DSLRUsers.com

Posted: **Sun Feb 13, 2011 8:17 pm**

As it turned out no spectacular sunrise - in fact no sunrise to speak of at all

NIKON D90 + 17.0-50.0 mm f/2.8 @ 17 mm, 13 sec at f / 22, ISO 200 + CPL

Playing with the white balance

NIKON D90 + 17.0-50.0 mm f/2.8 @ 17 mm, 6 sec at f / 22, ISO 200 + CPL

(psst - don't look at Gerry's...)

NIKON D90 + 17.0-50.0 mm f/2.8 @ 17 mm, 10 sec at f / 22, ISO 200 + CPL

NIKON D90 + 17.0-50.0 mm f/2.8 @ 17 mm, 6 sec at f / 22, ISO 200 + CPL

Posted: **Sun Feb 13, 2011 8:27 pm**

As it turned out no spectacular sunrise - in fact no sunrise to speak of at all

You got conned,. Gerry puts up a really colourfull effort last week to just to get you guys outta bed and he serves up this rubbish :wink:

Looks like you had a bit of fun with the white balance on these.
#1 and #3 get my vote provided you fix the bent horizon in 3.
Not keen on 2 at all

Posted: **Sun Feb 13, 2011 9:13 pm**

Jenno wrote:#1 and #3 get my vote provided you fix the bent horizon in 3

Done

Posted: **Sun Feb 13, 2011 9:54 pm**

#3 is almost there I reckon. I would suggest some '+++clarity' on the rocks and '---clarity' on the water. [next time use a slightly longer shutter :wink:

] with an overall saturation boost, +0.5 EV overexposure and mild contrast (or blacks) boost.

#2 would you consider BW? PS: your pictures look soft due to 'forum softnening'. I would suggest that you resize to 775 with sharpening in LR set to screen-medium. Some people can overlook this (and compensate) but for others it hits them on the face when an image is soft... :wink:

Posted: **Sun Feb 13, 2011 10:31 pm**

I like the first three Rodney. Maybe reduce the blue of #2

Posted: **Mon Feb 14, 2011 9:08 am**

surenj wrote:#3 is almost there I reckon. I would suggest some '+++clarity' on the rocks and '---clarity' on the water.

I'd done that (at least on the water on the right) - I added a bit more to the rocks now

next time use a slightly longer shutter

Yeah I know

- wonder what shutter Gerry used for his?

with an overall saturation boost

added a little now

+0.5 EV overexposure and mild contrast (or blacks) boost.

I'd already done that too (well +0.35EV - more you reckon?) however I added a little more blacks now

#2 would you consider BW? PS: your pictures look soft due to 'forum softnening'. I would suggest that you resize to 775 with sharpening in LR set to screen-medium.

Thanks I'll take a look at that and I've also switched to 775 (and adjusted my LR export settings) - so am I to understand that even though the forums rules list 800 pixel wide images as the limit that they actually get resized down to 775 pixels when displayed on the forum?

Posted: **Mon Feb 14, 2011 9:18 am**

Great work! Love the first and third one.

Posted: **Mon Feb 14, 2011 9:23 am**

surenj wrote:#2 would you consider BW?

Posted: **Mon Feb 14, 2011 12:10 pm**

I quite like the first, however the BW version of the second has potential imo - push the contrast and crop a bit off the bottom might improve it.

Thanks I'll take a look at that and I've also switched to 775 (and adjusted my LR export settings) - so am I to understand that even though the forums rules list 800 pixel wide images as the limit that they actually get resized down to 775 pixels when displayed on the forum?

I thinks it just a little bug where even if a image is 800px wide it still cops the forum resize which is not flattering for sharpness. By resizing to 775 it means your image will not be touched by the forum resize and maintains its original look. You can also just click thru to see the un-resized version too.

Jenno wrote:You got conned,. Gerry puts up a really colourfull effort last week to just to get you guys outta bed and he serves up this rubbish

lol, yeah my track record is pretty crap, I am surprised you and Suren still turn up after the malabar session! :rotfl2:

Posted: **Mon Feb 14, 2011 2:55 pm**

biggerry wrote:push the contrast and crop a bit off the bottom might improve it.

biggerry wrote:I am surprised you and Suren still turn up after the malabar session!

That certainly was a classic one.

Posted: **Mon Feb 14, 2011 6:28 pm**

Remorhaz wrote:
surenj wrote:#2 would you consider BW?

great suggestion Amhed, just love this as a mono. :cheers:

Posted: **Mon Feb 14, 2011 7:20 pm**

You're developing a nice style Gerry.

Posted: **Mon Feb 14, 2011 8:47 pm**

FYI: I've reworked the last two images (I didn't like the colour in the rocks mostly)

oh and here's my streaming water one

NIKON D90 + 17.0-50.0 mm f/2.8 @ 17 mm, 1.6 sec at f / 22, ISO 200 + CPL

DSLRUsers.com

Gerry's Sun Don't Shine in Maroubra Shoot...

Gerry's Sun Don't Shine in Maroubra Shoot...

Re: Gerry's Sun Don't Shine in Maroubra Shoot...

Re: Gerry's Sun Don't Shine in Maroubra Shoot...

Re: Gerry's Sun Don't Shine in Maroubra Shoot...

Re: Gerry's Sun Don't Shine in Maroubra Shoot...

Re: Gerry's Sun Don't Shine in Maroubra Shoot...

Re: Gerry's Sun Don't Shine in Maroubra Shoot...

Re: Gerry's Sun Don't Shine in Maroubra Shoot...

Re: Gerry's Sun Don't Shine in Maroubra Shoot...

Re: Gerry's Sun Don't Shine in Maroubra Shoot...

Re: Gerry's Sun Don't Shine in Maroubra Shoot...

Re: Gerry's Sun Don't Shine in Maroubra Shoot...

Re: Gerry's Sun Don't Shine in Maroubra Shoot...