Not at all sure

[Goatsmilkuk]

I took this shot at Rough Wood a while ago, which I looked at deleting, but decided to have a go at following a few things in the book I got for Xmas.

I corrected the colours, gave more saturation, then added a Gaussian blur layer. I'm not really sure about the picture is it too blurry? I feel I have made it look flat. Does the frame take too much away? Or is it just better to send it to the bin?

Original is in the thumbnails at the bottom.

Any suggestions on how to get this type of image looking that bit better ?

Stu

[Stephen]

Re: Not at all sure

I took this shot at Rough Wood a while ago, which I looked at deleting, but decided to have a go at following a few things in the book I got for Xmas.

I corrected the colours, gave more saturation, then added a Gaussian blur layer. I'm not really sure about the picture is it too blurry? I feel I have made it look flat. Does the frame take too much away? Or is it just better to send it to the bin?

Original is in the thumbnails at the bottom.

Any suggestions on how to get this type of image looking that bit better ?

Stu

Hi Stu, you have the makings of a really nice woodland scene here. I love this sort of dappled light type of shot, though it can be difficult to control.

In my opinion you need to make the viewer walk down the path with their eye. For me the blur doesn't work, its a kinda romantic cliche tbh. and I don't feel it has the desired effect of making the viewer walk into the picture

So how to do it. Well without giving away too many of my secrets acquired over years of experience you need to alter selectively the brightness and contrast. Maybe get some shadow detail, then darken corners and lighten the central area. By making well feathered selections so you can't see the join. You have to experiment and get what you want, but to give you an example here is one I did earlier

ps. not sure this should be in critique so am moving it to Photoshop Permutations

[Stephen]

Re: Not at all sure

One other thing I forgot to mention Stu. There is no substitute for using a tripod in these low light situations. 1/30s has led to a shot that is slightly soft. I know its a pain to carry one, but its amazing the difference they make

[Goatsmilkuk]

Re: Not at all sure

Cheers for the reply, so it's an idea to use some dodge and burn, curves etc and maybe a touch of vignette to first bring out the contrast then to add a focus to the path and lead into the shot?

I have been reading the section on using a selection in the middle, have a large feather value then 'knocking' the middle out, then using the slider on the layer to fade the effect.

I would normally have a tripod, but it was more of grabbing shots as I was out walking the dog with a 5 year old relative in tow.

Thank you for taking the time, you have given some good advice which I will put into practice with the image.

Stu

P.S It's probably not just the shutter speed that made it soft, I have been using the kit lens (dust cap), this is on my list to upgrade, in the next month.

[Bearface]

Re: Not at all sure

Hey,

I like the shot itself, it flows nicely. These types of things are purely subjective, so it's hard to say whether something is right or wrong, but I'm afraid the processing doesn't work for me either

Like Stephen, I've had a look at the image in Photoshop and tried to bring out it's inherent qualities. For a start, in images where you are led through a scene (in this case down a path into the distance), I think it's important to emphasise this and draw the viewer in by highlighting those features further into the shot, while making less of those around the edges of the frame.

To this end, I've darkened the edges, cropped some of the bright sky and then boosted colour and contrast increasingly as you move to the distance in the middle of the frame. Rather than trying to improve shots with filters, I think you should consider looking at them in context and asking yourself how you want the viewer's (untrained) eye to see your shot. You'll quickly realise that depth is the answer

If none of this is news to you, then forgive me for what might have sounded slightly patronising. Otherwise, give it some thought and as Stephen says, use that tripod

[coupekid]

Re: Not at all sure

Hey,

I like the shot itself, it flows nicely. These types of things are purely subjective, so it's hard to say whether something is right or wrong, but I'm afraid the processing doesn't work for me either

Like Stephen, I've had a look at the image in Photoshop and tried to bring out it's inherent qualities. For a start, in images where you are led through a scene (in this case down a path into the distance), I think it's important to emphasise this and draw the viewer in by highlighting those features further into the shot, while making less of those around the edges of the frame.

To this end, I've darkened the edges, cropped some of the bright sky and then boosted colour and contrast increasingly as you move to the distance in the middle of the frame. Rather than trying to improve shots with filters, I think you should consider looking at them in context and asking yourself how you want the viewer's (untrained) eye to see your shot. You'll quickly realise that depth is the answer

If none of this is news to you, then forgive me for what might have sounded slightly patronising. Otherwise, give it some thought and as Stephen says, use that tripod

Thats quite an amazing transformation Tim, nicely done.

The original definately had the makings of a nice shot, which you and Stephen have realised.

Out of interest gents, how do you feel about the use of a monopod, and its possible limitations. I personally have started carrying around a manfrotto monopod, and have found it to be invaluable. Obviously for the extended shots its useless, but I reckon for this sort of thing, it does the trick, and is a darn sight easier to walk around with!

[Bearface]

Re: Not at all sure

Thats quite an amazing transformation Tim, nicely done.

The original definately had the makings of a nice shot, which you and Stephen have realised.

Out of interest gents, how do you feel about the use of a monopod, and its possible limitations. I personally have started carrying around a manfrotto monopod, and have found it to be invaluable. Obviously for the extended shots its useless, but I reckon for this sort of thing, it does the trick, and is a darn sight easier to walk around with!

Well as someone who uses his tripod as a bag-stand as well as a camera support, I couldn't possibly condone the use of a monopod. (Imagine the scene as I extend my Manfrotto monpod and then try to hang my rucksack on it......and the repeated exclamations of "d'oh!" , as I try to understand why my beloved gear keeps hitting the deck...)

[Stephen]

Re: Not at all sure

Out of interest gents, how do you feel about the use of a monopod, and its possible limitations. I personally have started carrying around a manfrotto monopod, and have found it to be invaluable. Obviously for the extended shots its useless, but I reckon for this sort of thing, it does the trick, and is a darn sight easier to walk around with!

I use a monopod Ben, and they are great for steadying the camera. However I use it mainly for use with my long lens, a 70-200mm. This has a tripod mount collar, which allows me to swivel the camera easily from Landscape to Portrait mode.

[Goatsmilkuk]

Re: Not at all sure

After the advice which was greatly received, I had another go, feel I'm almost there with it now.

Any thoughts ?

Stu

[Archangel]

Re: Not at all sure

Stu,

Never throw anything away. You never know
My attempt on your photo.





George

[Autumn]

Re: Not at all sure

Stu,

Never throw anything away. You never know
My attempt on your photo.





George

George I can't see your attempt. Although as I am writing this, it looks as though you have attached it.

[Archangel]

Re: Not at all sure

George I can't see your attempt. Although as I am writing this, it looks as though you have attached it.

Audrey,

I think I have erased it from my scrapbook album in my gallery because the thread was somewhat old.
I will make it once more time if you are interested.

George

[Autumn]

Re: Not at all sure

Don't bother George if it is too much trouble. I just thought you hadn't posted it properly.