Water

Got a thin skin? Then look elsewhere. Post a link to an image that you've made, and invite others to offer their critiques. Honesty is encouraged, but please be positive in your constructive criticism. Flaming and just plain nastiness will not be tolerated. Please note that this is not an area for you to showcase your images, nor is this a place for you to show-off where you have been. This is an area for you to post images so that you may share with us a technique that you have mastered, or are trying to master. Typically, no more than about four images should be posted in any one post or thread, and the maximum size of any side of any image should not exceed 950 px.

Moderators: 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.

Water

Postby Fortigurn on Sun Feb 26, 2006 4:49 am

For those who appreciate water shots:

Image

Image

Image

No post production involved. Vignette achieved by putting a 135mm lens hood on a 28mm lens.
Fortigurn
Member
 
Posts: 228
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 12:23 am
Location: Taipei (Taiwan)

Postby owen on Sun Feb 26, 2006 10:10 am

Hi Mate. Firstly welcome to the forum.

The images are different I'll give you that. You've got a nice silky water effect in all of them, and I think the vignette suits that shot. I have to ask though, the colours look very yellow.

Look forward to seeing some more.

Cheers,
Owen.
http://www.ausphotos.com - My Gallery

http://www.doesgodexist.com - a very interesting site.
User avatar
owen
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1699
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 3:21 pm
Location: Nowra, NSW

Postby Fortigurn on Sun Feb 26, 2006 11:12 am

owen wrote:Hi Mate. Firstly welcome to the forum.


Thanks. :)

The images are different I'll give you that. You've got a nice silky water effect in all of them, and I think the vignette suits that shot. I have to ask though, the colours look very yellow.


The silky effect was what I was aiming for. I took the shots with exposure times of 1-2 seconds. I experimented with the vignette a couple of times (more to come).

Yes, the colours are very yellow in a few of the shots. That's a result of using Kodak Royal 25 ASA (a noble film which is sadly no longer made), and partly due to the long exposure time.

I was happy burning out the background for the sake of the water in the foreground.

Look forward to seeing some more.


I should stitch these together:

Image
Image
Image
Fortigurn
Member
 
Posts: 228
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 12:23 am
Location: Taipei (Taiwan)

Postby Fortigurn on Sun Feb 26, 2006 11:14 am

The other vignette shot:

Image

A faster shot:

Image

I like this camera. Shots like these are why I still have it.
Fortigurn
Member
 
Posts: 228
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 12:23 am
Location: Taipei (Taiwan)

Postby MCWB on Sun Feb 26, 2006 12:54 pm

Good to see you over here Fortigurn, welcome! :) Love all these shots, silky smooth water always gets me. The yellow cast is slightly annoying, might be worth a couple of minutes in PS to get rid of it, but despite the cast the shots (particularly the first one, where the background isn't blown out so the whole frame looks 'rich') still work well. Thanks for posting!
User avatar
MCWB
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2121
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 10:55 pm
Location: Epping/CBD, Sydney-D200, D70

Postby Marvin on Sun Feb 26, 2006 2:48 pm

I really like the second shot and the last shot. Where were they taken? Which camera did you use that you like so much?
Nikon D7000
User avatar
Marvin
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1486
Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2004 9:33 pm
Location: Back in the hot Riverland, SA.

Postby Fortigurn on Mon Feb 27, 2006 12:03 am

Thanks guys. I actually wanted the yellow look, because it captured the slightly gold glow in the scene as the afternoon light started to fade (it was a winter afternoon, between 3 and 4pm).

Now for the details:

  • Location: Cataract Gorge, Launceston (Tasmania), while the gorge was in flood (that's a concrete bridge you're looking at, which people normally walk across)
  • Film: Kodak Royal Gold (25 ASA), a beautiful ultrafine grain film with massive colour saturation, which I miss sorely
  • Filters: neutral colour skylight, neutral colour daylight, and a rotating polarizer at full intensity (a total of 5.5 f-stops all together)
  • Lenses: 55mm and 28mm
  • Additional equipment: Ancient Velbon tripod (heavy aluminium, very stable)
  • Speeds: 1-2 seconds (1, 1.5 and 2)
  • Aperture: f5.6
  • Camera: Pentax Spotmatic


This was my first camera, a fully manual Pentax Spotmatic with only a very basic inbuilt light meter to guide me. I worked out all the shots by taking a good look at the scene and calculating the f-stops and speeds with a piece of paper (ignoring the light meter).

I still have this camera. It's about 30 years old now, and was maybe 20 years old when I took these.
Last edited by Fortigurn on Mon Feb 27, 2006 1:46 am, edited 1 time in total.
Fortigurn
Member
 
Posts: 228
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 12:23 am
Location: Taipei (Taiwan)

Postby Fortigurn on Mon Feb 27, 2006 12:05 am

MCWB wrote:Good to see you over here Fortigurn, welcome! :) Love all these shots, silky smooth water always gets me. The yellow cast is slightly annoying, might be worth a couple of minutes in PS to get rid of it, but despite the cast the shots (particularly the first one, where the background isn't blown out so the whole frame looks 'rich') still work well. Thanks for posting!


That first one I really do like myself. I did enjoy burning out the background in the other shots, just for the sake of the silky water in the foreground (this was while I was following Peter Dombrovskis' photography, and experimenting with water shots), but I wanted that shot to be evenly saturated, and I really love how it turned out.
Last edited by Fortigurn on Mon Feb 27, 2006 12:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Fortigurn
Member
 
Posts: 228
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 12:23 am
Location: Taipei (Taiwan)

Postby wendellt on Mon Feb 27, 2006 12:21 am

not sure if it's the monitor i'm looking at but the shots look really moody, the first one is my fav but the last one has better silky smooth water.
well done
User avatar
wendellt
Outstanding Member of the year (Don't try this at home.)
 
Posts: 4078
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2005 10:04 am
Location: Dilettante Outside the City Walls, Sydney

Postby Fortigurn on Mon Feb 27, 2006 1:48 am

wendellt wrote:not sure if it's the monitor i'm looking at but the shots look really moody, the first one is my fav but the last one has better silky smooth water.
well done


Do you mean moody as in dark? It could be the monitor, or the scanning job I did on them (they were scanned a few years ago, and I didn't really scan them at a high enough resolution, nor did I save them at a high enough resolution - I had a lot to learn back then).

Thanks for the encouragement.
Fortigurn
Member
 
Posts: 228
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 12:23 am
Location: Taipei (Taiwan)

Postby dooda on Mon Feb 27, 2006 3:37 am

When I first looked I thought, that looks really filmy. Then I started looking for traces of digital manip into film, and read that you used kodack. I gotta say, I really like the film look. Almost polaroidish? Anyway the saturated look works for me because of the fact that you used film. It looks authentic.
love's first sighs are wisdom's last

Dave
http://www.flickr.com/photos/elton/
User avatar
dooda
Party Animal
 
Posts: 1591
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2004 11:47 am
Location: Vancouver, B.C. Canada

Postby Marvin on Mon Feb 27, 2006 12:06 pm

Fortigurn wrote:
This was my first camera, a fully manual Pentax Spotmatic with only a very basic inbuilt light meter to guide me. I worked out all the shots by taking a good look at the scene and calculating the f-stops and speeds with a piece of paper (ignoring the light meter).

I still have this camera. It's about 30 years old now, and was maybe 20 years old when I took these.

For me, who just came in during the digital age, that's might impressive!!
Nikon D7000
User avatar
Marvin
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1486
Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2004 9:33 pm
Location: Back in the hot Riverland, SA.

Postby Fortigurn on Mon Feb 27, 2006 2:02 pm

dooda wrote:When I first looked I thought, that looks really filmy. Then I started looking for traces of digital manip into film, and read that you used kodack. I gotta say, I really like the film look. Almost polaroidish? Anyway the saturated look works for me because of the fact that you used film. It looks authentic.


Thanks. After about 12 years of photography, I still haven't moved over to digital. I love film, and I have six film cameras (the oldest being a 60 odd year old Yashica medium format). I can usually distinguish between digital and film images (anything up to 5MP is pretty easy, but past 6MP with professional cameras it does get more challenging), and prefer film.

Having said which, I do intend to move to digital this year (Nikon D50).

I really wish Kodak hadn't discontinued Royal Gold. It was a stunning film. I have yet to find a replacement.
Fortigurn
Member
 
Posts: 228
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 12:23 am
Location: Taipei (Taiwan)

Postby Fortigurn on Mon Feb 27, 2006 2:04 pm

Marvin wrote:
Fortigurn wrote:
This was my first camera, a fully manual Pentax Spotmatic with only a very basic inbuilt light meter to guide me. I worked out all the shots by taking a good look at the scene and calculating the f-stops and speeds with a piece of paper (ignoring the light meter).

I still have this camera. It's about 30 years old now, and was maybe 20 years old when I took these.

For me, who just came in during the digital age, that's might impressive!!


Thanks. I have to say I was moved by all the digital shots on this forum to post a few Old Skool shots, just to remind people what film can do, and how good some of the earlier equipment really was.

I spent about 8 years working with fully manual equipment like this before I even had my first automatic camera. I believe that did me a lot of good.
Fortigurn
Member
 
Posts: 228
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 12:23 am
Location: Taipei (Taiwan)


Return to Image Reviews and Critiques