IR from todayModerators: Greg B, Nnnnsic, Geoff, Glen, gstark, Moderators
Forum rules
Please note that image critiquing is a matter of give and take: if you post images for critique, and you then expect to receive criticism, then it is also reasonable, fair and appropriate that, in return, you post your critique of the images of other members here as a matter of courtesy. So please do offer your critique of the images of others; your opinion is important, and will help everyone here enjoy their visit to far greater extent. Also please note that, unless you state something to the contrary, other members might attempt to repost your image with their own post processing applied. We see this as an acceptable form of critique, but should you prefer that others not modify your work, this is perfectly ok, and you should state this, either within your post, or within your signature. Images posted here should conform with the general forum guidelines. Image sizes should not exceed 950 pixels along the largest side (height or width) and typically no more than four images per post or thread. Please also ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is.
Previous topic • Next topic
16 posts
• Page 1 of 1
IR from todayHello all, some of my IR pics from today. C&C most welcome, still coming to grips with IR! Might try a bit of channel mixer action later.
[url=http://www.trentwallis.com/gallery/view_photo.php?full=1&set_albumName=DSLRusersmeet060627&id=DSC_2765resized] Click to enlarge![/url] [url=http://www.trentwallis.com/gallery/view_photo.php?full=1&set_albumName=DSLRusersmeet060627&id=DSC_2614resized] Click to enlarge![/url] [url=http://www.trentwallis.com/gallery/view_photo.php?full=1&set_albumName=DSLRusersmeet060627&id=DSC_2640resized] Click to enlarge![/url] [url=http://www.trentwallis.com/gallery/view_photo.php?full=1&set_albumName=DSLRusersmeet060627&id=DSC_2574resized] Click to enlarge![/url]
Great stuff Trent, I really like them. Where's the shot of the little house ?
I'll have to mull them over a little before I give more indepth feedback just been PP my own work and the stark difference between my colour shots and your IR is a little too much for my eyes right now. I'd say initally the last one is my favourite on first impressions.
Last one is like a winter wonderland
Dodging and burning are steps to take care of mistakes God made in establishing tonal relationships! -Ansel Adams
http://www.redbubble.com/people/blacknstormy
I kept wondering why you were pulling out the tripod on such a sunny day - how many panoramas could one person take? Great work with the IR, #3 is my favourite with the inky black water, closely followed by nice composition and texture in #4.
So join in the chorus, and sing it one and all!
Trent - the last one rocks! No, actually it was at Watsons Bay wasn't it?
Geoff
Special Moments Photography Nikon D700, 50mm 1.4, 85mm 1.4, 70-200 2.8VR, SB800 & some simple studio stuff.
Trent - anything with foliage looks great. IR does not really lend itself to urban or city jungles
Chris
-------------------------------- I started my life with nothing and I’ve still got most of it left
Cool.
I think #4 works the best for me, probably followed by #2. Foliage looks especially great in IR. (Btw, you probably know, but you have a little bit of dust visible in #2 and #3 - top rightish.) Cheers,
macka a.k.a. Kris
These are great Trent, I love IR (as previously revealed elsewhere).
And the impact is certainly greatest when foliage dominates, although I think #3 works very well too. What was your setup? R72 filter or something else? cheers Greg - - - - D200 etc
Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see. - Arthur Schopenhauer
It's good to see more IR work! I probably like the composition of the last one the most (but none of them are "bad"!).
Certainly urban landscapes don't always work well in IR (that first shot could almost be a mono "visible" shot). But sometimes a scene will surprise you, so don't be afraid to experiment! Greg, it certainly looks like an R72 to me (and the comment about channel mixing indicates that it was probably an R72). I would expect the skies to be darker with other filters. But working with an unmodded D70 anything darker than an R72 is going to be very unwieldy (I notice the first shot was 1s, f/4, ISO800). At this size the ISO800 noise isn't really showing up. Trent, feel free to check out the Photoshop action on my website as a starting point for playing with channel mixing of R72 images. I start off by setting the WB on the RAW file so that part of the image is neutral, and then running the action over it. Changing the initial saturation in the RAW converter can accentuate the result also.
Trent
I'm with the rest - Last one by a mile. Great effect and wonderful composition combine to make this a superb image. Peter
Disclaimer: I know nothing about anything. *** smugmug galleries: http://www.stubbsy.smugmug.com ***
What a superb image that last one is.
Producer & Editor @ GadgetGuy.com.au
Contributor for fine magazines such as PC Authority and Popular Science.
As Dave says, all of these were D70 + 17-55 DX + 77 mm Hoya R72 filter. The first one (Sydney Harbour) is actually at 17 mm (hence the distortion), ISO800, 1/20 s, f/4 and is handheld. The other three are on a Feisol 3401 tripod with Manfrotto 488RC2 ballhead. I store a custom WB for IR in-camera so I don't have to set it every time. Metering is rather challenging to say the least, so shooting RAW is essential. Thanks for your action Dave, I'll check it out! Thanks for all the comments guys, very interesting! I was very surprised people found #4 the best actually. Will have a crack at some different PP with these and some other images later. Edit: #4 not #3!
Previous topic • Next topic
16 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Return to Image Reviews and Critiques Who is onlineUsers browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests |