Super MoonModerators: 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
6 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Super MoonThanks Gerry for organising this one. Apparently a few hundred others also heard that the moon was going to be big. Honestly, I wasn't that impressed.
Also thanks Cath (and Rodney who suggested it) for lending me the x1.4 which was nice with the 70-200. Here are a few for your C&C. I found it exceedingly hard to 'correct' the blown moon as I planned to do in some pics. I've violated the 5 image rule just to squeeze in one more.
Re: Super MoonI really like images 2 and 4. Image 2 because the moon is clearly resolved and you have the iconic Opera House with the iconic moon, and image 4 because it is exquisitely lit and is a different take on a very overtaken image. Image 3, if the moon was similar to image 2 would also be an absolute winner.
Re: Super MoonHi Suren I like #2 although I'm not sure yet about the moondrop hanging off the end of the sail - I've got some in my library of the moon partly peeking up above the top of the sail but was unsure about processing them.
#1 and 3 are just too nuclear - it might as well be a shot into the sun, you can't tell - this is where I had to bracket to try and salvage detail both in the moon itself and the environment (be that sky or the SOH) - it was dark esp after twilight so the EV difference was much too great (even 4 stops apart starting at -6EV was nowhere near enough - in hindsight I should have done images at -7 or -8EV plus 0EV and maybe something else inbetween to blend) #4 is also nice but I'm not sure it warrants that much water at the bottom #5 is a neat look - didn't you shoot this vertically? D600, D7000, Nikon/Sigma/Tamron Lenses, Nikon Flashes, Sirui/Manfrotto/Benro Sticks
Rodney - My Photo Blog Want: Fast Wide (14|20|24)
Re: Super MoonThanks for your comments.
Thanks Ian. Unfortunately I don't have nicely exposed version of that one without the moon being too nuclear. I might have a few brackets and think about how to salvage a couple of pictures.
Fair call. I was hoping that the 'step' would cause curiousity and make the eye linger longer at the intersection then to slowly follow to the right side of the image.
Yeah, I found it really hard to adjust the moon without causing a halo and dark ring around it! Here is an attempt. Sydney Opera House Moonrise May 2012-6607.jpg by http://www.flickr.com/people/surenj/, on Flickr
Re: Super Moon
Thats better - can't see much of a dark ring, is that some sort of spotlight beam on the bottom left? D600, D7000, Nikon/Sigma/Tamron Lenses, Nikon Flashes, Sirui/Manfrotto/Benro Sticks
Rodney - My Photo Blog Want: Fast Wide (14|20|24)
Re: Super MoonI am struggling to get excited about moon shots from that day, i think i have moon fatigue
I like the fourth one and agree it needs less water on teh bottom, it looks alot like one of Cath's images (and probably half of sydneys' as well) which i think was one of the better compositions from teh night (post moonrise anyway). I like the last image, something different and the repeating patterns appeal to me. In terms of the moon shots, you really need to HDR them to get any detail - for me i would rather just plonk a moon in the scene, thats about the same level of processing from my end. Reality does not factor in for me with the moon gerry's photography journey
No amount of processing will fix bad composition - trust me i have tried.
Previous topic • Next topic
6 posts
• Page 1 of 1
|