Critique My Image

calengor

@Vipmediastar_JZ

I see. The thing is, I used Lightroom's perspective correction on that image, and that was the closest I could get it to fully vertical. I'll see if I can't post the original so comparisons can be made.

Msmoto

@calengor

If you look at some of these from Chicago, note for most of the images the verticals have no keystone effect. This is corrected manually in Lightroom, and done to my liking. For me, that is, in my opinion, the clean look of verticals which are plumb is simply what I like.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/fantinesfotos/sets/72157633337107507/

calengor

Now that you've pointed it out I can't stop seeing it in my image. I'll see if I can't get it to work better. I did not do it manually but rather let lightroom do it's thing and chose the best one that it offered.

spraynpray

@calengor: I'm sure that if you throw the image up on flickr and allow downloads, somebody here will correct it using Lightroom and repost. Did you go to lens corrections and use 'vertical' under the manual tab?

calengor

IIRC I chose either vertical or full in the basic tab.

Ade

@calengor

Is that a B&W HDR image? There appearsto be some HDR-like artifacts that bug me a bit... e.g., there's strong halo on the lamp post on the right side of the image, and the bricks on the buildings have a distracting pattern to them. Maybe just pet peeves of mine.

Still it's a good image. If it's HDR maybe try processing a non-HDR version just to compare? You might enjoy using a B&W plug-in like Silver Efex Pro.

calengor

I didn't get a chance to take a look at fixing the photo last night as I was not using the computer the file is on.

@Ade
I think it's a single exposure, I don't recall if I put it through HDRefex or Photomatix, but I used SilverEfex for the B&W conversion. When I get on the computer it's on I'll take a look at what exactly I did.

PB_PM

Working on an image based on the theme "odd angles". There are some minor lighting and framing differences, but the real change between the two is depth of field. I like the narrower depth of field, but wanted to get some feedback from others on which provides the needed information. In other words, is the picture better with the pencil in focus or not?


Large Version
Image 1: F4


Large Version
Image 2: F8

Any suggestions beyond that are welcome, of course.

Msmoto

@PB_PM

Not exactly certain as to what you are portraying, but, this might be an interesting shot with the entire plane of focus along the surface of the dial and hand out of focus. One would use a tilt shift lens for this.

But, if the idea is to have the point of interest at the pencil, possibly rearranging things to get the pencil tip in the lower right rather than the upper left would be interesting. Most of us read from left to right and thus if we can have our eye move from left to right landing on the important area, some feel this is better composition.

Just some food for thought...

PB_PM

@Msmoto As the theme suggests, the photo is supposed to capture an odd angle. I decided to take that literally, thus the mark being at the 105º position on the protractor. That is also why that part of the frame, rather than the pencil, is the primary plane of focus. I'm trying to use the lines on the protractor, and the pencil to draw the viewer to that part of the frame to highlight the "odd angle."

I don't have access to tilt shift lenses, just the 105mm VR, and it's just a shot for the local camera club competition, so I'm not going to rent one either. Good suggestion though!

Msmoto

OK, I see your point.

Elvishefer

@PB_PM - I prefer the f/8 version. I think it's because the out of focus logo in the f/4 version looks motion blur (when it isn't)... I think the character of the blur is poor. The f/8 would appeal to me more if the logo was straightened. I would also try dodging/burning the pencil tip and surroundings to draw more attention to that area of the photograph. Finally, because I always write too much, is 105 as odd as, say, 103? Good luck.

PB_PM

@Elvishefer Thanks for the suggestions, I'll keep those in mind.

PB_PM

Still went with 105º, simply because it is clearly marked on the protractor. I also decided to leave the pencil out of focus, and made a tighter shot. It's funny you mentioned that the bokeh looks nasty, never heard anyone say that about the bokeh of the 105mm VR before. Of course it could just be due to the shape of the text on the protractor, rather than the nature of the bokeh itself.

Elvishefer

I think any lens can meet a 'perfect storm' of bad circumstance that will result in questionable looking out of focus areas. You're right though, the 105mm is usually long enough and of a large enough aperture to make anything into cream.

Edit: I like your latest attempt the best.

Vipmediastar_JZ

@PB_PM the thirdone looks better witht the tighter crop. I would like to see a another option with the pencil sharp at least the tip maybe focus stacking?

Also on the top right from 80 to edge maybe a reflector to eliminate the shadow?

michael66

Still went with 105º, simply because it is clearly marked on the protractor. I also decided to leave the pencil out of focus, and made a tighter shot. It's funny you mentioned that the bokeh looks nasty, never heard anyone say that about the bokeh of the 105mm VR before. Of course it could just be due to the shape of the text on the protractor, rather than the nature of the bokeh itself.

I like the third version, but would have preferred that protractor was a little less out of focus at the bottom and perhaps show more of the pen.

I think he sad that the "character of the blur is poor', not that the bokeh was ugly. While the term bokeh is subjective, as in pleasing blur, it still sounds strange to hear that.

Msmoto

Oh, yes, to come back to the fisheye…. I am curious to know if there are any real gutsy folks who will say this is the worst thing I could have done, or if possibly some suggestions can be made. After seeing the final images I shoot, i can always find many changes I might have made…. just like when i did this for clients…. lots of changes. in any case here is one for your perusal.

Elvishefer

I really like the way the shelves on the left look (coming right up to the edge of the lens), and I think it might be nice to try to have the right do the same. I can see how it would be challenge with the door on the right. Perhaps more symmetry would be achieved if you stood in the middle of the car and looked down the length.

I really like the fisheye look though so to me, the image draws me in regardless.

Ade

@Msmoto

I like it. I'd agree with Elvishefer about maybe eliminating the gap on the right side... (worth trying, it may or may not look better). Maybe taking one or two steps in might do the trick.

Also the verticals seem slightly off, maybe the image needs to be rotated clockwise a degree or so?

Msmoto

Agree….. to both….. I think a step in would have been nice….

This is a fun lens to play with….. and, for sure i will be doing more of this….

Revisions:

spraynpray

I do like it (although I agree with previous comments), it is an intriguing shot which gives a good sense of space and time. May have been improved by having the people working in it.

Msmoto

@spraynpray

Thank you…. but I had to laugh… I believe it has been over fifty years since they used this in the USA.

michael66

As I headed into a meeting, I took a few shots of the most striking clouds against a deep blue sky background. I've shot 'the sky' before, but there was always something in the sky; a bird, a plane, no, it's... never mind. My biggest problem was that the AF couldn't seem to find a focus. My eyeballs didn't seem to be able to do much better. What should one do with the sky? Shoot at infinity? I've read that even the moon isn't at infinity. Maybe it doesn't matter, as the plan is to use this, someday, as a background.



D7100, Tamron 24-70/2.8, 24.5mm, f/5.0, 1/2500, ISO 100

Msmoto

I usually grab the edge of a cloud to use as a focus point. As to the moon being at infinity, there are so many other confounding factors, i.e., atmospheric conditions, that one must use a focus technique to obtain the best image. For the moon I use live view with great magnification in the image on the back.

Even with the sun, when photographed with a special filter (Thousand Oaks Optical) which cuts the light 99.999% one must focus. And this is 93,000,000 miles away.
For fun:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/fantinesfotos/8818383718/sizes/k/