Rate the Photo Above you

[Emzijs]

9 minutes ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

For the past few days I've been hopping airports and been in Bhutan where the internet was slow so haven't had that much time to comment on photos but this one... "what the duck am I looking at?" That's the first thought that comes to mind.

Ok, so what I've shot is a hand brake lever with an HGK Motorsport engraving. Vertical levers are used in drifting cars. And another lever is Samsonas transmission lever.

[vanished]

Just now, Emzijs said:

Ok, so what I've shot is a hand brake lever with an HGK Motorsport engraving. Vertical levers are used in drifting cars. And another lever is Samsonas transmission lever.

oh I see it now!  

[AkiraDaarkst]

3 minutes ago, Emzijs said:

Ok, so what I've shot is a hand brake lever with an HGK Motorsport engraving. Vertical levers are used in drifting cars. And another lever is Samsonas transmission lever.

A picture is supposed to represent a thousand words, if you had to describe it in text in order for us to see it...

[Emzijs]

 

17 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

One thing to improve would be the lens though, it seems no part of the image was actually in focus, but I can also clearly see the depth at which it is most focused which tells me the lens is seriously limiting your resolution.

 

 

It's a Yongnuo 50mm 1.8 prime lens. Sometimes it just likes to derp, and it focused mainly on handbrake and transmission levers. And the resolution is 6016x4000px. Probably should lower it.

[Emzijs]

1 minute ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

A picture is supposed to represent a thousand words, if you had to describe it in text then... 

I like to shoot cars and car related stuff. Not sure why sometimes you should find something that doesnt exists.

[vanished]

Just now, Emzijs said:

 

 

It's a Yongnuo 50mm 1.8 prime lens. Sometimes it just likes to derp, and it focused mainly on handbrake and transmission levers. And the resolution is 6016x4000px. Probably should lower it.

I know I've been told this is too technical but I have to

 

What I'm saying is that even the parts that supposedly are in focus are rather blurry.  What this means is your camera can capture much more resolution than the lens can actually support.  Imagine rubbing Vaseline on the lens - the resolution of the shots you take is the same since the camera saves all the pixels no matte what, but the actual amount of detail is massively reduced.  Some glass and some lenses are higher or lower quality and the better ones will let you capture much more detail.

[Emzijs]

2 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

I know I've been told this is too technical but I have to

 

What I'm saying is that even the parts that supposedly are in focus are rather blurry.  What this means is your camera can capture much more resolution than the lens can actually support.  Imagine rubbing Vaseline on the lens - the resolution of the shots you take is the same since the camera saves all the pixels no matte what, but the actual amount of detail is massively reduced.  Some glass and some lenses are higher or lower quality and the better ones will let you capture much more detail.

I get that. But here's the thing - sometimes the image is really good, but sometimes it's just blurry and I can't fix that. Probably you are right, it's something to do with a quality of a lens.

[vanished]

Just now, Emzijs said:

I get that. But here's the thing - sometimes the image is really good, but sometimes it's just blurry and I can't fix that. Probably you are right, it's something to do with a quality of a lens.

That's very strange, I can't imagine why the sharpness would vary significantly from one time to the next.  Unless... aperture settings.  Some lenses' sharpness is heavily dependent on aperture (and focal length if applicable).  You can check the details of yours on DXOMark (ok now I am getting too technical lol)

[AkiraDaarkst]

30 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

I like the effect and the subject, lots of interesting parts ... I'm not even sure what I'm looking at!  

One thing to improve would be the lens though, it seems no part of the image was actually in focus, but I can also clearly see the depth at which it is most focused which tells me the lens is seriously limiting your resolution.

OK flight's delayed for an hour, so out comes my MBP.

 

It's a good pano, but I don't really feel anything for the scene and I do feel it looks a bit bland.  It also looks like there may be some sort of perspective distortion.

 

 

4 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

That's very strange, I can't imagine why the sharpness would vary significantly from one time to the next.  Unless... aperture settings.  Some lenses' sharpness is heavily dependent on aperture (and focal length if applicable).  You can check the details of yours on DXOMark (ok now I am getting too technical lol)

Yongnuo lens, no autofocus and lack of a focus motor also means lack of AF tracking. The thin DOF due to the wide aperture also means softness in an image and the THIN DOF.  And the glass on the Yongnuo lens might not have high quality glass or coatings that reduce stuff like chromatic aberration.

 

 

10 minutes ago, Emzijs said:

I like to shoot cars and car related stuff. Not sure why sometimes you should find something that doesnt exists.

Do a google search for automobile photography.

[cc143]

20 minutes ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

A picture is supposed to represent a thousand words, if you had to describe it in text in order for us to see it...

I understood what I was looking at sort of immediately (I did have to look again), but then again I'm sort of a car nut as well (I can't keep away from expensive hobbies it seems;P). 

 

EDIT: Just saw your 2nd post, well its a ~£50 lens as far as I remember, so optics are bound to be sub par. 

 

@Emzijs I suppose the handbrake was the subject, but I don't really like the logo on the wheel being out of focus, perhaps you should have tried a deeper DOF instead or framing a bit differently, although I like the looking through the steering wheel effect. Also, what SS was this shot at? I can't fathom if what I see there is motion blur (from your shaking) or the lens is just way too soft. (Assuming you shot wide open, the lens is probably the main culprit though). 

 

What sort of post processing have you done? Have you played with the clarity slider at all? 

 

[AkiraDaarkst]

2 minutes ago, cc143 said:

I understood what I was looking at sort of immediately (I did have to look again), but then again I'm sort of a car nut as well (I can't keep away from expensive hobbies it seems;P). 

I also saw that it was some part of a vehicle, especially that round ring with the yellow logo or label I immediately assumed was some sort of steering wheel.  But as you can see, there seems to be so many points of interest, many of which are just out of focus.  Everything about the image, from composition to focus to points of interest that should draw the viewer's attention is all over the place.

[vanished]

1 minute ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

It's a good pano, but I don't really feel anything for the scene and I do feel it looks a bit bland.  It also looks like there may be some sort of perspective distortion.

Could be, I might try restitching it in a different program some day.  Personally I like all the little details and the lighting. Things I would change though (besides a restitch) would be probably an adjustment brush on the right side to darken/boost contrast just a hair.  If I could reshoot it though, I would pay closer attention to focus.  I ended up shrinking it to 50% width and height because it was a little blurry at native res, which was disappointing.

1 minute ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

Yongnuo lens, no autofocus and lack of a focus motor also means lack of AF tracking. The thin DOF due to the wide aperture also means softness in an image and the THIN DOF.  And the glass on the Yongnuo lens might not have high quality glass or coatings that reduce stuff like chromatic aberration.

I'm not sure autofocus can explain it in this situation though, since there's enough in the scene that no matter what it will be focused on something.  Question is how sharp is that spot.  I have a feeling it's the lens.

[Emzijs]

10 minutes ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

Do a google search for automobile photography.

Oh wow. I knew that I am bad, and I have read about that,  Speedhunter articles aswell. It's just a matter of practice, nobody's born a pro.

[cc143]

14 minutes ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

I also saw that it was some part of a vehicle, especially that round ring with the yellow logo or label I immediately assumed was some sort of steering wheel.  But as you can see, there seems to be so many points of interest, many of which are just out of focus.  Everything about the image, from composition to focus to points of interest that should draw the viewer's attention is all over the place.

Yes, but at the same time, I don't have any ideas as to how they could isolate the handbrake lever, so I would probably end up shooting at f/4 to get everything in focus. I'm not sure if it would be worse or not, but I feel it could be better that way, so you get the steering wheel in focus as well as the handbrake and shifter levers. 

 

 

I just got the Lee Big stopper 2 days ago and was experimenting with long exposures. I noticed that noise is quite an issue at exposures longer than about 1 minute, like the shot above, any recommendations to overcome this? 

[AkiraDaarkst]

29 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

Could be, I might try restitching it in a different program some day.  Personally I like all the little details and the lighting. Things I would change though (besides a restitch) would be probably an adjustment brush on the right side to darken/boost contrast just a hair.  If I could reshoot it though, I would pay closer attention to focus.  I ended up shrinking it to 50% width and height because it was a little blurry at native res, which was disappointing.

I'm not sure autofocus can explain it in this situation though, since there's enough in the scene that no matter what it will be focused on something.  Question is how sharp is that spot.  I have a feeling it's the lens.

For your landscape, it's up to you to decide how you will edit it to make the image pop because as it is right now, I do feel that the image is flat and has no depth.  Also, look around the location and see if there is another vantage point from which you can capture a better pano.

 

As for the lens issue, yes the lens has issues because it's a cheap Chinese lens with very likely low quality glass or low quality lens coatings.  However at the forefront the fault lies with the photographer.  It's the responsibility of the photographer to choose:

• composition
• framing
• angle of view
• editing choices during post
• and even the lens used.  I won't say I am 100% familiar with the nature of all the lenses I own, but I do own quite a number of lenses and use different ones for different purposes and to get specific looks.

Neither the lens or camera automatically decides for itself how they will behave.  They're just inanimate objects, tools used by the photographer.

 

 

10 minutes ago, cc143 said:

Yes, but at the same time, I don't have any ideas as to how they could isolate the handbrake lever, so I would probably end up shooting at f/4 to get everything in focus. I'm not sure if it would be worse or not, but I feel it could be better that way, so you get the steering wheel in focus as well as the handbrake and shifter levers. 

 

 

I just got the Lee Big stopper 2 days ago and was experimenting with long exposures. I noticed that noise is quite an issue at exposures longer than about 1 minute, like the shot above, any recommendations to overcome this? 

Well it would be up to the tog to find a different viewpoint that works, right now as it is IT DOES NOT work.

 

What settings:

Long Exposure NR off?

Low ISO?

If the answer to both is yes, then it's something that you need to take care of in post.  I also spot some sensor dust issues that you can deal with using LR's spot removal tool.

 

OK I'm off to board the plane, will comment on your photo in more detail later.

[cc143]

1 minute ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

Well it would be up to the tog to find a different viewpoint that works, right now as it is IT DOES NOT work.

 

What settings:

Long Exposure NR off?

Low ISO?

If the answer to both is yes, then it's something that you need to take care of in post.  I also spot some sensor dust issues that you deal with using LR's spot removal tool.

121 second exposure, NR off

ISO 100. 

That's what I was asking for, NR reduction in LR didn't really work that well and the other recommended remedy of reducing the blacks wasn't a significant improvement either.

Yes I should clean my sensor at some point too, It must have gotten dusty over my last trip I was swapping lenses all the time.  

[vanished]

1 minute ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

For your landscape, it's up to you to decide how you will edit it to make the image pop because as it is right now, I do feel that the image is flat and has no depth.  Also, look around the location and see if there is another vantage point from which you can capture a better pano.

Alright, I think I see what you mean, thanks  

 

I do have a few others from that day that might have more "depth"

Spoiler

Spoiler

I think I already know you'll tell me the composition on this is off but I don't mind it  

 

1 minute ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

[...] However at the forefront the fault lies with the photographer.  It's the responsibility of the photographer to choose:[...] They're just inanimate objects, tools used by the photographer.[...]

Yeah, I always mean to throw in "ultimately it's the art that's important, not the MP with which you capture the scene  but seeing that art more clearly never hurts " but I like to think people just know that... maybe I should say it anyway though.

 

[AkiraDaarkst]

8 hours ago, cc143 said:

121 second exposure, NR off

ISO 100. 

That's what I was asking for, NR reduction in LR didn't really work that well and the other recommended remedy of reducing the blacks wasn't a significant improvement either.

Yes I should clean my sensor at some point too, It must have gotten dusty over my last trip I was swapping lenses all the time.  

OK I'm at my hotel in Manila.

 

I would honestly not rely on LR's NR tools for this.  Either take the image to PS or use something like Google Nik's Dfine or another plugin.

[AkiraDaarkst]

10 hours ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

  Reveal hidden contents

  Reveal hidden contents

I think I already know you'll tell me the composition on this is off but I don't mind it  

 

 

These new photos are good, but going back to your previous panorama, now that I'm no longer looking at the clock for boarding the plane... one thing I just noticed:

Left side has depth, mainly because of the shadows.  The right side, it feels like everything is flat and 2D.  The landscape has potential, I think it's mainly a matter of you looking around for a better spot to take the photos, waiting for the right time of day or weather, and how you process the images.

 

The 2 new landscape you posted (hidden), you can see they show layers and levels and with the shadows at the right areas there is depth.

 

In my comments, I've used the word "flat", in the first instance I used it to mean "the image is boring or unimpressive or unflattering", but in this comment I am using the words "flat" and "depth" to mean having dimensionality.  Describing art is so subjective.

[.spider.]

7 hours ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

 

I would honestly not rely on LR's NR tools for this.  Either take the image to PS or use something like Google Nik's Dfine or another plugin.

Lightroom's NR isn't bad if you know how to use it.

[AkiraDaarkst]

School children in Bhutan

[vanished]

On 6/20/2017 at 6:23 PM, AkiraDaarkst said:

School children in Bhutan

>posted tuesday
I guess no one else is gonna dare critique it  

Whatever, I'll give it a shot

 

I can't decide if I like the wide crop, the way if gives context to the people and shows the interesting environment, or would prefer it cropped righter to focus on the people more intently.  I suppose either would work, and would give a different impression.  I think my eye wants to get closer to that intensely dense pattern in the clothing for relief though.

 

That post in the ground that's perfectly spaced between the two on the right, that's the only thing my eye is drawn to as being a little odd.  Can't really say anything bad about it beyond that I guess

 

Ok, now some of things instead of landscapes

Spoiler

Spoiler

 

[AkiraDaarkst]

13 hours ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

I can't decide if I like the wide crop, the way if gives context to the people and shows the interesting environment, or would prefer it cropped righter to focus on the people more intently.  I suppose either would work, and would give a different impression.  I think my eye wants to get closer to that intensely dense pattern in the clothing for relief though.

 

That post in the ground that's perfectly spaced between the two on the right, that's the only thing my eye is drawn to as being a little odd.  Can't really say anything bad about it beyond that I guess

I was in Bhutan for 4 days 3 nights (more exactly 3 full days worth because the plane landed and we got to our hotel around noon on the first day and we flew back out in the afternoon on the 4th day).

 

Two of the full days were taken up by filming and only had part of a day where I had any time to take photos.  The Bhutanese are very nice people, but they are also reserved and can be camera shy. This was the 4th group of students that I asked before getting their consent to be photographed.  Usually I spend about a month in a country taking photos, four days is not enough.

 

 

As for your photos... again I'm not feeling anything.  Obviously they were taken in a museum, so anyone can take photos like these in a museum.

[vanished]

20 minutes ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

As for your photos... again I'm not feeling anything.  Obviously they were taken in a museum, so anyone can take photos like these in a museum.

wow, that's pretty much the lowest grade possible.... I thought they were a little better than that.  I know of course that this is a scene that 1000 people would see in a day so I tried to frame them in an interesting way and take them from a slightly atypical position.

 

Can you offer any specific feedback about what's not so great and how to improve them?

[mama_fluxus]

On 6/17/2017 at 6:11 PM, Ryan_Vickers said:

 

  Hide contents

 

  Reveal hidden contents

I think I already know you'll tell me the composition on this is off but I don't mind it  

 

 

 

I just wanted to add that I'd hang that top picture on my wall right now. I LOVE the texture of every part of this photo. The foreground slightly defocused to draw attention to the beautifully textured mountains to the texture of the clouds in the sky. You should post this on Reddit with a link to buy prints.

 

But, that's just my 2 cents!