Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

motdakasha · 02-14-2007, 01:57 PM

It's a good start. Are these shot with film or digital?

In the first image, there is a disparity of exposure value for the sky and horizon. An ND grad would help even it out to create texture in the sky and simultaneously details in the foreground.

In the second image, it seems a bit dark, but it could also just be my monitor (LCD changes brightness levels depending on the angle which is a pain). For this one, I would suggest a longer exposure with a small aperture (larger fstop number).

The ducks seem really squished because the edge of the photo is close to both their front and back. I do like the tree stumps in the background, but maybe crop just a little more from it so it creates a visual border at the top, but doesn't make your eye try to continue up the tree and feel cut off.

The first bridge photo is a little bit too in-between exposures. It's hard to tell if you meant to create a silouhette or even exposure with details in foreground and background. It creates an uncertainty as to what is the subject, the cityscape, the sky, or the whole scene. If you want to silouhette the foreground,and focus on the sunset/sky, use a shorter exposure time. If you want details in the foreground, but don't care about the sky, use spot meter to get the EV for the foreground and ignore the background. If you want someone to enjoy the whole scene use an ND grad to lower the exposure time for the sky and even things out, or wait longer for the sun to go down and the sky to become dimmer.

The next bridge photo is a good example of a "whole scene." It has details in the sky, but also the foreground. The composition is decent, too, because the horizon is straight even though the bridge is not. Having a straight horizon line in the photo somewhere gives you a better grounding, a point of reference, for knowing what is 'crooked' and what isn't.

What is the subject? The tree or the sky?

This photo also seems a bit dark. There's very little differentiation between the dark clothing and the shadows on the clothing. You want some contrast there so people look like people rather than bleak omnious blobs (unless that's what you're going for, but somehow I doubt that). Also, this picture isn't aligned well, the buildings are all off kilter. If you're using digital, setting the display to include gridlines to better align your image when there are lines in the composition. If you're using film, well... a tripod or monopod will help but other than that you have to just eye it.

02-14-2007, 01:57 PM	#5 (permalink)
motdakasha Hiya Puddin'! Miss me? Location: Silicon Valley, CA	It's a good start. Are these shot with film or digital? In the first image, there is a disparity of exposure value for the sky and horizon. An ND grad would help even it out to create texture in the sky and simultaneously details in the foreground. In the second image, it seems a bit dark, but it could also just be my monitor (LCD changes brightness levels depending on the angle which is a pain). For this one, I would suggest a longer exposure with a small aperture (larger fstop number). The ducks seem really squished because the edge of the photo is close to both their front and back. I do like the tree stumps in the background, but maybe crop just a little more from it so it creates a visual border at the top, but doesn't make your eye try to continue up the tree and feel cut off. The first bridge photo is a little bit too in-between exposures. It's hard to tell if you meant to create a silouhette or even exposure with details in foreground and background. It creates an uncertainty as to what is the subject, the cityscape, the sky, or the whole scene. If you want to silouhette the foreground,and focus on the sunset/sky, use a shorter exposure time. If you want details in the foreground, but don't care about the sky, use spot meter to get the EV for the foreground and ignore the background. If you want someone to enjoy the whole scene use an ND grad to lower the exposure time for the sky and even things out, or wait longer for the sun to go down and the sky to become dimmer. The next bridge photo is a good example of a "whole scene." It has details in the sky, but also the foreground. The composition is decent, too, because the horizon is straight even though the bridge is not. Having a straight horizon line in the photo somewhere gives you a better grounding, a point of reference, for knowing what is 'crooked' and what isn't. What is the subject? The tree or the sky? This photo also seems a bit dark. There's very little differentiation between the dark clothing and the shadows on the clothing. You want some contrast there so people look like people rather than bleak omnious blobs (unless that's what you're going for, but somehow I doubt that). Also, this picture isn't aligned well, the buildings are all off kilter. If you're using digital, setting the display to include gridlines to better align your image when there are lines in the composition. If you're using film, well... a tripod or monopod will help but other than that you have to just eye it. __________________ =^-^= motdakasha =^-^= Just Google It. BA Psychology & Photography (I'm not going psychoanalyze you nor will I let you cry on my shoulder. Have a nice day.)