DSLRUsers.com

i would like some feedback on a few things I was trying yesterday whilst down in the Thirroul area. Restricting myself to the 24-70 may not have been the best call as I felt that I needed more width, but it was challenging.

This was an opportunistic shot that I fired instinctively without looking at the light meter, I dont like the overblown sky nor the green of the grass, but I do like the elements in the photo. Anything I can to do salvage this? This photo has not been edited yet.


I think this is a bit too dark, i will probably have a play with it, any suggestions for this one?




HDR shot (9 frame bracket) I am not entirely sure why it looks so fake, any ideas? the colours in the sea?

Anything I can to do salvage this? This photo has not been edited yet.

recover some of the highlights and go for a pano style image (chop some sky), I reckon it would work quite well. Needs some sharpening, however hard to judge based on the web copy.

There certianly is some very nice snorkellign and spear fishing down there...

The non-HDR image is better imo. I don't think this is a scene (at that time of day) which lends itself to a large dynamic range. The HDR version just appears to be recovering a few of shadows (which NX2 would do easily in this case) and then throwing a whole bunch of saturation in, this saturation is probably what makes it look and feel a bit plastic. However it does not look that fake to me - probably a happy medium between the nonHDR and HDR versions would work for me.

aim54x wrote:HDR shot (9 frame bracket) I am not entirely sure why it looks so fake, any ideas?

its the halo's, especially around the cliff face where it goes from vivid blue to white-ish to green grass.

biggerry wrote: Anything I can to do salvage this? This photo has not been edited yet.

recover some of the highlights and go for a pano style image (chop some sky), I reckon it would work quite well. Needs some sharpening, however hard to judge based on the web copy.

I think the blown sky removes distraction and adds to image. I couldn't recover any highlights from your web version but have attempted to make it stronger. [It would almost be a wendell if it had a compelling third element so I went with the clouds....my head was screaming UFO to complete the scene from death > transformation > above and beyond but then I resisted.....
Let me know if you want this taken down. I couldn't copy your exact logo on to the new image.

biggerry wrote:The non-HDR image is better imo. I don't think this is a scene (at that time of day) which lends itself to a large dynamic range. The HDR version just appears to be recovering a few of shadows (which NX2 would do easily in this case) and then throwing a whole bunch of saturation in, this saturation is probably what makes it look and feel a bit plastic. However it does not look that fake to me - probably a happy medium between the nonHDR and HDR versions would work for me.

Rooz wrote:its the halo's, especially around the cliff face where it goes from vivid blue to white-ish to green grass.

on both counts.
This scene is done in difficult light and will not be improved by HDR. Why can't we have dawn/dusk light around 11am-2pm ??

Thanks for the replies. i will have a look at these images and a play....but at the moment i feel it is more important to get my website back up and running again.

I had a look at the NEF file for the first image, and was quite shocked to find that there was actually little detail in the sky, even though there are not many lost highlights the sky. I did have a look at a pano crop, and Surenj I like what you have done (dont worry about the logo too much), I hadnt considered a mono, and looking at yours, it doesnt seem to work enough for my liking. Hopefully I will get around to playing with this soon and post some results.

As for the HDR...I will have to play with the non HDR and see if I can get a bit more out of it.

Cheers