My landscapes are flat :(

Neil79

Neil79

Neil79

Caporegime
Joined
8 Sep 2006
Posts
39,891
Location
On Ocuk
early_morning_reculver_by_pirateneilsouth-d30g58k.jpg


When i see other peoples shots kinda like this they are more sharp , clear and have good levels of contrast. But to me my shots seem flat and not very sharp , even though i've used unsharp mask and adjusted the contrast

Is it because i'm using the standard canon kit glass?
 
I think its a nicely composed shot, where were you focusing? Only thing I would say is that there is a slight yellow/orange cast on the photo so if you cool it down a notch with some blue it would bring out the green on the seaweed and show more of the blue sky reflected off the water giving it more colours.

Maybe you should look into investing in a CPL filter if you're into shots like these but it would be hard to use on a the canon kit lens due to the rotating front element.

You can also use lightroom/PS to manually put in a GND filter effect to tame the sky abit.
 
Looks much better now that you can see the blues in the sky and water. I think abit of fill light in Lightroom will finish the photo nicely by lighting up those dark areas abit.
 
Neil79, I don't think it is a bad image, it is just that you can only do so much to the contrast / saturation levels before it begins to look odd.

Constructive criticism wise.....

I think the biggest problem with the picture is the sky. It was obviously a nice day when you took the shot. The sky is blue but there doesn't appear to be any clouds. You can see that near the horizon there is a greyish/blue haze and that is about it.

I think had the picture had some nice fluffy white clouds in it, then it would have been a different proposition.

There are also two conflicting points of interest, the big blob of sand/seaweed and the Church/Castle ruins. Is the picture a crop? Can you crop out the blob in bottom middle, add in some more sky above the ruins and perhaps line the ruins up on a 'rule of thirds' intersection? The picture may have more impact as a result.

As others have already mentioned there are a few things you can do.

1) Invest in a polarising filter to boost the blue of the sky, you can also alter the reflective nature of water with one too.

2) Graduated Grey filter. One of the bugbears of Landscare photography is the fact that skies can often be too bright, its a balancing act between exposing for the detail in the ground or exposing for the detail in the sky. Graduated filters can help immensely.

3) I don't know if your budge allows for it, but Lightroom 3. An amazing program which can do an awful lot to improve photographs. The sharpening / noise reduction abilities are amazing.

One last thing. Take a look at a couple of Flickr groups which have some really nice Landscape shots. I am sure they will inspire you. Stick at it, the recent shots in Black and White you have posted in another thread are really good.

The British Countryside

Sky and Clouds

Landscape
 
The thing is, good landscape photography is incredibly difficult, probably the hardest type of photography there is. Yes, anyone can take a snapshot of a landscape, but making a truly great photo requires a lifetime to master. Ansel Adams didn't just pop out on a sunny Sunday afternoon and grab a few exposures. He dedicated his life to get the photographs that are remembered a century later. You don't have flashes, studio lighting, you can't change the backdrop, the weather, you can't hire beautiful models, you don't have 6 billion cooperative intelligent people to photograph, you don't have controlled environments, you may have to travel thousands of miles and pray to the weather gods. You can't tell a mountain or a tree how to pose themselves!

You have an infinite choice of subjects, locations, lenses and focal lengths to choose from to begin with. Having an interesting subject can already be a challenge involving traveling long distances (depending on what you want to photograph, opportunities are everywhere for some people, if you have specifics interests you may have no choice but to fly to another continent).

Then there is the lighting, you have no control over the weather or the sun. All you can do is try to get at the location at the best time of the year, at the best time of day and hope the weather is cooperative. Summer is usually a difficult time of year, specially midday. Then getting a good composition is very difficult, you can place yourself in numerous positions but you need to know what the best location is to give the feeling you want to the photo. Zoom lenses tend to make you lazy so you will need to try harder to find out where you should be. Compositionally, following common rules helps but usually does not intrigue the viewer, although there are plenty of exceptions when the subject itself is dominating. More often than not, the lighting in the scene just isn't ideal. Not a lot you can do about that but try again another time.

I do a lot of recon work finding locals I want to shoot under certain conditions, whenever these conditions crop up I will try and head to them. Not being a pro though I rarely can make it to those places I want at the right time. And when I do, it still comes down to luck.


There are a lot of technical requires of course as well. Filters, tripods, sharp lenses. Lots of techniques, hyper-focal focusing for example. These are important but much easier to sort out (money and a few good books). Somethings I may never be able to learn, to be able to get those magical shots. But mountains are my life energy so I hope one day I will be able to capture my feels in a photograph.
 
Last edited:
hmm, wrote a detailed reply and lost it. here is a summary:

Did you use a CPL?, ND Grad?

Did you use automatic WB or manual ?

Have you tried the photo in the evening at sunset (the shadows are quite dark and the DR of the photo quite high, maybe at sunset the beach is better exposed?)


Don't be afraid to push vibrance and contrast in PP a little.

And there is still a composition problem, the sand blob is a little distracting as it is bigger than the castle.
 
The difference is light. You can't force a landscape to be interesting, regardless of how much you process the shot. You must have the magical quality in the light in the first place.
 
olv said:
The difference is light. You can't force a landscape to be interesting, regardless of how much you process the shot. You must have the magical quality in the light in the first place.
Click to expand...

Or do what most seem to do on here and combine exposures ;)
 
olv said:
The difference is light. You can't force a landscape to be interesting, regardless of how much you process the shot. You must have the magical quality in the light in the first place.
Click to expand...

what i tried to aluded to earlier in a long and winding post.

Just because you are there at 7am doesn't mean the lighting is great. Maybe it is simply the wrong time of year, or maybe you just weren't lucky..
 
On the topic of landscapes!

Say you take a shot but then you dont notice the background subjects at a slant so the horizon isnt straight how can you counter this using photoshop?
 
Mp4 said:
On the topic of landscapes!

Say you take a shot but then you dont notice the background subjects at a slant so the horizon isnt straight how can you counter this using photoshop?
Click to expand...

Ctrl+T and then move the image horizontally. Adobe Lightroom can do this very easily as well.
 
okiedokie ill have a go in photoshop as i dont own lightroom :(

Geez lightroom is expensive! :o
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom