Rate the Photo Above you

[.spider.]

32 minutes ago, xQubeZx said:

Go out and shoot an image with a white balance that is waaay to warm for the setting and one identical but with the right WB or one that is quite close. Then try to get the totally wrong one to look the same as the proper one. 

No, it's your job to proof your baseless statements.

[AkiraDaarkst]

21 hours ago, xQubeZx said:

6.5/10 @cc143

 

I kinda like the composition but imo I think its to warm of a tone and the reflection in the water is a bit disturbing. May have been possible to avoid with a CPL but that would have dropped the exposure more too. 

 

Here is a shot from my recent trip to NY. 

 

 

Nice photo of NYC skyline from atop a bridge.  I just hope you're not one of those thrill seeking urban explorers who end up getting themselves killed falling off while trying to take an extreme photo.   The framework of the bridge and the skyscrapers seem to share equal prominence in the photo.

 

10 hours ago, cc143 said:

I tried to get the temperature to a more natural level in LR, but it really messed up the image.

You should carry a sheet of white paper or a small white balance checker grey card with you, they are not big, heavy or expensive.

For your boat shot, you can try using the White Balance picker (eyedropper) tool in LR and clicking on one of the boats, at least one of them looks to have a white hull.  It will help you get a good start in correcting white balance.

[AkiraDaarkst]

Here's a photo from one of my recent travels.

 

A little boy that seems to be pouting or unhappy.  My crew and I were driving from where we were filming a documentary and heading to another city before flying back home and on the way I saw a procession of people celebrating a traditional ceremony part of Theravada Buddhism.  The driver of our car stopped on the side so that I could get out and take some photos.  This little boy was on horseback wearing ceremonial costumes on his way, together with his family, to a monastery where he will under go the ceremony of Shinbyu.  It is part of the growing up culture for Buddhists who practice Theravada Buddhism in South East Asia, in countries like Thailand and Burma.

 

I wish I could've stayed longer and followed them to the monastery, they were inviting us to come along.  But we had to get back to the main city to catch our flight the next day and still had several hours of driving ahead of us.  I'll visit Burma again, the people are some of the friendliest on Earth and the food is amazing.

 

[xQubeZx]

48 minutes ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

Nice photo of NYC skyline from atop a bridge.  I just hope you're not one of those thrill seeking urban explorers who end up getting themselves killed falling off while trying to take an extreme photo.   The framework of the bridge and the skyscrapers seem to share equal prominence in the photo.

 

It's from a walkway on the bridge haha. Was with my family so even if I would have wanted to do any urban exploring I'm almost 100% certain my mom would have stopped me from it. I could however enjoy doing it, under circumstances where you put a lot of weight on saftey. I have seen some very sketchy stuff and some not so sketchy urban explorations. I don't know if you follow or know who Jimmie Chin is but I saw a photo on his IG feed a while back where they climbed the One World TradeCenter I think it was. that was however with proper saftey equipment and permits. Stuff like that I would love to do!

[AkiraDaarkst]

2 minutes ago, xQubeZx said:

It's from a walkway on the bridge haha. Was with my family so even if I would have wanted to do any urban exploring I'm almost 100% certain my mom would have stopped me from it. I could however enjoy doing it, under circumstances where you put a lot of weight on saftey. I have seen some very sketchy stuff and some not so sketchy urban explorations. I don't know if you follow or know who Jimmie Chin is but I saw a photo on his IG feed a while back where they climbed the One World TradeCenter I think it was. that was however with proper saftey equipment and permits. Stuff like that I would love to do!

Yeah I follow some urban explorer photographers, especially ones that take proper precautions like Jimmy Chin and Joe McNally who took a photo from the top of the Burj Khalifa (ok Joe's not really an urban explorer).  The ones I don't follow are the thrill seekers, whom many appears to be from Eastern Europe/Russia, trying to take extreme selfies and some have gotten themselves killed.  These kinds of people are also ones that don't respect the cultures and laws of other nations, like that kid who climbed the Great Pyramids to take a photo.

 

I didn't realize there was a walkway in a NYC bridge that lets you get a view as if you climbed atop the bridge, but then I haven't been to NYC in over 20 years now, so am not as familiar with the city as I could be.

[xQubeZx]

41 minutes ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

Yeah I follow some urban explorer photographers, especially ones that take proper precautions like Jimmy Chin and Joe McNally who took a photo from the top of the Burj Khalifa (ok Joe's not really an urban explorer).  The ones I don't follow are the thrill seekers, whom many appears to be from Eastern Europe/Russia, trying to take extreme selfies and some have gotten themselves killed.  These kinds of people are also ones that don't respect the cultures and laws of other nations, like that kid who climbed the Great Pyramids to take a photo.

 

I didn't realize there was a walkway in a NYC bridge that lets you get a view as if you climbed atop the bridge, but then I haven't been to NYC in over 20 years now, so am not as familiar with the city as I could be.

Yep agree, and it is from Brooklyn Bridge. Kind of in the middle where you see the cars driving below you. 

[vanished]

9 hours ago, xQubeZx said:

That is because you shot it too warm. Even though RAW's are great I have found that it is way easier to turn a raw file warmer than trying to make it cooler in the color tone. So when shooting at night you should set your color temperature quite low (like 2000-3000k imo) to get rid of the very warm tone or at least give you the option to have both. 

 

3 hours ago, .spider. said:

The internal WB has no effect on the RAW.

This was my understanding as well.  When you shoot JPG, the WB settings of course matter because it's applied right then and there, but afaik when you shot RAW, the file is just the, well, raw sensor data with metadata attached.  The only settings that matter are the ones that affect your shot (ISO, shutter speed, aperture, focal length, etc) and things like WB have no effect since they're just saved to the file as a tag like "this is what it was set to when shot", but you can completely adjust it in post.

[xQubeZx]

1 minute ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

 

This was my understanding as well.  When you shoot JPG, the WB settings of course matter because it's applied right then and there, but afaik when you shot RAW, the file is just the, well, raw sensor data with metadata attached.  The only settings that matter are the ones that affect your shot (ISO, shutter speed, aperture, focal length, etc) and things like WB have no effect since they're just saved to the file as a tag like "this is what it was set to when shot", but you can completely adjust it in post.

Thats what I thought too untill I encountered a file that was almost impossible to fix the WB on in post. I tried the next day with the same shot and put a better WB in body before the shot and then it turned out much better. It maybe just is my Sony .ARW files that are troubeling at times. 

[vanished]

1 minute ago, xQubeZx said:

Thats what I thought too untill I encountered a file that was almost impossible to fix the WB on in post. I tried the next day with the same shot and put a better WB in body before the shot and then it turned out much better. It maybe just is my Sony .ARW files that are troubeling at times. 

Well, "full disclosure", I've never done a test like that myself so I guess I can't say for certain, but that was what I thought... 

[AkiraDaarkst]

4 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

 

This was my understanding as well.  When you shoot JPG, the WB settings of course matter because it's applied right then and there, but afaik when you shot RAW, the file is just the, well, raw sensor data with metadata attached.  The only settings that matter are the ones that affect your shot (ISO, shutter speed, aperture, focal length, etc) and things like WB have no effect since they're just saved to the file as a tag like "this is what it was set to when shot", but you can completely adjust it in post.

Even if you shoot RAW, getting proper WB in-camera helps.  Sure WB can be adjusted much better with a RAW file than a JPEG, however if you can get the WB in-camera as close to the correct temperature as possible it just makes life easier and the workflow a bit faster.

 

Sometimes the auto WB metering in the camera gives the incorrect value, you shoot RAW but when you load the file into LR, Photoshop, C1, whatever software used and there's no reference point you can measure to adjust the white balance, you can spend a few seconds to several minutes playing around with the temperature and color sliders...

 

And it's much harder and more time consuming with mix lighting and mixed light color situations.  That's why in situations like these I make sure to take a reference photo of a WB card under the same lighting so that there is a reference point I can use during post production workflow.

1 minute ago, xQubeZx said:

Thats what I thought too untill I encountered a file that was almost impossible to fix the WB on in post. I tried the next day with the same shot and put a better WB in body before the shot and then it turned out much better. It maybe just is my Sony .ARW files that are troubeling at times. 

 

[Noix]

On 1/9/2017 at 7:02 AM, cc143 said:

Same night as the previous one. I would like a deeper DOF, but I didn't want to decrease SS or increase ISO any more. 

Its  a nice photo, but personally I would have stood in the middle of the walk way allowing you to see all the way down.

 

 Another quick little shot I thought was kinda cool. Dont really like the way I edited it tho.

[SQZY98]

8 minutes ago, Noix said:

Its  a nice photo, but personally I would have stood in the middle of the walk way allowing you to see all the way down.

 

 Another quick little shot I thought was kinda cool. Dont really like the way I edited it tho.

That's great picture! What ND filter did you use? And what camera settings? Just bought my first ND filter (3.0 density) 

[Noix]

3 minutes ago, SQZY98 said:

That's great picture! What ND filter did you use? And what camera settings? Just bought my first ND filter (3.0 density) 

It was a ND 8 which i got of amazon that itsnt actually that good at all. The image was actually over exposed so I had to edit it in light room which is why I think it looks a little too dark. But thanks!

[.spider.]

Why cant people rate the above picture?

[mcmxcii]

http://www.dowdenphotos.com/landscapes/5nywq9xzhkm1uy6reumq22wu0awpt3

[SQZY98]

23 hours ago, .spider. said:

Why cant people rate the above picture?

Is rating pictures with a digit obligatorily bound to this thread? That's a genuine question. IMO a short feedback with tips on how to improve the submitted photo is worth a lot more. 

 

*If you are refering to my post, sorry. I was just curious about the hardware used.

[vanished]

On 1/12/2017 at 9:54 AM, Noix said:

 Another quick little shot I thought was kinda cool. Dont really like the way I edited it tho.

[snip]

 

On 1/12/2017 at 10:08 AM, Noix said:

It was a ND 8 which i got of amazon that itsnt actually that good at all. The image was actually over exposed so I had to edit it in light room which is why I think it looks a little too dark. But thanks!

Other than the faces which seem to have taken on a bit of a harsh orange tint, I actually really like the look of everything else.

[Mihle]

6 hours ago, SQZY98 said:

Is rating pictures with a digit obligatorily bound to this thread? That's a genuine question. IMO a short feedback with tips on how to improve the submitted photo is worth a lot more. 

 

*If you are refering to my post, sorry. I was just curious about the hardware used.

I think he means that there are some people that doesn't rate or comment on the previous picture at all before posting a new one.

 

Some are either not commenting on any pictures when posting an image, or are commenting on pictures before the last one, that someone else already have rated/commented on.

[Sprawlie]

On 12/01/2017 at 11:54 AM, Noix said:

Its  a nice photo, but personally I would have stood in the middle of the walk way allowing you to see all the way down.

 

 Another quick little shot I thought was kinda cool. Dont really like the way I edited it tho.

Rate the picture: Gorgous. 8/10. love the effect. captured the motion that surrounds the area very well. 

 

 

[mcmxcii]

On 19/01/2017 at 5:49 PM, Sprawlie said:

Rate the picture: Gorgous. 8/10. love the effect. captured the motion that surrounds the area very well. 

 

 

7/10 i like it but there is something that bothers me, not sure what it is. I think maybe the sky or the road or the fence

 

http://www.dowdenphotos.com/landscapes/ccq4s3j9ganemf32ix92x4yf4v0a2n

[vanished]

1 hour ago, mcmxcii said:

7/10 i like it but there is something that bothers me, not sure what it is. I think maybe the sky or the road or the fence

It could be that there's very little actually in it.  Some leaves, blank sky, blank path, and a thin strip of (far in the distance) details in the middle...

I get the feeling this was a very magical moment irl tho.

[xQubeZx]

On 2017-01-19 at 6:49 PM, Sprawlie said:

Rate the picture: Gorgous. 8/10. love the effect. captured the motion that surrounds the area very well. 

 

 

I like the idea of this one. However I would straighten out that horizon, bring up the shadows quite a bit. Maybe even could have been done with 2 exposures. And then remove the leafes in the top. 

 

It is a beautiful sunset though. 

[Sprawlie]

On 21/01/2017 at 8:29 AM, xQubeZx said:

I like the idea of this one. However I would straighten out that horizon, bring up the shadows quite a bit. Maybe even could have been done with 2 exposures. And then remove the leafes in the top. 

 

It is a beautiful sunset though. 

 

Actually Sunrise in Edinburgh.

 

[cc143]

Just a half hour ago on my balcony in Glasgow. 

 

I'd appreciate any input to improve in LR, I played with it a bit but I feel there's more that could be done

[xQubeZx]

2 hours ago, cc143 said:

Just a half hour ago on my balcony in Glasgow. 

 

I'd appreciate any input to improve in LR, I played with it a bit but I feel there's more that could be done

I would first make the horizon straight. Then add a lot of warmth as the WB is kinda meh. Add a gradueted filter to up the exposre on the lower half of the image. Make a tone curve where I remove the clear blacks (Make them a slight gray tone). Crop the image so you get rid of the bottom part where you see your fence. Try to fix the green lights. Do you have the RAW? So maybe we could play around a bit?