My first pic on these forums

divine_madness said:
F5.7 @ 1/2048 sec, ISO 400

^^ That's a bit of a random set of parameters too, if you could have the shutter at 1/2048 why not use ISO100 and F8 or something? Or was it taken on Auto mode, EXIF has gone so I can't tell.
 
Yeah, wierd isn't it, but that's the EXIF info. Ideally I would have stopped down to F11, but I was set on aperture priority at F5.6 and just took it.
 
Even thought the ISO is bit high and some parameters seem random, you would still get great shot with the 5D. I wouldn't be too worried about ISO on the 5D.

The photo is by no means perfect but it captures the holiday well and it gives the feeling of being there.

Nice!
 
Dont know if this improves on it, but the crop seems to work taking out the other boat.
Minor tweak to the sky. Made it more blue.

maldives1smallzp8.jpg


tis a pity Capture NX wont take the vignetting out of jpgs :(

That water is sooooooooooo inviting
 
The sky looks much better, but this is where I get confused. Just how far should you go to manipulate an image? My original shot is what I saw and I quite like the purity of that, but the altered image does look "better". I guess everyone has their own limits for manipulation.
 
Personally I love the shot as is, without the corner vignetting.
I like the boat at the front, I like the colour of the sky, more blue wouldnt look natural in that case I think. I previously thought that a touch less green would be good, but I've changed my mind on that one :)

maldives1smallzp8.jpg
 
You see, having looked at it some more this morning.. and im sure im probably alone with this thought, but, i think the vignetting may possible add something to the image... its a bit Lomo-esque... and I like the original more than the one above this post...
 
Helium_Junkie said:
Lomo-esque? :)

Aye, Lomo cameras produce a high contrast, highly Vignetted image and are something of a cult photography item... very poor optics but very nice effect.
 
It has just occured to me now im back on my own PC at 1280x1024 and not the 1600x1200 screen i was using last night, it breaks the forum layout, post smaller :p
 
As for the technical aspects of the shot, there are a few things i might suggest...

As the scene looks quite bright, IE, no cloud, good sunlight etc, you can afford to use a lower ISO. Infact I think this has already been mentioned. In turn however this will mean a longer exposure. Perhaps ISO 200 at f9? and then what ever exposure to suite, which I would imagine to be somewhere in the region of 1/60th - 1/200th, which is easily fast enough to be used hand held. The smaller aperture would give a longer depth of field, which although not noticeably necessary in this shot, in general would help.

A circular polariser would have been magic in this shot, as it would have brought out the sky and increased the overall saturation of the shot a fair amount.


As for the composition, I cant help but feel that an everso slightly higher viewpoint would have looked awsome. This would have seperated the top of the boat from the horizon, and also allowed you to loose the wood at the bottom of the shot, whilst still keeping the horizon on the top third line.

Of course these are really only small points, and a matter of personal opinion. But I do like this shot, and the location looks awsome. Very tranquil indeed.

:)
 
Spie said:
The sky looks much better, but this is where I get confused. Just how far should you go to manipulate an image?

My opinion is that anything's fine so long as you don't add anything that wasn't there initially. That means photoshopping fake reflections or stars into a non-starry sky would be out, but anything to bring out hidden detail in the photo or otherwise alter what's actually there is perfectly fine and in most cases desirable.

I think most people would agree, but I'm not sure :)
 
robmiller said:
My opinion is that anything's fine so long as you don't add anything that wasn't there initially. That means photoshopping fake reflections or stars into a non-starry sky would be out, but anything to bring out hidden detail in the photo or otherwise alter what's actually there is perfectly fine and in most cases desirable.

I think most people would agree, but I'm not sure :)
It all depends on what you want the image to say. I don't like to add things to my images as you say but it can suit some images depending on the effect required.

There can be a fine line between a photographer and an artist. I personally prefer to stay on the photographer side of the line.
 
I reckon if you remove the rope and the wood from the other boot and fix the sky a little it would be 100%.

Anyone wanna try that in PS as i am crap in it
 
Back
Top Bottom