|
never mind
Jupiter Jazz fucked around with this message at 04:31 on Oct 6, 2020 |
#
¿
Oct 6, 2020 04:13
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 19:58 |
|
|
Context: Biden's victory day.   The shots are underexposed. As said in another thread I really like low key aesthetic. How do I achieve a great exposure with natural light, in the wild, while maintaining this kind of low key aesthetic? Think Alex Webb.   The aesthetic of shafts of natural light illuminating the subject and casting a high contrast look is a look I'm highly attracted to. How can I achieve this without feeling like I need to underexpose? On Alex Webb shots he is similarly overly represented by an uneven histogram.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2020 17:25
|
|
|
Sleepytime posted:From those examples, it looks like the overall composition helps carry the picture as far as adding shape and form. The windows/symmetry in the first and the arch and balance in the second. I think your first scene would have had the best potential with the doorway behind the guy. Wow. I never thought about the shapes in the Webb compositions. Thank you for that. Here's one shot of him in front of the door. The other shot I got low. Made a rookie mistake and didn't pay attention to background.  The problem with this one though, is that his hand with the spoon isn't as visible. Which is why I didn't post it. And I've now exceeded my three images a day. Sorry. Sleepytime posted:I’m also more attracted to the first because you can see his face. It’s totally understandable why you can’t in the second 2 because of the rona. The best bet there may be waiting for interaction between the two kids or finding a way to bring in more of the third person from the right. I milked the scene and have a lot of shots of this scenario including the man on the right (he's got his mask down). Blackhawk posted:Thanks for all the feedback on that one, I agree with what's been said re. flatness. I've been trying to learn a bit more about composition recently and how to properly critique an image, and I think what I've learned is that the vast majority of my photos don't really have much in the way of compositional elements going on in them. I prefer the second. The gradation of the blue in the background and less clouds gives for a more minimalist feel. The first is exceedingly busy. I do question why you shot vertical and I'm exposing my biases here but I don't think the cliff, with its length, helps the verticality of this composition. In effect, it feels constrained when I want more of the scene. If possible, shoot from another angle or use depth of field to blur the foreground. They are distracting from the overall mood of the rocks, clouds, and sea. The color temperature of the second image is utterly beautiful and while the first gives more definition and detail to the rocks, I don't find them as interesting of the beautiful tapestry of the sky's blue, pink, and white which gives a hint of sunset. Jupiter Jazz fucked around with this message at 17:58 on Nov 21, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2020 17:36
|
|
|
I've never shot RAW ever. I guess I should try it out. And yeah, looking at the thumbnails supplied, Alex's shots are way more lit. I'm not sure if these pictures I posted that are mine can be salvaged. Jupiter Jazz fucked around with this message at 19:29 on Nov 21, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2020 19:19
|
|
|
These are pictures by a pj I really respect, Karla Gatchet. It's my goal to shoot light like this with that aesthetic, but with the humanity of Mary Ellen.    That's what I've been striving for, ultimately. Does anyone have further suggestions on perhaps achieving this kind of light without losing detail? Because unlike Webb, her shots are far less saturated. It feels even more underexposed than Webb. Dren posted:btw the art word for the thing you like is chiaroscuro Thanks. Jupiter Jazz fucked around with this message at 19:39 on Nov 21, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2020 19:36
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 19:58 |
|
|
Magic Hate Ball posted:Those pictures are lower contrast than Webb's, but they, mostly the first and last, still use contrast between light and shadow to direct your eye. You should absolutely be shooting RAW, it gives you way more ability to manage your shadows (and highlights) than if you're shooting straight to jpeg. When you shoot straight to jpeg, anything that's underexposed is basically destroyed, whereas, while a RAW photo comes out of the camera looking more "flat", it will keep the details that would've been stamped out by a jpeg for you to be able to use as you edit it. Yeah I love the contrast in her pictures. I figure if I can shoot high contrast like Webb, I'll be able to shoot light to my whims in general. Good idea on RAW. I just set it to shoot jpg+raw. I've never shot RAW ever. Time to experiment.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2020 07:36
|
|