Photo Critiqing Thread
- Thread starter GaryMc
- Start date
Photog
Explorer
Lost Canadian said:Ok how about these two?
These are very dramatic. Excellent ideas and good technique.
Post processing suggestions.
Trees:
Work with the brightness behind the trees. Keep it bright; but allow some detail in the clouds to come through. (assuming these are digital images) Start with the original file, and add blue shift. This will make the sky more colorful. Then using the "Channel Mixer" in Photoshop, click monochrome, and use the sliders to allow the extra blue to come through, as detail in the sky.
Stream:
Darken the sky, and the far end of the valley. A polarizer may have been helpful, to cut down the haze. It looks like you may have use a split neutral-density filter.
Last edited:
nwoods
Expedition Leader
The flower image may not be salvagable. It's out of focus, has difficult lighting, etc....
I did fool around with that excellent canyon shot. It doesn't "need" anything, but it can be exaggerated in many different ways. I did a quick spin in Adobe Camera Raw and came up with these. We could do a LOT more with high dynamic range, layering, filters, etc...but this is just a quick tweak of what the camera saw.
I did fool around with that excellent canyon shot. It doesn't "need" anything, but it can be exaggerated in many different ways. I did a quick spin in Adobe Camera Raw and came up with these. We could do a LOT more with high dynamic range, layering, filters, etc...but this is just a quick tweak of what the camera saw.
Photog
Explorer
nwoods said:
That is a very interesting twist on the canyon photo. I agree that it is an excellent image to work with. It looks good, as is; but it could be really great!
It has a strang feeling, or multiple temperatures. The bottom is blue and cold, while the top is orange and warm. As Mr. Woods said, I would make an adjustment layer, and and mask to warm up the bottom, and reduce the dynamic range a little. I will work on this a bit, and place it back in this post.
Here it is. Not completely finished. I would play with the colors a little more, to get a little more natural feel to it.
Guy, try some of these types of adjustments, and see how you like it.
View attachment 15335
Last edited:
bigreen505
Expedition Leader
Nice. I like that! :26_7_2:Photog said:OK, here it is. Comes out to be a square crop. I added a little vignette too.
nwoods
Expedition Leader
Its really interesting to me how much brighter your version is at the deepest point of the canyon floor. My version is intimidating and a bit foreboding, verses your image that invites exploration. How cool!
I really need to learn how to take advantage of layer masks and adjustment layers. I seldom use them. I think they scare me a but, along with the bezier curve tool
I really need to learn how to take advantage of layer masks and adjustment layers. I seldom use them. I think they scare me a but, along with the bezier curve tool
Photog said:That is a very interesting twist on the canyon photo. I agree that it is an excellent image to work with. It looks good, as is; but it could be really great!
It has a strang feeling, or multiple temperatures. The bottom is blue and cold, while the top is orange and warm. As Mr. Woods said, I would make an adjustment layer, and and mask to warm up the bottom, and reduce the dynamic range a little. I will work on this a bit, and place it back in this post.
Here it is. Not completely finished. I would play with the colors a little more, to get a little more natural feel to it.
Guy, try some of these types of adjustments, and see how you like it.
View attachment 15335
Photog
Explorer
nwoods said:
That is exactly the look I was shooting for. If it were mine to print, I would push the color around a little more, and add some contrast back into it.
All that aside, it is a good image to begin with, and allows many options for modification. The only problem spot in the image, is the bright spot in the top center of the image. It is over exposed. If this were a RAW file, there might be enough data there, see color and detail.
nwoods
Expedition Leader
pismo62 said:
I use PhotoShop CS3. I used to have CS2, but they made significant improvements with CS3 and it was worth the upgrade for me personally. It's definantly heavy duty software, and expensive considering that I don't shoot professionally and thus have no tax benefit or supporting revinue stream to support these kinds of purchases.
But the new & improved Adobe Camera Raw and Bridge photo management tools that come bundled with PhotoShop CS3 are very good and save me loads of time.