Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Sunset Over Arran 3

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

Add Comment

Okay, this is the last in the series (you'll be pleased to know!)

Right, rip this one to shreds, I want to know everything that's wrong with it before I go out and try again!

Taken with the ND2 and ND4 at ISO 100, f16/1 sec.

Couldn't slow it down any more at that fstop otherwise I blew the sky. Am hoping to rectify that over the weekend regarding getting more grads (thanks Dunc!)

Next time was going to try the 10-20 lens too...

Camera:Canon EOS 20D
Lens:28-135mm
Recording media:RAW (digital)
Title:Sunset Over Arran 3
Username:rowarrior rowarrior
Uploaded:23 May 2008 - 10:09 PM
Tags:Beach, Dunure, Landscape / travel, Sunset
VS Mode Rating Unrated
These stats show the percentage of wins and the rating score that your photo has achieved. You can go to the VS Mode by clicking on this icon.

Signup to e2

Signup to e2 to see which photo this has won or lost against in the vs mode
Votes:Voting Disabled
Critque wantedCritique Wanted
Modifications wanted Modifications Welcome (Upload a Modification)
Awards have been disabled on this photo

Comments

This photo is here for critique. Please only comment constructively and with suggestions on how to improve it.
JohnnyGraham
23 May 2008 - 11:11 PM

hey I'd really recommend you getting that 10-20 on and maybe switching to portrait if you get that light and sunset again.

get nice and low to the rocks near near the shoreline(dont drop camera into sea, it hurts) and with the grads on and dont be afraid to be experimental with your compositions you can always crop them later.

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

blondiebee
24 May 2008 - 12:42 AM

I like this. Nice foreground and lovely colours. Ness

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

riggwelter
24 May 2008 - 12:50 AM

Personally I would either get really low to the ground with a wide angle (10-20)? or use the long end of the 28-135 and concentrate on the mountains of Arran. Also, either totally blur the sea or keep it sharp, otherwise it just looks out of focus.

This shot makes want me to go to Arran with my mate who is going there next week!!!

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

RosaB
RosaB  761 forum posts Greece2 Constructive Critique Points
24 May 2008 - 7:42 AM

Just looked at your other photos in this series and much prefer the first one! It has more natural colours and the sea is nice and sharp!
Rosalie

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

alansnap
alansnap e2 Member 10529 forum postsalansnap vcard United Kingdom22 Constructive Critique Points
24 May 2008 - 11:37 AMConstructive Critique!This comment was flagged as constructive critique! 

OK here we go. First i like this one from the point of view of mood. I would have tried a version with a faster shutter speed to freeze the sea. Sometimes that works too.
I know you were trying for a milky sea, but the most effective shots like that seem to be done in winter or when the sun has gone down even further. Like me you seem to be a little impatient - a family trait. I would have waited another 15 minutes or half an hour when more light has gone from the sky and from the scene too, but the contrast between sky and sea would have been a lot lower too. Three stops on the grad should be the most you need.
Use the camera without filters as a light meter to compare foreground and background exposure. When the difference between the two comes down to three stops (or 2 is even better) then recompose with the filters and you'll get the chance for much longer exposures.
The sky colour is your other concern as the red may decline, but in the right situations the colour will change sometimes in remarkable ways.
I know your tripod won't go any lower, but you have a bean bag so use that to get the camera right down to ground level. take a bin bag with you to lie on.

Above all else keep trying. Go and play with your new toy too, but watch the 10-20 mm with the filter holder, something that wide will vignette very easily.

Himself

Last Modified By alansnap at 24 May 2008 - 11:40 AM

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

culturedcanvas
25 May 2008 - 1:48 AMConstructive Critique!This comment was flagged as constructive critique! 

Hi.

You've basically got too much wasted space and as such an unbalanced composition. The mid areas are too flat and uninteresting and the comp lacks any forground interest.

Working with hills in the distance the obvious method would be to stand further back and compress the distance using a longer focal length. However if the area behind you rises too quickly you will find this difficult as you will be too high. As it stands you need to get loswer down to cut out some of that sea.

Working with the 10-22 you are going to further exagerate the distance between foreground and hills so try to make sure you will the foreground with something interesting as the background will fade into relative insignificance.

I'd personally try to shoot this with both the 10mm end of your 10-22mm and also with a longer focal length such as 100mm and see what the results are like. Challenging yourself to work the same scene with hugely different focal lengths is a very productive and effective way of improving your ability to 'see' a scene.

The exposure isnt so much of an issue with this to be honest and it appears there may be still some detail retained in those highlights. Choice of shutter speed is also a bit slow to retain detail and a bit fast to get milky water and stuck between the two niggles me a bit.

Hope that helps!

Dan

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

Nickscape
Nickscape  8696 forum posts England9 Constructive Critique Points
26 May 2008 - 8:43 AMConstructive Critique!This comment was flagged as constructive critique! 

I remember your thread about getting the milky water - as Dan says your kind of inbetween the shutter speeds here - 1 second is ok for bluring waterfalls but the sea needs at least 10 seconds for the proper milky effect. I think the main way you can achieve this is to get to your location before sunrise, or before the sun rises above the horizon. This was the lighting is dull enough to get the long shutter speeds, but because of the exposure the sky will look as bright as this sky - thats one thing i never realised when i was starting out with these kind of shots. Composition wise its all been said- too much space in the middle, just a few movements and next time you can sort this.

Nick

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

- Original Poster Comments
- Your Posts

Add a Comment

You must be a member to leave a comment

Username:
Password:
Remember me:
Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.