Beginners Outing(Part 19)-Double Helix Bridge and MBS on the 31 July(Photos thread)

[wildcat]

I might just try your suggestion and do a little cropping on my Thorns, ZerocoolAstra.
And I do agree that composing the Helix Bridge can be a little difficult, I think the first set posted (#1 to #6) has maybe better compositions?
But thanks for your encouragement and comments!

Actually I have different thoughts on that. My problem is not on the empty space of #11 but rather, a middled exposure where you neither have a lot of highlights, nor a lot of deep shadows. Using an S curve in Photoshop might help. It might help to find a portion of the Esplanade where the sun is shining on it.

In any case it is quite difficult situation; if I understand correctly, you took this near noon time, correct?

 

[dawngel]

You have to put yourself in the shoes of the viewer. What would attract your attention at first glance. how will elements in the picture "move" that attention. Any thing can be a line, as long as it has some dominance in the audience's attention. A road, a path, patterns, a bridge, a river, even a string of clouds.

A lot of these things will come to you as you learn to stop and think more before you hit that shutter. Ask yourself:

What do you want the point(s) of interest (POI) to be?
How would elements in a frame help to accentuate that POI?
Are any elements unnecessary (being an extra)?
Are any elements forming a distraction that pulls attention away from your POI?

Hitting the shutter everyone can do. The key to great photos, and art, is to be able to capture exactly what you want the viewer to see. That is the x-factor that separates a snapshot from a piece of photographic work.

As for the spotlights. What I was avoiding, is to blow the spotlights and the lighted areas. By keeping it unblown, I can more leeway to work with the RAW picture and do my adjustments. ZCA mentioned the black card technique. For black card technique to work well, you need to at least have

1. a considerably long exposure.
2. a clear large area where you can use the black card to cover.

Black card users usually will try to drag out the shutter speed, so they have enough time to play with having the black card over the part of lens and another part of the exposure where the full frame is allowed to expose. Clear horizons works the best and when using the black card, you need to shake it so you sort of created a soft edge feel. GND can also achieve the effect but it constantly on, and is dependent on the number of stops the GND blocks out. Black card is up to you, how big a part of the entire exposure time you cover (and shake).

In this case, it will be very hard to use a black card. Simply because the spot you want to balance out (the spot lights) is too small and precise.

BTW, even as I say these, I am no expert. I am not there yet. In fact I am still very very far away from being an expert. I am still striving to get there...

Wow, this is "chim". :bigeyes:
Got a question: How do you keep the spotlight unblown, while ensuring the rest of the scene is correctly exposed? Is it balancing the settings to get the least blown situation and use photoshop to correct the raw to perfection later on?

As for the black card technique, I think I will need to read up more on that...can't really visualise how it works ^^
But its always nice to be introduced to new techniques
Thanks.

 

[jeanthemean]

Actually I have different thoughts on that. My problem is not on the empty space of #11 but rather, a middled exposure where you neither have a lot of highlights, nor a lot of deep shadows. Using an S curve in Photoshop might help. It might help to find a portion of the Esplanade where the sun is shining on it.

In any case it is quite difficult situation; if I understand correctly, you took this near noon time, correct?

Wildcat, I took this in the late afternoon and if i remembered correctly, Esplanade was covered in shade.

Thanks for pointing out the exposure, I will take note of the range between the highlights and shadows and make sure theres more 'punch' to it. I take every comments here in CS seriously, gives me a small step towards perfecting my images, so thanks for your pointers!

Cheers!

 

[daredevil123]

Wow, this is "chim". :bigeyes:
Got a question: How do you keep the spotlight unblown, while ensuring the rest of the scene is correctly exposed? Is it balancing the settings to get the least blown situation and use photoshop to correct the raw to perfection later on?

As for the black card technique, I think I will need to read up more on that...can't really visualise how it works ^^
But its always nice to be introduced to new techniques
Thanks.

dawngel, you just answered your own question.

It is all about compromise. To find the middle ground where the highlights are not blown and yet the rest of the frame is not too underexposed. It sounds hard but doable. I will show you the original out of camera jpg of the same exact picture. (I always take RAW+JPEG)

Here it is out of cam. Only resize, and watermark. No other adjustments or sharpening. Notice the part under the bridge is a lot darker than the final result.

 

[ZerocoolAstra]

Actually I have different thoughts on that. My problem is not on the empty space of #11 but rather, a middled exposure where you neither have a lot of highlights, nor a lot of deep shadows. Using an S curve in Photoshop might help. It might help to find a portion of the Esplanade where the sun is shining on it.

In any case it is quite difficult situation; if I understand correctly, you took this near noon time, correct?

you very bad leh....
This one is Beginners Outing, and you comment on the tones... (highlights, midtones and shadows) tsk tsk...
That one is Primary 4 level already. I'm only at Primary 3, so not qualified to comment...

 

[ZerocoolAstra]

Wildcat, I took this in the late afternoon and if i remembered correctly, Esplanade was covered in shade.

Thanks for pointing out the exposure, I will take note of the range between the highlights and shadows and make sure theres more 'punch' to it. I take every comments here in CS seriously, gives me a small step towards perfecting my images, so thanks for your pointers!

Cheers!

with landscapes, you're looking for a range of tones to fill up the dynamic range of the sensor. Ideally you should not get blown highlights (histogram exceed the right edge) or unrecoverable shadow details (histogram exceed the left).
I think the technique DD123 uses is sometimes referred to as "exposing to the right", whereby the tones are more biased to the highlights, but keeping them from exceeding the limits. Then recover shadow detail from the RAW file in post-processing...

 

[daredevil123]

with landscapes, you're looking for a range of tones to fill up the dynamic range of the sensor. Ideally you should not get blown highlights (histogram exceed the right edge) or unrecoverable shadow details (histogram exceed the left).
I think the technique DD123 uses is sometimes referred to as "exposing to the right", whereby the tones are more biased to the highlights, but keeping them from exceeding the limits. Then recover shadow detail from the RAW file in post-processing...

Yea bro and jeanthemean. When "exposing to the right", you have to keep looking at the histogram to make sure none of the highlights are clipped. Your pictures will look as if they are over exposed, and when people ask to look at your LCD of your shots, they will go "eeewwwwww". But deep down you know that none of the highlights are clipped. and when you process the RAW, you will bring down the exposure in PP, and you will notice the shadow areas actually has a lot of details. I actually used this technique in DD#2. When I am home tonight, I will try to post up the original out of cam JPEG for you to see. It looks horrendous. But once processed, you will see that final result in DD#2.

That is the biggest challenge with shooting in this technique, that constantly your eyes tell you all your pics are screwed up, and all over exposed. But believe in your histogram, and your RAW file. You will only see the real beauty emerge after PP.

I will have to make this an article with examples soon...

 

[jeanthemean]

you very bad leh....
This one is Beginners Outing, and you comment on the tones... (highlights, midtones and shadows) tsk tsk...
That one is Primary 4 level already. I'm only at Primary 3, so not qualified to comment...

Haha, I'm cool with that ZerocoolAstra, I'm a sponge, I absorb all comments!

And here's the edited version after I tweaked the curves and gave it a closer and tighter crop! I do love this one better than the former!

 

[daredevil123]

Haha, I'm cool with that ZerocoolAstra, I'm a sponge, I absorb all comments!

And here's the edited version after I tweaked the curves and gave it a closer and tighter crop! I do love this one better than the former!

For me, the picture has potential, but the blue sky spoiled it all. The shapes in the esplanade roof is fun to work with, but it doesn't really go with a sky with no character. It doesn't gel with the blue color also. I would go total B&W on this. I took the liberty to do a quick job on your picture and here it is. If you want me to take it down and delete it, let me know.

 

[SHLEW]

No problem

DD#1 there is not much PP. Just some slight adjustments in curves and noise removal. This one I shot totally level, with a spirit level as a guide, so there is no perspective distortion in the picture. Settings also straight forward. Base ISO, Aperture priority, F13. I used -2/3 EV to keep the spotlights from blowing. I used hyperfocusing in this one. Focused to 2m, so everything from 1m to infinity is sharp and in focus.

Hi DD,
1 When you say perspective distortion, are you referring to the fore and aft tilt of the camera?
2 If I am shooting a scene such as your #01, how much distortion will it cause to render the picture unacceptable if say the initial view is not as you would like it and you have to tilt the cam fore and aft., in which case, the level is only on the side to side axis?

Thanks and cheers.
LEW

 

[daredevil123]

Hi DD,
1 When you say perspective distortion, are you referring to the fore and aft tilt of the camera?
2 If I am shooting a scene such as your #01, how much distortion will it cause to render the picture unacceptable if say the initial view is not as you would like it and you have to tilt the cam fore and aft., in which case, the level is only on the side to side axis?

Thanks and cheers.
LEW

I am sorry, I am not a boating person. So I get confused with fore and aft.

Basically it means tilting the view down or up. As long as it is not level, you will see buildings lean in or lean out from the centre of the frame. With any straight buildings in the picture, as long as it looks off, it is unacceptable. Sometimes it is good to leave it in if it is not very visible or if the perspective distortion is purposely left in to create a sense of height/size.

What you can do, is to:
1) shoot wider while keeping it level, and crop later
2) shoot tilted up or down, and correct the distortion later in PP. In this case, you need to shoot wider to allow room for cropping later after distortion correction is done.
3) get a higher or lower vantage point to get the the view you want.

 

[SHLEW]

I am sorry, I am not a boating person. So I get confused with fore and aft.

Basically it means tilting the view down or up. As long as it is not level, you will see buildings lean in or lean out from the centre of the frame. With any straight buildings in the picture, as long as it looks off, it is unacceptable. Sometimes it is good to leave it in if it is not very visible or if the perspective distortion is purposely left in to create a sense of height/size.

What you can do, is to:
1) shoot wider while keeping it level, and crop later
2) shoot tilted up or down, and correct the distortion later in PP. In this case, you need to shoot wider to allow room for cropping later after distortion correction is done.
3) get a higher or lower vantage point to get the the view you want.

Thanks DD. From your explanation, the best option where possible, is to do #3 which has the least hassle. Of course, leaving a tall building with distorted perspective for creativity purpose is not wrong either and very subjective and open to many opinions.
Cheers.
LEW

 

[deveraux]

Nice pictures....looks like i missed shooting with cleon and iszan again. Keep up the good work guys

 

[Ghaz1]

For me, the picture has potential, but the blue sky spoiled it all. The shapes in the esplanade roof is fun to work with, but it doesn't really go with a sky with no character. It doesn't gel with the blue color also. I would go total B&W on this. I took the liberty to do a quick job on your picture and here it is. If you want me to take it down and delete it, let me know.

Much prefer this B&W version.

 

[cleonbus]

Nice pictures....looks like i missed shooting with cleon and iszan again. Keep up the good work guys

Thanks bro.So when are you planning to shoot landscapes again?That day saw you went to the Bukit Timah KTM railway stn to shoot?

 

[iszan]

Much prefer this B&W version.

:thumbsup: reminds me of Kit's work.. haha.. this is a keep~

 

[SHLEW]

Hi iszan, DD & Zerocool,
Since there is a lot of discussion in this thread on technical issues such as levelling and perspective on buildings, I would like to borrow a bit of space here (although the subject is not regarding this thread) to ask you what are your opinions on the AP picture in The Straits Times today (Aug 6, 2010) page A27? The picture shows a group of people photographing a scene with the Taipei 101 building distinctly leaning about 6 degrees in the background.
Thanks.
LEW

 

[daredevil123]

Hi iszan, DD & Zerocool,
Since there is a lot of discussion in this thread on technical issues such as levelling and perspective on buildings, I would like to borrow a bit of space here (although the subject is not regarding this thread) to ask you what are your opinions on the AP picture in The Straits Times today (Aug 6, 2010) page A27? The picture shows a group of people photographing a scene with the Taipei 101 building distinctly leaning about 6 degrees in the background.
Thanks.
LEW

I don't get straits time at home. Anyone care to scan?

 

[ZerocoolAstra]

I don't get straits time at home. Anyone care to scan?

i don't have the Straits Times at office too, and the web version doesn't have the article.

I could guess that, since Taipei 101 is a super tall building, it would be pretty hard to get it all in whilst maintaining proper perspective.
If it's a journalist's photo of people photographing the building, then the most important point is to fit the building and the people in the frame, heck about the perspective

 

[skylover]

Hi iszan, DD & Zerocool,
Since there is a lot of discussion in this thread on technical issues such as levelling and perspective on buildings, I would like to borrow a bit of space here (although the subject is not regarding this thread) to ask you what are your opinions on the AP picture in The Straits Times today (Aug 6, 2010) page A27? The picture shows a group of people photographing a scene with the Taipei 101 building distinctly leaning about 6 degrees in the background.
Thanks.
LEW

Bro.. Yes you are welcome to do so. Everybody can learn something in return. That's why its a sharing session.

I don't get straits time at home. Anyone care to scan?

i don't have the Straits Times at office too, and the web version doesn't have the article.

I could guess that, since Taipei 101 is a super tall building, it would be pretty hard to get it all in whilst maintaining proper perspective.
If it's a journalist's photo of people photographing the building, then the most important point is to fit the building and the people in the frame, heck about the perspective

I have the newspaper. Will try to scan it later where possible or else tonight. :devil: