random drive in london
- Thread starter Overlag
- Start date
slightly over exposed i think..... but the 2nd shot i done which is better contrast is blury...doh.The Eye is a very nice shot
The view from Alexandra Palace would be better with a blacker sky.
doesnt help that the bright foreground is there too.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Jun 2006
- Posts
- 4,375
id be proud to of taken that eye shot m8, great stuff
Love the second shot, the London Eye truely is a great landmark to photograph; why its the apparently the most photographed landmark in England!
I love random drives, there so great, you get to be impulsive!
The second shot is slightly over exposed, perhaps you could adjust it slightly in photoshop? I would be I'm at work at the mo, this dog of a PC can only just manage to run IE and Word let alone Photoshop!
GReg
I love random drives, there so great, you get to be impulsive!
The second shot is slightly over exposed, perhaps you could adjust it slightly in photoshop? I would be I'm at work at the mo, this dog of a PC can only just manage to run IE and Word let alone Photoshop!
GReg
I have to say i dont think they are that great at all. The first thing that comes to mind is that they are both extremely soft. The first probably from a wide-open aperture over a long distance, and the second maybe because it was such a long exposure (a bit of shake maybe?).
The first doesnt interest me at all. I see what the subject is supposed to be but it's not framed very well, the foreground is highly distracting and the colours arent quite right (including the sky being too bright).
The second is better, but the composition isn't particularly good again. You're not at enough of an angle to The Eye to make it seem purposeful, yet you're not dead straight onto it. The Eye is dead in the middle of the shot, but if you're doing this you really need to fill the frame more, not leave a lot of space around it. In my opinion.
Was The Eye spinning? If it was, i would have gone for a much longer exposure to show this.. as it stands it looks a bit like you've just snapped it at a short exposure.
I hope that's useful stuff
The first doesnt interest me at all. I see what the subject is supposed to be but it's not framed very well, the foreground is highly distracting and the colours arent quite right (including the sky being too bright).
The second is better, but the composition isn't particularly good again. You're not at enough of an angle to The Eye to make it seem purposeful, yet you're not dead straight onto it. The Eye is dead in the middle of the shot, but if you're doing this you really need to fill the frame more, not leave a lot of space around it. In my opinion.
Was The Eye spinning? If it was, i would have gone for a much longer exposure to show this.. as it stands it looks a bit like you've just snapped it at a short exposure.
I hope that's useful stuff
yeah i dont really think the first one is all that greatI have to say i dont think they are that great at all. The first thing that comes to mind is that they are both extremely soft. The first probably from a wide-open aperture over a long distance, and the second maybe because it was such a long exposure (a bit of shake maybe?).
The first doesnt interest me at all. I see what the subject is supposed to be but it's not framed very well, the foreground is highly distracting and the colours arent quite right (including the sky being too bright).
The second is better, but the composition isn't particularly good again. You're not at enough of an angle to The Eye to make it seem purposeful, yet you're not dead straight onto it. The Eye is dead in the middle of the shot, but if you're doing this you really need to fill the frame more, not leave a lot of space around it. In my opinion.
Was The Eye spinning? If it was, i would have gone for a much longer exposure to show this.. as it stands it looks a bit like you've just snapped it at a short exposure.
I hope that's useful stuff
the eye wasnt moving at that point, its a 15second exposure at F8 i think i used.
would a low F number make more sense? im not totally clued up on these settings.
camera is only a S3IS, max exposure 15seconds, F2.7-F8, but only F3.5 when even slightly zoomed (12x zoom max in other shot)
If it was moving then the 'done' thing would to make the exposure as long as possible to allow trails/movement to show. As it wasnt you're not going to get any movement so what you've done is fine. With some subjective composition a 'still' shot of the eye could be just as good as a moving one.
i ment of the city scape from alexandra palace...
i got one thats sharp, but over exposed (the first one in the pic), and one thats darker, but blury due to a small shake.
I might go up there again to do it.