CC appreciated :-)
- Thread starter Melbourne_James
- Start date
Blue439
New member
Assuming that “CC” intends to mean “constructive criticism”, here goes:
. Photos #1 and 4 are the same. It is a very commonplace snapshot that is not very sharp anywhere and seems to have been taken as you were walking by, without particular inspiration nor intent in the composition. The buildings’ verticals are diverging, which reinforces the impression of “I wasn’t paying much attention”. The exposure is OK, but the EXIF have been partly stripped (as far as I can tell), so there is not much more I can say.
. Photo #2 is much better, and the best of the lot. There has been some thinking in terms of composition and the grayscale is good. However, once again the photo is not sharp at all and the EXIF are missing, so that there is not much more I can say as to why.
. Photo #3: totally blurry, overexposed, very bad white balance, best forget right away it ever existed.
That’s my honest opinion!
. Photos #1 and 4 are the same. It is a very commonplace snapshot that is not very sharp anywhere and seems to have been taken as you were walking by, without particular inspiration nor intent in the composition. The buildings’ verticals are diverging, which reinforces the impression of “I wasn’t paying much attention”. The exposure is OK, but the EXIF have been partly stripped (as far as I can tell), so there is not much more I can say.
. Photo #2 is much better, and the best of the lot. There has been some thinking in terms of composition and the grayscale is good. However, once again the photo is not sharp at all and the EXIF are missing, so that there is not much more I can say as to why.
. Photo #3: totally blurry, overexposed, very bad white balance, best forget right away it ever existed.
That’s my honest opinion!
Last edited:
Dawg Pics
Senior Member
I can see where you were going with the landscape shots. You have leading lines into each, but with the top image, they don't really lead to anything. It could still be a nice image, though with maybe a tighter composition of something. Ultimately, you have to decide if you like it.
The top image looks hazy and soft from fog, I am guessing.
I kinda like the pier image. I have no thoughts on what to do better on that one other than sharpness.
All of the images are soft, but I don't know why. Do they look sharp when you are processing them? Could just be the file size on here, maybe.
The moon is a bright subject when it is full, so you need to close down the aperture or shoot at fast shutter speeds, so it doesn't get blown-out. Try ISO 100, f11, 1/325th or so, see how it looks and make some adjustments from there.
You want to lower the ISO to have less noise in the background, fast shutter speeds when zooming because the moon moves fast through the FOV and shoot on a night when the atmosphere is steady. Twinkling stars means lots of atmospheric disturbance. If you look at the moon and it has steady focus, you are good to go. If it is going in and out of focus from atmospheric disturbance then it is better to just shoot on a different night. You might know some of this stuff, I don't know, so I thought I'd share what I know.
The top image looks hazy and soft from fog, I am guessing.
I kinda like the pier image. I have no thoughts on what to do better on that one other than sharpness.
All of the images are soft, but I don't know why. Do they look sharp when you are processing them? Could just be the file size on here, maybe.
The moon is a bright subject when it is full, so you need to close down the aperture or shoot at fast shutter speeds, so it doesn't get blown-out. Try ISO 100, f11, 1/325th or so, see how it looks and make some adjustments from there.
You want to lower the ISO to have less noise in the background, fast shutter speeds when zooming because the moon moves fast through the FOV and shoot on a night when the atmosphere is steady. Twinkling stars means lots of atmospheric disturbance. If you look at the moon and it has steady focus, you are good to go. If it is going in and out of focus from atmospheric disturbance then it is better to just shoot on a different night. You might know some of this stuff, I don't know, so I thought I'd share what I know.
Melbourne_James
New member
Thanks all - good commentary! Apologies for the double upload (#1 and #4) - lags in performance mean that I think it hasn't uploaded so do it again and then an image shows up twice.
Regarding the sharpness, I am still trying to find out why that occurs. Camera body and lens are good quality so it is clearly a user issue, not an equipment issue. I did severely reduce the size to get the files on this forum but I suspect that is, at most, a minor issue.
More learnin' to be done!
Regarding the sharpness, I am still trying to find out why that occurs. Camera body and lens are good quality so it is clearly a user issue, not an equipment issue. I did severely reduce the size to get the files on this forum but I suspect that is, at most, a minor issue.
More learnin' to be done!
Are you doing post processing or are these out of camera JPG?
On the first image it would be easy to create an focal point for the leading lines, the bridge. This could be done by have the bridge in focus and darker as the image is basically a gray scale with blue. When I say making the bridge darker this would be a post processing thing and just a bit and not the whole image, to help pull attention. The other thing I would like to is less foreground, nothing of interest there, maybe use a 16X9 crop pushed to the top of the frame. If this a place nearby go back and shoot using different areas of focus to get an idea of how it might look.
Number two looks to be a long exposure, nice. It appears you have ghosts, I prefer not to have people in long exposures , just can't get them to cooperate. If you go on a windless day the palms will be sharper. Might be a place for an early morning or evening image with the pier lit.
On the first image it would be easy to create an focal point for the leading lines, the bridge. This could be done by have the bridge in focus and darker as the image is basically a gray scale with blue. When I say making the bridge darker this would be a post processing thing and just a bit and not the whole image, to help pull attention. The other thing I would like to is less foreground, nothing of interest there, maybe use a 16X9 crop pushed to the top of the frame. If this a place nearby go back and shoot using different areas of focus to get an idea of how it might look.
Number two looks to be a long exposure, nice. It appears you have ghosts, I prefer not to have people in long exposures , just can't get them to cooperate. If you go on a windless day the palms will be sharper. Might be a place for an early morning or evening image with the pier lit.
Last edited:
Robin W
Senior Member
I have trouble uploading photos to look the same as what I see on my computer. There are "actions" you can use to help you set your export settings for particular sites that are suppose to make your images look better. I have had the most luck with Steve Perry's actions on the Backcountygallery. I cannot remember where I found it on his site but it did help some.
Was looking for the info you mentioned, if you use Lightroom this might be useful.
https://bcgforums.com/help/lrpreset/
BF Hammer
Senior Member
What holds me back on analyzing the photos is there is no exif data other than "Z8". So I guess you are using a Z8 but I do not know the lens, the focal length, the basic settings.
My first thought is are you using a tripod? Did you accidentally leave the Image Stabilization turned on while using a tripod? I have actually fallen victim to that one more than a couple of times. Image stabilization is a counter-shake to your hands, so when on a steady platform it actually creates shake. It's an easy explanation for the lack of sharpness.
The other comments before me are fairly spot-on IMO.
My first thought is are you using a tripod? Did you accidentally leave the Image Stabilization turned on while using a tripod? I have actually fallen victim to that one more than a couple of times. Image stabilization is a counter-shake to your hands, so when on a steady platform it actually creates shake. It's an easy explanation for the lack of sharpness.
The other comments before me are fairly spot-on IMO.
Dawg Pics
Senior Member
I have had the same issues and had a thread on it a long time ago. Never got it sorted.
I found a sharp image in a thread and downloaded it to look at it closer. It was sharper than my images, so I figured at least part was either me or my camera/lens combo. So, with images not as sharp as they should be and losing sharpness posting them, I was pretty frustrated.
Melbourne_James
New member
I think I have left the fields blank when it comes to exif data. I need to look into this (am using darktable). Yes, good point about the VR / IS. I used a tripod on the pier photo and resting on a platform for the river, so similar to a tripod. They look fine on the tiny screen but do come up a bit soft once expanded to a monitor. I will try without the stabilisation settings next time. There was also a little bit of wind and I wasn't using a weight with the tripod so that could also be at play.
Melbourne_James
New member
yep, good points. I took this in "tourist" mode and, well, it looks like an average holiday snap! I thought the rolling mist with the rising sun would make a good shot but you are right as there is no object, it's just a bunch of city / river scenery. It is actually a stunning setting on the river Arno in Florence- you have to acknowledge the skill it takes to make such a magic setting look mundane! ;-)
Blue439
New member
That’s the thing with EXIF, you don’t have to fill in the fields or “leave them blank”: the camera fills them all by itself. Then, during the post-processing, the software may be configured by the user or by default to strip them off at some point. This is probably what happened there.
P.S.: sorry if I have been a bit blunt in expressing my opinion above. I am not very good at wrapping things up in pink ribbon when giving an assessment...
The good part of it is that, when I give praise, you can be sure I do mean it and don’t say it just to be nice, like it happens so many times with well-meaning people who, in fact, do not help. I wouldn’t want anyone to do that to me.
There is quite a bit you can do with that image in PP.
If you ever want to see various renditions of your image you can post here: https://discuss.pixls.us/tag/play_raw
Just remember you need to give it public license.
Last edited:
Melbourne_James
New member
am giving this a crack
Melbourne_James
New member
Had another attempt at image #1 (and #4 - ha!):
You've received a lot of comment on your pics, but do continue exploring atmospheric mood, composition, and learning. You are on the right track.
1. The pics of the river feels like the scene is tilting to the left. Maybe rotate the image to the right just a tad.
2. The overall composition and tones of the pier picture are nice, but consider darkening the foreground using your photo editing app. Lead the viewer further into your composition. Landscapes by Ansel Adams serve as good examples. Also, think of that pier composition as having 3 broad lines. Where do these lines lead the viewer? In this case... out of the frame.
Perhaps revisit the pier if possible and explore other vantage points, there may be some rewarding possibilities... piers are intriguing.
1. The pics of the river feels like the scene is tilting to the left. Maybe rotate the image to the right just a tad.
2. The overall composition and tones of the pier picture are nice, but consider darkening the foreground using your photo editing app. Lead the viewer further into your composition. Landscapes by Ansel Adams serve as good examples. Also, think of that pier composition as having 3 broad lines. Where do these lines lead the viewer? In this case... out of the frame.
Perhaps revisit the pier if possible and explore other vantage points, there may be some rewarding possibilities... piers are intriguing.
Blue439
New member
This new post-processing makes it more interesting, with a more mysterious general tone. That is good. I would disappear the very materialistic and modern construction cranes that do nothing to enhance the dreamy atmosphere you are trying to create.
Peter7100
Senior Member
I really like the mood and tones in this one
