Rate the Photo Above you

[AkiraDaarkst]

@mama_fluxus

 

Here's the before image that I said I'd post:

 

And the after

[vanished]

6 hours ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

@mama_fluxus

 

Here's the before image that I said I'd post:

 

And the after

 

Why not get closer, either with zoom or just moving in?  I didn't realize from the final one how much you cropped 

[AkiraDaarkst]

25 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

Why not get closer, either with zoom or just moving in?  I didn't realize from the final one how much you cropped 

I was using the 70mm end of my 24-70.  Sure I could've used my 70-200, but I'm lazy, I know what I'm doing, and I had other things to shoot which were larger and required using the wider sides of a 24-70 lens.  I'm using a camera with almost a 40MP sensor.  More than enough resolution for what I need to do.  Other lenses I could've used would be my 85mm prime, 105mm macro, etc. but for the session I needed the flexibility of a zoom and was shooting with at least f/5.6.  I was also standing atop a chair, getting closer would mean more lights reflecting off my light color clothes.

[vanished]

1 minute ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

I was using the 70mm end of my 24-70.  Sure I could've used my 70-200, but I'm lazy, I know what I'm doing, and I had other things to shoot which were larger and required using the wider sides of a 24-70 lens.  I'm using a camera with almost a 40MP sensor.  More than enough resolution for what I need to do.  Other lenses I could've used would be my 85mm prime, 105mm macro, etc. but for the session I needed the flexibility of a zoom and was shooting with at least f/5.6.

Alright makes sense

[cc143]

16 hours ago, fergusonnn said:

I appreciate the feedback.  Yeah, 3 is a bit tricky due to the uneven terrain and not much to really relate to orientation.  Right now all I own is a 24-105 f/4L so that's the widest I can go, until I break down and purchase a 17-40 or 16-35.  I'm planning on a telephoto lens first.

 

Very nice for candlelight. Maybe brighten the gentleman a little more, but it looks awesome.

The first 2 are pretty impressive, well done, small piece of advise, go for the 16-35mm over the 17-40, I didn't and I've been regretting it ever since, the 16-35 f/2.8 is just a bit more versatile. 

 

Here is my first attempt at a panorama, the middle of the image seems a bit dark to me, there's just something off idk. I want some feedback on how to improve it. 

I also took this, although framing is far from ideal, I basically had to take 3 portrait shots at an angle, which is why the sides of the image are so distorted. 

 Its also a panorama, but the aspect ratio is closer to standard. 

 

Its my first time playing around with this stuff, so I haven't come up with an efficient shooting/editing process yet i.e. to what extent to reexpose when shooting, editing before or after stitching etc. I suppose this is another case where DxOviewpoint would come in handy;P 

 

Any advise to improve these is welcome as always.  

[xQubeZx]

58 minutes ago, cc143 said:

The first 2 are pretty impressive, well done, small piece of advise, go for the 16-35mm over the 17-40, I didn't and I've been regretting it ever since, the 16-35 f/2.8 is just a bit more versatile. 

 

Here is my first attempt at a panorama, the middle of the image seems a bit dark to me, there's just something off idk. I want some feedback on how to improve it. 

I also took this, although framing is far from ideal, I basically had to take 3 portrait shots at an angle, which is why the sides of the image are so distorted. 

 Its also a panorama, but the aspect ratio is closer to standard. 

 

Its my first time playing around with this stuff, so I haven't come up with an efficient shooting/editing process yet i.e. to what extent to reexpose when shooting, editing before or after stitching etc. I suppose this is another case where DxOviewpoint would come in handy;P 

 

Any advise to improve these is welcome as always.  

I like the first panorma except that you cut the top of the tower. And is it some mist in the bottom? I'm on my phone so I will have to look more at it at my desktop later but so far it looks pretty good. 

 

The second one feels to distorted for my taste. 

[cc143]

19 minutes ago, xQubeZx said:

I like the first panorma except that you cut the top of the tower. And is it some mist in the bottom? I'm on my phone so I will have to look more at it at my desktop later but so far it looks pretty good. 

 

The second one feels to distorted for my taste. 

No that's smoke from the barbecues etc. in the park, its quite rare in the UK to get a bright hot day, so when you do here in Glasgow at least parks are packed with people barbecuing and doing picnics and whatnot. 

 

 

This captures the entire scene a little more, but I later noticed the middle of the frame is way underexposed and it turned out too noisy. its fine at this size, but if you zoom in at say 1:2 then it becomes really obvious. 

 

The crop on the first image is basically due to the stitching, I left enough room when I was taking the images but I hadn't considered how much room it would actually need. 

 

I have the same criticisms for the 2nd image as well btw. 

[SimssmiS]

Very Nice Images I like the Panorama 

 

very old shot I took in Alaska

[AkiraDaarkst]

18 hours ago, cc143 said:

The first 2 are pretty impressive, well done, small piece of advise, go for the 16-35mm over the 17-40, I didn't and I've been regretting it ever since, the 16-35 f/2.8 is just a bit more versatile. 

 

Here is my first attempt at a panorama, the middle of the image seems a bit dark to me, there's just something off idk. I want some feedback on how to improve it. 

I also took this, although framing is far from ideal, I basically had to take 3 portrait shots at an angle, which is why the sides of the image are so distorted. 

 Its also a panorama, but the aspect ratio is closer to standard. 

 

Its my first time playing around with this stuff, so I haven't come up with an efficient shooting/editing process yet i.e. to what extent to reexpose when shooting, editing before or after stitching etc. I suppose this is another case where DxOviewpoint would come in handy;P 

 

Any advise to improve these is welcome as always.  

Good photos but here's a few things that bother me:

Photo 1: The panaroma

• You've cut people off.
• The tree on the right side edge, where you only see part of it's branches and leaves.

Photo 2: The building

• Obviously the distortion of the image.
• The cables in the foreground, I guess they are there to support/hold onto something.
• What I would've done is stand in front of the area where those cables are attached to the ground.  This way I may be standing more directly in line with the center of the (main entrance?) building.  From that, I'd keep the lens straight level and just pan left and right to capture the pano, or move the tripod laterally (sort of like moving the tripod and camera to do a hyperlapse) to capture the necessary images for the panorama.

 

 

16 hours ago, SimssmiS said:

Very Nice Images I like the Panorama 

 

very old shot I took in Alaska

Good photo but the snow peaks in the distance are a bit overblown in the exposure.

[cc143]

2 hours ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

Good photos but here's a few things that bother me:

Photo 1: The panaroma

• You've cut people off.
• The tree on the right side edge, where you only see part of it's branches and leaves.

Photo 2: The building

• Obviously the distortion of the image.
• The cables in the foreground, I guess they are there to support/hold onto something.
• What I would've done is stand in front of the area where those cables are attached to the ground.  This way I may be standing more directly in line with the center of the (main entrance?) building.  From that, I'd keep the lens straight level and just pan left and right to capture the pano, or move the tripod laterally (sort of like moving the tripod and camera to do a hyperlapse) to capture the necessary images for the panorama.

 

 

I had to frame it that way due to the park being packed and me standing on a pretty narrow walkway with bicycles coming and going a lot. Also, there was too much movement in front of me to keep the shot consistent, that's why the people are cut off. Also, I don't really like people, that's why I like shooting landscapes.;P 

 

Composition was in general pretty difficult in both images on the first due to the crowd and the second due to the sheer size of the university and the placement of the flag pole the wires are holding. 

[vanished]

On 5/28/2017 at 1:27 PM, cc143 said:

The first 2 are pretty impressive, well done, small piece of advise, go for the 16-35mm over the 17-40, I didn't and I've been regretting it ever since, the 16-35 f/2.8 is just a bit more versatile. 

In what way?  I guess I'm missing something but to me it seems that the wider the range, the more versatile, and going by that, 17 - 40 covers more scenarios.  I guess the 16 should be ever so slightly wider though, which, if you're looking for a wide lens as the number 1 priority, is important I guess  

On 5/28/2017 at 1:27 PM, cc143 said:

 

Here is my first attempt at a panorama, the middle of the image seems a bit dark to me, there's just something off idk. I want some feedback on how to improve it. 

I really like this, but I feel slightly claustrophobic looking at it; I think having more height, both into the sky and toward the ground would help.  So often panoramas are just a long strip of half sky half water or other uninteresting ground, so I think you've at least avoided that with this scene. 

On 5/28/2017 at 1:27 PM, cc143 said:

I also took this, although framing is far from ideal, I basically had to take 3 portrait shots at an angle, which is why the sides of the image are so distorted. 

Isn't that kind of unavoidable though?  I mean, if you had instead just used a super wide lens and taken it in one shot, it would look the same, no?  Perhaps someone can correct me if I'm wrong but to the best of my knowledge, that's just a limitation of geometry; when you try to cram a huge FOV into a small space, things either look like the left side or the right side of this image:

ie, either unnatural due to curves, or unnatural due to massive stretching

[cc143]

6 hours ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

In what way?  I guess I'm missing something but to me it seems that the wider the range, the more versatile, and going by that, 17 - 40 covers more scenarios.  I guess the 16 should be ever so slightly wider though, which, if you're looking for a wide lens as the number 1 priority, is important I guess  

 

Well not really, a 50mm for instance could be said to be more versatile than a 100-400 since the latter has very specific uses, while the 50 could be on the camera for longer. But that is not the point. 

 

At 35mm I can with minor cropping get to a 40mm fov, but the extra 1mm on the wide end I often can't get. Don't get me wrong, the 1mm isn't significant enough, but the tradeoff between 1mm on the wide end vs 5mm on the tail end (which is the point you made). But you could also use the 16-35mm for street photography and portraiture in some cases even, unlike the 40mm. That extra stop of light is excellent when shooting in low light (and focused at infinity obviously) and also, it allows it to have some use for portraiture, unlike the 17-40 which is kinda useless in that regard. 35mm is still a very standard useful focal length. The 16-35 is also mostly sharper, even though its a bit more bulky. 

[vanished]

9 hours ago, cc143 said:

Well not really, a 50mm for instance could be said to be more versatile than a 100-400 since the latter has very specific uses, while the 50 could be on the camera for longer. But that is not the point. 

 

At 35mm I can with minor cropping get to a 40mm fov, but the extra 1mm on the wide end I often can't get. Don't get me wrong, the 1mm isn't significant enough, but the tradeoff between 1mm on the wide end vs 5mm on the tail end (which is the point you made). But you could also use the 16-35mm for street photography and portraiture in some cases even, unlike the 40mm. That extra stop of light is excellent when shooting in low light (and focused at infinity obviously) and also, it allows it to have some use for portraiture, unlike the 17-40 which is kinda useless in that regard. 35mm is still a very standard useful focal length. The 16-35 is also mostly sharper, even though its a bit more bulky. 

Ah, I wasn't following the start of this and didn't know there were also differences beyond focal length between the two lenses.

[THeEmpire.01]

(Hard to capture photo in a moving car^) 

 

Iconic New York Statue

[.spider.]

On 5/19/2017 at 7:01 PM, AkiraDaarkst said:

That's too bad, a CPL would've have helped a bit there.

No it wouldn't learn the basics of when a polarization filter is having an effect on the image.

From a 0° degree angle there's no effect at all.

[.spider.]

On 5/27/2017 at 9:45 PM, AkiraDaarkst said:

Here's something that I haven't finished editing because I'm too tired tonight.  I used candle light and an Icelight v2 to help as a fill light from above.  I need to darken the background so that it looks more like their faces are lit by the glow of the candles.   I'll finish it tomorrow at the studio.

 

 

 

Is that strong vignette a desperate try to hide the fridge in the background?

[AkiraDaarkst]

So I've been in Ecuador for the past few days since the 30th.  First was in Guayaquil, and now just landed in Quito about 2 hours ago.  The views from the hotels I stayed in Guayaquil were not nice, and neither was the hotel room in the small city of Vinces though the place had a nice atmosphere.  Nine days from now I'll be in Bhutan where I hope to get some nice shots.  In Ecuador I'm spending more time filming.

 

Quick snapshot of the view from my hotel room in Quito

[AbrahamoLincolni]

1 hour ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

So I've been in Ecuador for the past few days since the 30th.  First was in Guayaquil, and now just landed in Quito about 2 hours ago.  The views from the hotels I stayed in Guayaquil were not nice, and neither was the hotel room in the small city of Vinces though the place had a nice atmosphere.  Nine days from now I'll be in Bhutan where I hope to get some nice shots.  In Ecuador I'm spending more time filming.

 

Quick snapshot of the view from my hotel room in Quito

Ecuador, no wonder I haven't seen you online on Skype.  How is it?  And you're going to Bhutan next, must be an amazing trip.

[AkiraDaarkst]

9 minutes ago, AbrahamoLincolni said:

Ecuador, no wonder I haven't seen you online on Skype.  How is it?  And you're going to Bhutan next, must be an amazing trip.

Yep, spotty mobile networks and the only wifi I get is in the hotels so I don't bother logging into Skype.

[xQubeZx]

15 hours ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

So I've been in Ecuador for the past few days since the 30th.  First was in Guayaquil, and now just landed in Quito about 2 hours ago.  The views from the hotels I stayed in Guayaquil were not nice, and neither was the hotel room in the small city of Vinces though the place had a nice atmosphere.  Nine days from now I'll be in Bhutan where I hope to get some nice shots.  In Ecuador I'm spending more time filming.

 

Quick snapshot of the view from my hotel room in Quito

The landscape looks awesome, however it is visible its only is a snapshot. Tilted horizon and a very dark right side imo. Could also have been shot during sunrise or sunset to get softer and warmer light on the mountains. But I guess you already know that. 

 

Here is a shot from a recent portrait shoot with one of my friends. If anyone wonder how I got the high vantage point I sat 4m up in a tree.. On ground level it looked to "flat" imo and it was hard to capture the entire landscape. 

[AkiraDaarkst]

6 minutes ago, xQubeZx said:

The landscape looks awesome, however it is visible its only is a snapshot. Tilted horizon and a very dark right side imo. Could also have been shot during sunrise or sunset to get softer and warmer light on the mountains. But I guess you already know that. 

I just took out my phone and took this shot as soon as I entered the hotel room.  I plan to capture a better shot in the next few days, schedule permitting.

 

Nice shot in the flower fields, though I'm not sure I like the leaves and branches getting in the way on the left.  Another shot you can do in such a field is low angle close up.  For the wedding I shot last week, I wanted to take the bride into a flower field like this but her dress was a short skirt and she didn't have any leggings or pantyhose.  I didn't want her to get scratched or injured.

[xQubeZx]

8 minutes ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

I just took out my phone and took this shot as soon as I entered the hotel room.  I plan to capture a better shot in the next few days, schedule permitting.

 

Nice shot in the flower fields, though I'm not sure I like the leaves and branches getting in the way on the left.  Another shot you can do in such a field is low angle close up.  For the wedding I shot last week, I wanted to take the bride into a flower field like this but her dress was a short skirt and she didn't have any leggings or pantyhose.  I didn't want her to get scratched or injured.

I did think about the leaves. But I couldn't get an angle so I could get rid of them all so I decided to go for this composition then as it looked very weird with it just being very tiny up in the corner. 

 

And I've got a few low angle shots like this one: 

[cc143]

2 hours ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

I just took out my phone and took this shot as soon as I entered the hotel room.  I plan to capture a better shot in the next few days, schedule permitting.

That explains why I felt the shot needed some LR love at least. The view seems better than you said in your first post though. 

2 hours ago, xQubeZx said:

I did think about the leaves. But I couldn't get an angle so I could get rid of them all so I decided to go for this composition then as it looked very weird with it just being very tiny up in the corner. 

 

And I've got a few low angle shots like this one: 

Nicely done, My only criticism, although personal is I'm not sure how I feel about the out of focus flowers in the foreground, I assume you were shooting quite close to them? 

 

Your first shot also looks nice, I feel the colours pop just a bit too much, but I'm just more reserved in that respect most of the time myself so again it might be just personal preference. 

 

I've been in Bucharest on vacation since past Thursday and thought I'd do some street stuff, get outside my usual tripod cityscape or landscape rut.

 Here's an old lady on the side of the road. I think its the best of the street shots I took, although I did have to crop a bit. 

 

I did the usual thing as well, I just need to go back home to edit that stuff that needs more attention, my trackpad is really not ideal for editing;P The sigma 35mm art is amazing, and very versatile, it's been on my camera 80% of the time, the other 20% being shots requiring ultrawide focal lengths. My 24-105L has literally never left my bag! I regret having to lug it around with me.

[AkiraDaarkst]

9 minutes ago, cc143 said:

That explains why I felt the shot needed some LR love at least. The view seems better than you said in your first post though. 

This is the view from my hotel room in Quito.  My hotel rooms in Guayaquil and Vinces didn't have nice views.

[xQubeZx]

46 minutes ago, cc143 said:

Nicely done, My only criticism, although personal is I'm not sure how I feel about the out of focus flowers in the foreground, I assume you were shooting quite close to them? 

 

Your first shot also looks nice, I feel the colours pop just a bit too much, but I'm just more reserved in that respect most of the time myself so again it might be just personal preference.

I was like 5-10 cm away from the flowers with my lens but its a nice effect imo, personal prefferance as said. But I defentivly could have gotten them in focus by using a tripod and two exposures. The reason for the really strong colors are that the yellow in my mind looks very ugly when desaturated. I like the strong yellows to really emphazise the good weather and summer vibe. 

 

 

I like your street shot but you could straighten the lines  Personally I feel so akward shooting random people so I rarley do it.