|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 11/9/2007
|
Mary, I just try to not sound like some kind of "guru that is always right just because he is right", and so I just have to explain *why* I find this or that. Of course, and at any given time, I am really willing and happy to hear other points of view with argumentation since they enrich my own mind.
At the end we are all steadily and only beginners, and compared to what there is still to be learned our knowledge can only be considered as negligible. Learning a whole life - a very good thing to know, since this means that it can never get boring, if we only keep it up.
Have all the fun of the world with your new camera, explore its capabilities, its limitations, how it reacts, how it perhaps sometimes plays the diva, what it likes, what it dislikes, what it sees, what it oversees - that's the fun of it, get to know it. It will be then not just a camera but really your indispensable friend and supporter for anything you want to do. And you will really know what that "click" of the shutter button means. I wish you a big fat long friendship with it.
And remember always, Mary, no PS can get the place of such a friend.
Cheers,
Nick
P.S.: That's why my T90 is still my fave. Yeap, an oldie but the tank never left me standing in the rain. :-)
|
|
|
|
|
Mary Brown
{K:71879} 11/9/2007
|
Nick, you put a lot of time and thought to write such a comprehensive response. I really do appreciate that. Your points make a lot of sense and give anyone reading them things to think about. My new camera has a lot more manual options than my last one. My hope is that sometime I will have learned what they all do and how to use them to their best adventage. It will take much more experience and knowledge for that to happen. However, practice and comments such as yours have been helpful. UF has been a great learning place and I am glad that a friend recommended joining. I am admittedly at the beginning of that learning situation. But, as you said, if it were easy, everyone with a camera would be taking great images. However, I enjoy photography and learning bits at a time. Thank you again for taking the time to assist me.
MAry
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 11/8/2007
|
---Continuation of last message
And what does the above show? It shows two things:
1) It is not enough to find something "beatiful" in nature and capture it in order to have a "aeatiful" image. This way doesn't suffice. Considering that nature can be extremely difficult to be captured right this shows that for a photographer it is not enough to just get out and find photogenic subjects to shoot. He/she must capture them in such a way, that the *image* demonstrates what she/he found striking.
2) When an image is purely taken then expect no miracles from PS or any other software. Don't wonder about the perfect adjustment in PS but do wonder about the perfect adjustment of the camera for the particular situation. And here I have the feeling that the dawn of all that fantastic imaging software brought too high a confidense that we don't need to care for the setup of the camera anymore. Just see something, shoot, and it is "beautiful", isn't it.
Some more consideration of the optics, techiques, settings, apertures, shutter speeds and the like is absolutely necessary. And also another thing which is very hard to do. Detach from your subject at shooting time. Don't be only guided by enthusiasm. The spectator does not see what you saw but only an image, and you have to pump in all the special lookings/details/whatever in a restricted rectangle cut out from the scene, that will be your image. Think of the settings, the composition, the perspective, What will the chosen aperture do? Or the shutter speed? Should that thing over there be included?
Think very relaxed and cool about what is that really that excites you on some given, say, landscape? Is it color? Shapes, details, relations, complexity, simplicity? And what does the camera see under some special settings? And how to enhance this and to lower the importance of that?
It is not easy to do that being still a human being, since of course there has to be enthusiasm for the subject in order to wish to shoot a photo of it at all. But it shouldn't be just enthusiasm, it should be *conscious* enthusiasm.
You see, I could be as enthusiastic as it takes about music, but at the end it is knowing where to out my fingers on the guitar in order to play enthusiastically a gopod song - or else I could take the air guitar too. ;-)
I hope I could make it understandable - this is why the long message. As always "you" denotes just about anybody.
Cheers,
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 11/8/2007
|
You are very welocme, Mary, and I am glad if I have said something reasonable. (Doyle says, it happens only when I am in delirium! ;-))
Well, let's start from the beginning, which seems to be forgotten especially in photography of nature. When something is "nice" in nature, then it way doesn't mean that it is also nice on the image. An image might depict something that is "wonderful" in nature, but this is not what we consider here. We consider the image itself, not what the scene was that really existed. I don't "see" how "beautiful it must have been, but how "beatifully" the scene was captured. Or else, everybody catch a camera and be automatically a great master simply by photographing something of nature one way or the other. But you know, skill is not "one way or the other".
OK, having said that, lets' take a look at the corrected images. The third one you attached is still too weak, too fuzzy, there is that kind of haze over it. We forget it and proceed to the other two. They both are stronger than the third, but look at what cost you gained the stronger contours through PS adjustment. The right side is now completely dark. There is absolutely no detail to see - it's just a dark blue region.
This happens quite often - you gain a bit contrast here and you lose all details of extended regions that do not carry strong differences in lighting on them. And that's of course going to happen, since adjustments are no magic but simply spreading the tonal range. If for example the alreary already darker regions that carry just a bit of tonal differences between their subparts are all made even darker through adjustment, then at some point our eyes cann differentiate anymore between the different details that have been shifted to darker tones.
What do I see on the images now? (The images, not what I can connect with them with nature by having experienced that kind of sight before.) Imagine you would show them to somebody that never saw what you saw. Would she/he then be as amazed by the corrected or the original pictures? I'm afraid not! No strongly illuminated borders of the clouds in that glowing manner, no texture of the clouds in the darker regions which would supply electrifying plasticity, no real dynamic, striking appearance. If I wouldn't know how such a spectacle looks in nature, would I ever be able to see some of the above mentioned things on these images?
---I continue on next message
|
|
|
|
|
Mary Brown
{K:71879} 11/7/2007
|
last one of the adjusted ones
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mary Brown
{K:71879} 11/7/2007
|
Another one
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mary Brown
{K:71879} 11/7/2007
|
Nick, thank you so much for your thoughtful and detailed comment. I understand what you are saying about the upper ones looking faded, especially the one on the upper left. I took it because it shows the long distance that the ray shone. Usually, crepuscular rays are much brighter and more clearly defined. This day, they were not, but interesting none the less. It was sort of wierd. After reading your comment, I opened tem again in PS and adjusted the contrast and brightness. Perhaps, I should have done that before posting the collage. Here are a couple of them. Let me know what you think. I appreciate your honest comments. Thank you.
MAry
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 11/7/2007
|
Nice idea, Mary, and also good coloring. But the spotlights are too weak especially on the images at the top. They do not have those strong contours that are per se the definition of a spotlight - they simply mix up with the clouds in a more or less gradual light transition.
The darker parts of the clouds are quite impressive but then, some kind of contrast, some strong contour, something of a sudden change is absolutely necessary for making visible the grandiosity of the natural spectacle.
The small size of the individual images makes that kind of very homogenous looking even stronger. The wonderful spotlights turn to tiny candlelights. And the layout and chosen background color are simply quick and dirty. Only one of the images would be enough (if more interesting) on a bigger version.
Any chances to see a bigger one too?
All the best,
Nick
|
|
|
|
Erland Pillegaard
{K:34147} 11/4/2007
|
Wonderfult work and picture
erland
|
|
|
|
Elle Elle
{K:10958} 11/3/2007
|
very nice result dear Mary,
best, mahassa
|
|
|
|
Nedim Muhic
{K:14362} 10/22/2007
|
Amazing shot. I love the colors and the lights. A truly wonderful landscape. Well done! Nedim.
|
|
|
|
B T
{K:1794} 10/22/2007
|
Well done ;) I like it ;)
Regards,
Bartosz
|
|
|
|
H L
{K:11377} 10/15/2007
|
Opps my vote:)
|
|
|
|
|
H L
{K:11377} 10/15/2007
|
I love the looks ....like meteors slashing trough the sky,
Excellent lighting work, great originality!!!!
All my best, Mary!
Cheers,
Harry
|
|
|
|
halil çelebi
{K:89} 10/14/2007
|
Four part images are good idea. Step by step Im looking to sky and clouds. Blue tones and lights perfect. I selected 2 and 3.
Halil.
|
|
|
|
Roberto Arcari Farinetti
{K:209486} 10/12/2007
|
wwooow dear Mary.. played on pefect last ray of sun..
love it!
roby
|
|
|
|
Alison DuFlon
{K:36566} 10/11/2007
|
The sky can have some pretty amazing things going on and you seem to have captured the best of it. Wonderful colors, shapes and light rays. Alison
|
|
|
|
|
Alicia Popp
{K:87532} 10/10/2007
|
Estupenda secuencia nos muestras... genial Mary!
Felicitaciones!!!
|
|
|
|
Jose Ignacio (Nacho) Garcia Barcia
{K:96391} 10/9/2007
|
great. simply magnificent. 7++++++++==
|
|
|
|
Ali Naghizadeh
{K:19600} 10/8/2007
|
Love them .. very intresting presentation.. well done dear Mary..
My best.. aLi
|
|
|
|
reza goudarzi
{K:7097} 10/5/2007
|
realy perfessional photo again dear mary...thx for sharing! beutiful job..regards,
reza,
|
|
|
|
Andre Denis
{K:66407} 10/4/2007
|
Mary,
It was a good idea to present these images like this. It's good to be able to compare them all in one viewing sometimes.
You have given me an idea for presenting some images of the moon that I took last week.
Andre
|
|
|
|
Rachel Leah
{K:26110} 10/1/2007
|
Wow, awesome series here! Great eye, I love how you captured this and laid it out for us! It looks gorgeous, such an awesome thing you captured too! Nice work with this :)
~Rachel~
|
|
|
|
|
Robert Chin
{K:22282} 9/29/2007
|
Awesome capture Mary,the 'spotlights' sure lit up the sky.
Excellent exposure!!
Take care
Robbie
|
|
|
|
parehan .K
{K:27453} 9/27/2007
|
Beautiful, strong viewed rays and amazing Mary.well done !!!7/7
Best wishes,
parehan
|
|
|
|
|
Paulo Vinícius
{K:2657} 9/27/2007
|
Good tones and well done composition
Congrats...
|
|
|
|
Walter Scarella
{K:19671} 9/26/2007
|
Beautiful composition, excellent work !!! Regards.....Walter
|
|
|
|
|
parehan .K
{K:27453} 9/24/2007
|
Nice presentation, ,I love it.
Best wishes,
parehan
|
|
|
|
|
Alison DuFlon
{K:36566} 9/23/2007
|
Wonderful capture and presentation of these beams of light. It is pretty spectacular. Alison
|
|
|
|
Ace Star
{K:21040} 9/22/2007
|
beautiful presentation dear Mary :)
love your work
excellent
good luck
|
|
|
|
|
Del Metheny
{K:25617} 9/22/2007
|
Very well assembled and presented Mary. It reminds me some of the biblical paintins you see with light streaming through the openings in the clouds. I like it. Del.
|
|
|
|
Marcus Armani
{K:36599} 9/21/2007
|
wonderful series Mary, the clouds with the suns rays are really beautiful, I really like the different directions and intensity, excellent..
|
|
|
|
Michele Carlsen
{K:146013} 9/21/2007
|
A beautiful collage Mary and perfect title too...
It's very hard to pick one image when they are all soo interesting each with their own beauty - so I am glad you got at least 4 shots to share with us with a super presentation ....very peaceful to view ...
Best wishes,
Michele~
|
|
|
|
Shane Finnigan
{K:1990} 9/20/2007
|
Great study of light and water(clouds) Mary!
|
|
|
|
John Hatz
{K:156973} 9/20/2007
|
Great composition Mary, beautiful strong viewed rays and amazing the idea of...an eye that opened here, really especialy the top photos...WOW...and rightly at the time he 'eye' opens and JUST ONE ray cames down, amazing!
Excellent!
be well!
|
|
|
|
|
Fabio Keiner
{K:81109} 9/20/2007
|
excellentissimo
|
|
|
|
Jim Budrakey
{K:24393} 9/20/2007
|
Spectacular. Ain't the sky great? :-) As far as I'm concerned, the sky is the light show to which all light shows aspire. You have captured it so well. I particularly like the grouping.
|
|
|
|
Stan Ciszek
{K:56854} 9/20/2007
|
Gorgeous Photo Mary,I love it,
Congratulations,
Stan
|
|
|
|
Gustavo Scheverin
{K:164501} 9/20/2007
|
Bellas luces.
Felictaciones!
|
|
|
|
Bill Voizin
{K:78} 9/20/2007
|
Spectacular natural light show Mary...nice presentation.
Regards--Bill Voizin
|
|
|
|
Carolyn Wheeler
{K:1007} 9/20/2007
|
Very nicely presented, and appropriately named.
|
|
0 
