A discussion forum - and more - for users of Digital Single Lens Reflex cameras.
Adelaide by nightModerators: 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
11 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Adelaide by night
Victoria Square fountain by night, Adelaide
This is my first attempt at Dynamic Range Increase (DRI) - it's a layer mask composite of 5 exposures 1 stop apart from 0.6 - 10 sec, f/10 @ 17mm (WB fluorescent - it really was this orange), some distortion correction and sharpening, but no tone-mapping stuff. Larger and better version can be found at http://www.flickr.com/photos/jhurrah. Johnnie Hurrah
Postcard!! Lovely.....
Share what you know, learn what you don't.
Wilderness Photography of Tasmania http://www.tasmaniart.com.au
Great shot Johnnie.
I'd almost be tempted to photoshop out the crane on the left. Daniel Last edited by DanielA on Sat Jun 24, 2006 6:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Nikon D4, D2Xs, D70, Nikkors and Sigmas lenses from 10 to 400mm
www.DSAimages.com
Yes, that crane! It was the best side of the fountain to take because of that row of lights on King William Street on the left, but then there was that crane! Is it part of the dynamic cityscape to be savoured or is it a disturbing eyesore? I tried just cropping more (it's already cropped a bit on the left and bottom), but I lose those lights. I'll give it a go in PS CS2.
Here's one without the crane. This one has been made from the RAW files, the first was made from the low quality JPGs of the D50. Please see the better/bigger version at http://static.flickr.com/45/173669137_90c0bf30ed_b.jpg.
An excellent image Johnnie. Yes, I'd clone out the crane with PS.
Just noticed you did clone it out. Maybe take out the base of the crane as well? Cheers John D3, D300, 14-24/2.8, 24-70/2.8, 85/1.4, 80-400VR, 18-200VR, 105/2.8 VR macro, Sigma 150/2.8 macro
http://www.johndarguephotography.com/
The crane base is a lot less obtrusive than the arm was. It is associated with some trickier gradations in sky colour and also some branches down the bottom, neither of which I felt likefiddling with. The arm could just be pointing to the left or away from the viewer, and you wouldn't be any the wiser.
Nice work....I am assuming the difference between DRI and HDR is the tone mapping of HDR? The DRI used here looks great, but I must admit HDR images have that 3D look, not suited to a lot of images but a good look just the same.
Roger.
Well, the techies debate this difference endlessly, and I don'y pretend to understand all the ins and outs. The above images are simply layered composites of the original "low" dynamic range images (8 bit JPG or 12 bit RAW), so the result remains at that level. I think in this instance the image is somewhat similar to the scene I could perceive with my own eyes at the time, whereas the "correctly" exposed image was a little too dark. You can take the same set of originals and use the File - Automate - HDR function of Photoshop CS2 to get a 24 bit high dynamic range image, or use other software such as Photomatix to the same end. The resulting file has such a high dynamic range that no printer or normal monitor can display it. And/Or you can tonemap the set of originals (e.g. in Photomatix) for particular effects - in effect, this is just fancy Curves. SOME of the results you see on the Web are spectacular, some are very strange. Mind you, I'm not sure that we're necessarily trying to reproduce reality with photography - I think the great masters of painting would have laughed at such a suggestion. There is a lot on the Web about how the Impressionists, for example, created the illusion of dynamic range with a palette of a few paints. A lot is also made of the days that Ansel Adams took to make prints to the same end. In summary, this was an experiment of a particular technique for a particular circumstance - changing tools for the job, as always, not sticking to one.
Ah, that's better.  The colours also look richer in this one. Very nice.
Daniel Nikon D4, D2Xs, D70, Nikkors and Sigmas lenses from 10 to 400mm
www.DSAimages.com
Previous topic • Next topic
11 posts
• Page 1 of 1
|
