one best. The light and color is the best in that one, and you composed the shot so that the stream is generally following the rule-of-thirds.
I’d go with 5 or 6… I personally like 5, but 6 is probably more “interesting” of a subject. I think the editing you posted was rather poor… if you don’t know what your doing in photoshop, just submit the natural pic. But honestly… I’m not overly impressed with any of the pics, and I wouldn’t pay any money to submit any of the photos.
Here. You might find this of interest.
[quote]meangenes wrote:
Go for this effect. The changes are subtle compared to your revisions. I upped the contrast, brightness and saturation.
This photo would smash with a wide angle lens. If you regular access to this place, buy/rent a wide angle and re-shoot this with better lighting/different time of day.[/quote]
Ok see if i can replicate this on my photo, thanks
[quote]HG Thrower wrote:
You seem to enjoy shooting landscapes. One basic rule of landscape photography is that you should always shoot within 1 hour of sunrise/sunset. The light is much better at those times and gives you better exposure and detail in your landscapes. I would re-shoot some of your landscapes during those times, see what results you get with better light. Try to get it right in-camera before you worry about post-processing.
Edit: Of the ones you posted, I like the first one best. The light and color is the best in that one, and you composed the shot so that the stream is generally following the rule-of-thirds.[/quote]
I may try this if I can fit in time. As poster above asked about, I do have access to number 6, about 1.5hr into a hiking trail around here is where that is located, so I may go back and try this.
[quote]Squiggles wrote:
Here. You might find this of interest.
Landscape Photography: 13 Surefire Tips (+ Stunning Examples) [/quote]
thanks, that second pic is unreal
Doesn’t cost anything to submit them, just few bucks to print pic off. It’s little award they have at the school here, only competing against 64 students in the program so I think I have a chance, can’t see too many even applying for it.
[quote]xkungpowx wrote:
I’d go with 5 or 6… I personally like 5, but 6 is probably more “interesting” of a subject. I think the editing you posted was rather poor… if you don’t know what your doing in photoshop, just submit the natural pic. But honestly… I’m not overly impressed with any of the pics, and I wouldn’t pay any money to submit any of the photos.[/quote]
Yea, don’t be discouraged by the not-so-savory remarks. Roll with it man. If you like it do it. Art isn’t perfect. As a matter of fact most art starts as a crazy, accidental trend that develops into a style or rule over time.
It’s the imperfections that make it an expression of humanity.
[quote]js385787 wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
This is road that runs right into the heart of Superstition Mountains
Nice photo, are you posting it as an example of the kind of pic I should be taking? [/quote]
I am posting it because I like it and I took it ,
[quote]HG Thrower wrote:
You seem to enjoy shooting landscapes. One basic rule of landscape photography is that you should always shoot within 1 hour of sunrise/sunset. [/quote]
Should always? no, just mostly is all.
[quote]meangenes wrote:
Yea, don’t be discouraged by the not-so-savory remarks. Roll with it man. If you like it do it. Art isn’t perfect. As a matter of fact most art starts as a crazy, accidental trend that develops into a style or rule over time.
It’s the imperfections that make it an expression of humanity. [/quote]
Completely agree, however would like to add that a certain dgree of technical ability will generally help you to express yourself better.
There is a difference between something being imperfect and something being far from adequate.
But on a positive note …hey fuck yeah! if you like it go out and do it you’ll get heaps better.
And if you can reshoot that creek go for it!
[quote]Cheeky_Kea wrote:
meangenes wrote:
Yea, don’t be discouraged by the not-so-savory remarks. Roll with it man. If you like it do it. Art isn’t perfect. As a matter of fact most art starts as a crazy, accidental trend that develops into a style or rule over time.
It’s the imperfections that make it an expression of humanity.
Completely agree, however would like to add that a certain dgree of technical ability will generally help you to express yourself better.
There is a difference between something being imperfect and something being far from adequate.
But on a positive note …hey fuck yeah! if you like it go out and do it you’ll get heaps better.
And if you can reshoot that creek go for it! [/quote]
Ah yes, this is the truth. Well I was mainly talking about finger painting.