|
That's good. Burn the bottom area a bit, then it's great. (or use a 5 filter in the printing, if these are film... don't think so though) Good texture on the second one, too, though the DOF blur at the bottom is distracting.
|
# ¿ Sep 28, 2009 23:30 |
|
|
# ¿ May 4, 2024 00:41 |
|
Fukushima
|
# ¿ Sep 29, 2009 02:55 |
|
Whitezombi posted:Thanks. These are digital. What bottom area? I've hacked away at it to show you; the quality would be much better if performed on a TIFF file from the RAW. If you're really into digital B&W, Nik Software's Silver Efex Pro is excellent.
|
# ¿ Sep 29, 2009 20:22 |
|
This is pretty cool.
|
# ¿ Sep 30, 2009 20:10 |
|
All three of those images have a nice composition, and the colors are great. I've seen too many images like that with crazy Crayon colors, those are all very good. The first one would have greatly benefited from a polarizer (to allow the lake bed to be seen better) and properly exposed highlights. It could help to have the mountain closer to the center of the frame; everything to the left of the log is pretty uninteresting. All of them have blown highlights. If you bracketed, grab a frame with better highlight exposure and bring up the shadows as best as possible and see what that looks like. Wanna go there.
|
# ¿ Oct 16, 2009 02:14 |
|
I like both of these, with the highlights caveat on the first one again. I disagree with the previous poster about the composition of the waterfall. So many waterfall shots like this are shot wide angle and seem so busy and active. In the photo here you've managed to make it seem very calm and simple, which is likely much more representative of the scene. There's a lot of texture in the image that would likely be much better appreciate if it were printed.
|
# ¿ Oct 16, 2009 16:15 |
|
You really, really, need to give some B&W conversions a shot. These are great images.
|
# ¿ Oct 18, 2009 14:11 |
|
That shot also begs to be cropped square.
|
# ¿ Oct 19, 2009 17:23 |
|
evil_bunnY posted:Some pretty impressive mountain photography I have never seen anything like this mountain. Where is this? edit time! sooooo that mountain isn't real. If you go to the photographer's website ( http://www.michaelnajjar.com/ , warning, it resizes your browser and is kind of a pain to navigate) you can read about the project, "High Altitude". It visualizes stock market trends in mountain vistas. Hence, some of the images you see are in edited to match the period indicated in the description of each image. Now the photos are suddenly worth looking at. JAY ZERO SUM GAME fucked around with this message at 00:09 on Oct 29, 2009 |
# ¿ Oct 28, 2009 23:59 |
|
yessssssssssssss A touch underexposed. But awesome.
|
# ¿ Nov 12, 2009 18:09 |
|
I guess this is a landscape?
|
# ¿ Nov 17, 2009 01:00 |
|
Yeah, I'm not sure I'm happy with it either. Coming back to it I've done this, which is much closer to what I'm after.
|
# ¿ Nov 17, 2009 03:04 |
|
Split-toning look to this, less vignetting, similar structure look. This is going to be printed and hung in a particular place, and the selenium look was going to be too cold. Pretty happy with this. JAY ZERO SUM GAME fucked around with this message at 06:03 on Nov 17, 2009 |
# ¿ Nov 17, 2009 04:23 |
|
Love it.
|
# ¿ Nov 17, 2009 06:03 |
|
I really like this, but start over in post-processing. Too dark, and has a bad HDR feel to it.
|
# ¿ Nov 26, 2009 17:58 |
|
I like that. It doesn't quite feel like a, to borrow a term, fine print, though.
|
# ¿ Dec 28, 2009 20:43 |
|
I like this. e: a lot
|
# ¿ Jan 9, 2010 00:11 |
|
I hate to do it, butMannequin posted:I think these are boring. Who cares? Running water. Big deal. Work on your compositions dude. Make pictures interesting. This is the same old crap. You should be able to do better. Learn to edit tighter, as well. Only one of those three needed to be posted. Which one best communicates what you saw? What you felt? What you would like others to see or feel?
|
# ¿ Jan 16, 2010 15:34 |
|
Posted on your flickr, but I like this quite a bit. You have just enough detail in those tree trunks to make that bottom half interesting.
|
# ¿ Jan 22, 2010 22:45 |
|
Always nice stuff in here. Makin' trees look sexy
|
# ¿ Jan 29, 2010 18:10 |
|
It's snowy and I can't go do poo poo so you get another photo.
|
# ¿ Jan 30, 2010 00:56 |
|
I like the contrast a lot, reminds me of wet plate photography. Except you actually have a sky!
|
# ¿ Feb 3, 2010 17:06 |
|
ElroySmin posted:
Found this place randomly in northwest Oklahoma. Color or B&W? I forgot to throw on the polarizer since my car was going to be towed in 15 minutes and I had to run 1.5 miles down a mountain sooooo
|
# ¿ Apr 9, 2010 04:18 |
|
Whitezombi posted:What was the nearest town? Here's a better color version; I'm always conservative with colors. I still like the B&W version better. e: also I hadn't calibrated in about two weeks; ever since I upgraded to Windows 7 Huey doesn't prompt me every 48 hours for calibration. No wonder no one liked the first color version. JAY ZERO SUM GAME fucked around with this message at 17:05 on Apr 9, 2010 |
# ¿ Apr 9, 2010 15:41 |
|
northward posted:
|
# ¿ Apr 13, 2010 01:33 |
|
On the black and white image: Mask out the sky and process it separately if there's enough density (or information, whatever) there to pull out more contrast. I'm not sure the framing is appropriate for the subject, perhaps fiddle with that? The textures are nice. This feels like an image I would shoot and fiddle with a lot and ultimately end up saying "I just need to go reshoot this with a different mindset." It's frustrating, I know. The second image is good technically, but don't fall into the "WOW THAT'S A PRETTY SKY" mystique; it takes more than a nice sky. I actually think you could have a nice photo if you cropped out the rocks and tried a square crop on THIS image, perhaps creating just a bit more tonal variance between the sky and the water while doing so. I like this. Pleasant balance. You should go back (if possible) and shoot when the sun is lower, too. These are all pleasing images and are well done. I think only the first one stands out as a "winner" shot, owing to the interesting object, the tone of the sky, and overall warmth of the image. *** Went back to Gloss Mountains. Spent most of my time eating a sandwich and just sitting there, but I eventually made some photos. Remembered to bring the polarizer this time, as well.
|
# ¿ Apr 14, 2010 02:38 |
|
coooooooooooool e: okay more specifically, this does what you see a million photos TRY to do, and does it well: it makes the clouds the subject, and you can FEEL them. They have presence. The slice of Petroglyph below is probably the best way I've seen those three little mountain thing portrayed. They feel small as they are in the context of New Mexico, a footnote to the glorious sky that was around this weekend. Really, really, like it because it's what I see when I look at that skyline from a distance, but never thought to portray it like that. Anyway, a made a few token shots while on a trip JAY ZERO SUM GAME fucked around with this message at 02:42 on May 12, 2010 |
# ¿ May 12, 2010 02:19 |
|
The waterfall is a nice exposure, but it would be nice if it had something to do with the seals you mentioned. The mountain sunrise, though, has all the pieces. Excellent. Fantastic. Whitezombi posted:Didn't see that you had added these. What was the deleted one? Where did you shoot these? ---- So I finally found out, two weeks later than anticipated, that I won a place in a week long access to Valles Caldera the first week of June. I have no clue what I'm doing. My only real plan is to wake up at 4AM every morning to be in place for specific shots every day, and repeat the same thing in the evening. I just ordered a few more batteries and CF cards; anyone have any other advice for this sort of thing?
|
# ¿ May 17, 2010 16:47 |
|
Son, I haven't even been camping since I was 14, and that was in a nice prepared camping area. I'm going to die.
|
# ¿ May 17, 2010 17:43 |
|
Hi dorks. So many awesome photos here lately. Valles Caldera.
|
# ¿ Jun 11, 2010 22:41 |
|
Being way too conservative here. Make that poo poo pop. Goes from a has ran to a "Print it 40x60" if you do. The VC shots were all digital. I even had a film camera with me, just never used it. That's the final nail there, as far as I'm concerned, more so after I got exactly what I wanted out of those, especially the fourth one. Glad you like them.
|
# ¿ Jun 14, 2010 18:02 |
|
Just swell.
|
# ¿ Jun 15, 2010 23:56 |
|
I assume that's afternoon light, so camp out and shoot just before the sun rises. Probably move to the right 50 feet or so, though that's hard to tell. Change the composition.
|
# ¿ Jun 17, 2010 14:44 |
|
Every image on this page has something I like, and shows a talent I wish I had. Great. Stuff. I like this best of your set. The underexposed feeling of all of them is pleasant. Quiet. Yep. I like your skies, always; of course it's not terribly difficult out that way. The crazy blue at top center and the trunk on the left both need to go. Then it's awesome. I'm afraid people are starting to ignore you because of your habit of turning out things that always looked the same not long ago. This is different. It's beautiful. I know it's an expensive hurdle, but shots like this really benefit from a T/S lens or large format camera that has movements. Nice job. I've seen this sort of thing with my own eyes a million times, but you're so good at capturing a basic scene and showing us how you see it differently. ---- I did this thing.
|
# ¿ Jul 13, 2010 01:31 |
|
scottch posted:Very austere and looks great. What filters? Red filter and polarizer.
|
# ¿ Jul 13, 2010 17:44 |
|
Did I pull this off and if so, is it a nice improvement. If you want to get your panties in a wad about manipulating an image too much, the moon was around but I could not get a shot where I wanted it to be. So I fixed that.
|
# ¿ Jul 20, 2010 19:40 |
|
Check it out: He got that photo because he was trying. He says it's a fluke, but he was looking for photos. Just didn't plan the rainbow. But you can. (rainbows: get on the west side of retreating showers in the afternoon. Is there a forecast of showers moving past that perfect spot? Be there.)
|
# ¿ Oct 28, 2010 17:10 |
|
I'm so much more interested in the forest behind the waterfall, Dread Head.
|
# ¿ Nov 15, 2010 17:23 |
|
Dodge that stump or whatever it is in the foreground.
|
# ¿ Nov 24, 2010 15:19 |
|
|
# ¿ May 4, 2024 00:41 |
|
I am Very Original Bell Rock by Bryan Cook, on Flickr E: one more for now, 1920px wide version available on flickr Coconino National Forest by Bryan Cook, on Flickr JAY ZERO SUM GAME fucked around with this message at 01:44 on Jan 4, 2011 |
# ¿ Jan 4, 2011 01:31 |