I know this horse!

At the time of shooting, you had the camera pointed towards the sky, so the horse turned out a little underexposed. In situations like this, as suggested by Pablo, "force" your flash ON, so that it illuminates the horse. This goes for any situation when shooting into the sky.

In post processing, you can lift detail in the horse as if you had used the flash. I used the shadow tool in CS5, but with basic Photoshop you can also do this using levels and a layers mask. This also reveals the colour of the horse.


To reduce the distraction of the surrounding colours, you can selectively colour the horse only.


I have loaded two mods to show what I mean.



regards



Willie

There is a slight cast, but the main issues are over saturation, (look at the sky) and its not straight (water falls straight, not at an angle)

Loaded a quick mod.


Heres a link for checking colour casts for yourself:

http://www.dpchallenge.com/tutorial.php?TUTORIAL_ID=24



regards



Willie

Welcome to EPZ Andrew.


This is quite a spectacular shot of an often overlooked bird that can be photographed well, as is the case here. Terrific detail in the eye, and the feathers are exposed well so you can see lots of detail


The camera is in Programme Mode, so unless you have intervened in the settings, the exposure is completely down to the camera, and if you want to progress, you will need to explore the Aperture priority and Shutter priority modes for more control.

I like the diagonal presentation, even though it places the focal point, the gulls eye in the centre.

It can be tweaked in post processing to provide a little more contrast, reduce the highlights slightly, and enhance that nice catch light on the eye. Also, painting over the blocks of colour at the bottom can help keep the eye on the bird.



Ive done this in mods to show what I mean, and mod 2 is an alternate crop.

To see mods, click the Modifications tab and the click the modified images.



Enjoy the site,



regards



Willie

Its an interesting image. Though theres that promise of the open space, its blocked by the bars, so near and yet so far in a way.


Hard to comment on the B&W processing without seeing the original. It looks quite good to me. I would suggest making more of that sky and open space by giving it some more contrast.

The composition is what it is, - you were limited by the position of the door and the arch and have done what you needed to do to make it work, and I think it works well.

Upload a mod to show what I mean.


regards


Willie

Welcome to EPZ Gavin.

These shots are difficult, and require some practice. Technique matters, as does location, and time of day.


Youve already been made aware of the apparent off level appearance, and in addition to that, the image appears very flat, meaning no blacks, and the water is very much over exposed.

The location lacks interest, though I imagine youre trying this out wherever you can, Location makes a big difference though if you can include interesting focal points.

Shot settings:

You chose manual mode, and multi segment metering. What did you use as a reference for your metering decisions? Were you taking different shots, looking at the LCD and making changes? When looking at your LCD, always use the mode that shows your Brightness Histogram, and use that as your guide for exposure. If you look at the histogram for this, using Levels in Photoshop, you will see the graph starts on the left well in from the edge (losing blacks) and is piled up high against the end at the right, which indicates overexposre. Checking at the time of shooting is a good habit to get into, so you can adjust and take another shot.

Overexposre is obviously caused by the long shutter speed which you wanted for the "milky" effect, in combination with ISO and aperture. You needed to reduce the amount of light entering the camera. Using ISO 400 will contribute to overexposure, so start out with ISO 100. Then adjust the aperture, choosing a smaller aperture, f/16 as an example, until your LCD view shows you the exposure is good.


Ive loaded a mod with the same scene straightened, and used Photoshop to correct the exposure as much as I could, but there are still areas of overexposure. Its a waste of time removing debris, - you need a better location. If you compare it to the original, you will understand the concept of "flat".

iPhoto has very little capabilities for image editing, so you should look out for either a free decent editor, or Photoshop.


Heres a link to the EPZ top 10 free programmes:

http://www.ephotozine.com/article/here-s-a-rundown-of-ten-top-free-photo-editors...



Hope this is helpful,



regards



Willie

Helen, good feedback, and I have one question for you.

Are you resizing as follows:

Resize image: Image>Image size> set pixels per inch to 72; then set the longest side to what the site allows; then during the save as process, you will adjust the quality slider to get the right file size, then save.

Next: Open the new image. Check for sharpness at 100%. It will very likely need to be sharpened. You can use whatever method you prefer; here is a reliable method you can use:

Filter>sharpen>unsharp mask; set Radius = 0.8; set threshold = 3; now slide the Amount slider all the way to the right, which oversharpens the shot; then slide it slowly back to the left until it doesnt look soft, and doesnt look too sharp. You can view your image and turn Preview on and off to see how youre doing. When your happy, press OK, then SAVE. Now upload.




If no, thats why it looks soft.



regards



Willie

It is a magic moment David, and the shot has turned out quite well. A polarizer filter on the lens would have reduced some of the glare from the mist, - but you would have missed the moment if you had delayed to use it.

Its possible using the highlight tool in CS5 to reduce glare and Ive dome the in the mods, in addition to contrast and sharpening. When you re size and save, you need to open your newly re sized image, check it for sharpness, and add sharpening as needed before uploading, which is likely a step missed here.


Mod2 I added a warming filter, just for a different look.



regards


Willie

Hi Mario.

The brushing in of the background has a few places where it can be filled in a little more; especially over the right shoulder; The face appears very smooth, where a very detailed, contrasty and darker look would suit better; the underside of the helmet has a few areas of black marks, - worth filling it in with all black; he is too low in the frame, and it looks better if he has more room on the left, - easy to do; Ive made the background darker in the mod also.


The helmet exposure is very good. Though the reflections are interesting, it might look better if they werent there, - like in a studio shot.


Let me know if the mod works for you.



Willie

Welcome to EPZ Michael, and your first upload for critique.


Looking at your camera, the setting, and you position in relation to the dancers the shot has turned out quite well. Its slightly lacking in contrast, but not a bad exposure overall, with the camera doing a decent job of dealing with a wide range of light.

As you suggested yourself, it likely better cropped tighter ( I loaded a mod with one dancer only, but used quite a bit of photoshop trickery for this, the point is to show what could have been)


If you had the opportunity to take the shot from the same level as the dancers youre chances of a really good shot would have been improved. From your vantage point, an even wider shot showing more dancers may have been closer to what you intended. As it is, its realy halfway between being close and wide, with either closer or wider being a better option.


I do like the dancers, - I havent seen a shot of Turkish dancers on here before.



Enjoy the site,



regards



Willie

You need to calibrate you display. Is it a laptop, or a separate LCD screen?



Heres a link to a free online calibration tool:


http://displaycalibration.com/


There are probably a lot more. The best way to calibrate is to use a colorimeter, like ones made by Spyder and others. But this should get you started.



Its a good looking shot, - however, it would really stand out if the centre was sharper that it is here.

Are you sharpening your re sized and saved image before you upload?

Resize image: Image>Image size> set pixels per inch to 72; then set the longest side to what the site allows; then during the save as process, you will adjust the quality slider to get the right file size, then save.

Next: Open the new image. Check for sharpness at 100%. It will very likely need to be sharpened. You can use whatever method you prefer; here is a reliable method you can use:

Filter>sharpen>unsharp mask; set Radius = 0.8; set threshold = 3; now slide the Amount slider all the way to the right, which oversharpens the shot; then slide it slowly back to the left until it doesnt look soft, and doesnt look too sharp. You can view your image and turn Preview on and off to see how youre doing. When your happy, press OK, then SAVE. Now upload.

With the image sharpened it looks a lot better.

Your putting us under pressure here Garreth, letting us know your wife likes it!

It is nice, and there is a great opportunity to learn how to shoot into the sky.

The exposure is underexposed for the flowers, and somewhat for the clouds. So, when shooting into the sky, always expect your camera to underexpose your main subject, as the metering system is influenced by the sky. So, you have two choices. One is to use your exposure compensation feature, and set it to + 2/3, then look at your histogram view on the LCD. You can decide if 2/3 is too much, or too little.

Second, you can do what Trev suggested, and thats to force your on board flash to pop up, and the flash will fire at a low power, illuminating the flowers better.


The composition doesnt work well. Best if you can get the branch at a diagonal across the frame.


Loaded a mod with all of the above done.

The exif data shows you used shutter priority if I read this correctly? With this type of shot, using Aperture priority is a better choice, giving you control over dof, rather than the camera.


let me know if the mod passes the wife test!



Regards



Willie

Hi Ashley,

A few questions first. I dont quite understand the exif settings, - to me it reads that you used shutter priority, set it to 1/60, and then used ISO 800. I would conclude from this that the camera selected f/14? Is this correct?

I ask the question because the main issue with the shot is underexposure. The settings appeared to be reasonably OK for the sky, but not from the castle down. It is in fact two shots in one, - the sky, and the castle. You could have taken two exposures if you had a tripod, or a solid support, with one shot metered by pointing at the sky, and the second metered by pointing down, excluding the sky, and using photoshop to merge the two.

As for composition, Ive uploaded your original shot with the rule of thirds overlaid as a cropping guide. You can see it can benefit if the castle moves to the left, by cropping space from the left.


Mod2 has the lower area + castle exposed correctly, with the upper area mostly as it was I have used no colour, vibrancy adjustments, - what you see is whats there with the correct exposure.



Hope you find this of some help,



regards




Willie

Its overexposed and over sharpened. The exposure doesnt make a lot of sense, as you would expect underexpose, not overexposure from this scene. The small piece of sky is not the normal sky colour, so I imaging uoui have applied some post processing changes. Very difficult to recover this as is, but made an effort in the mod.



regards



Willie

Time to get that circular polarizer to turn this into a way better shot, deeper colours and contrast will make a big difference. Theres no black in the shot, and though youve done the right think with the -1, perhaps an even shorter exposure would have provided a more contrasty image.



regards



Willie

They are all the same Alan in the effect they have.

Levels allow for more control, and with the other two sliders you can adjust not only the whites, but mid tones and darks.

Screen basically gives you a one stop over exposure. The you can use a layer mask to remove the brighter areas from where you dont want them by painting with a black brush.

Brighten should be avoided at all costs, - forget you ever saw it. It can ruin an image. Its not for pros like you!

So screen and levels, with levels being more flexible and handy. And you may not need to use a layer mask. Experiment with both for practice.


W

Hi from Toronto.


I like the idea, - lens wide open with nothing sharp, - like the colours, like the softness. The placement of the main flower leave the shot unbalanced for me, and it may suit a square crop better. I would remove those brown stems too just to leave it softer in the background.

Although youve gone for soft, its not a bad idea to have a very small amount of the flower sharp, which Ive done in the mod. I also applied some diffuse glow to soften a little more, and applied a simple frame. Hope you like the idea.




regards


Willie

Hi John,


This is a nice tranquil image, - love the invisible horizon.

Theres absolutely nothing wrong with it as is. It can have a little more contrast, but that can also spoil the mood you were capturing. Same with adding skies that werent there, - not a bad idea, but again it changes the mood and intent. I did a mod, but a very small amount of contrast.


One point about you camera settings, - dont use the widest aperture, - stop the lens down one or two stops. You could quite easily have used f/8 with this one. GIve it a try next time.





Regards



Willie

A good shot Billy. Difficult subject, with angles, multiple surfaces, ridges. The ridges have a Moire effect, but thats due to the pattern and the sensor, - difficult to do anything about it. The main area, - the building, is quite straight judging from the doorway, with the posts having an obvious tilt as youve mentioned. Theres general agreement that the tree can go, - so you need the chain saw attachment for your D90.

You can straighten the posts area on its own by using the marquee selection tool, draw a rectangle around the posts, then edit>transform>distort and drag them vertical. Do it on a layer so you can clean up any obvious overlaps.


Apart from that, the exposure is good. I would like to see more contrast in the side of the building, and have increased contrast in that area only in the mod.


Well done with a difficult subject.




Regards



Willie

"I would prefer the bridge to be a deeper colour but can't quite get there."

Why do you want this? Is the brick not representative of the actual colour you saw?


What do you mean by deeper? Is it more of the same colour (saturation) of a different shade of the brick colour (Hue)


What "style" have you selected for JPEG with your camera, - the result is determined by your style choice. Lets know what you have selected.


I have loaded a mod without touching any colour adjustments, or overlays. I used colour correction which reduced the green tone, and increased contrast. The result is way more vibrant, and this should be the first adjustment you do before you look at colour. Get this right, and everything else will fall into place.


Heres the link to what I did, and how you can do it. You have the rod, now catch fish!


http://www.dpchallenge.com/tutorial.php?TUTORIAL_ID=24




regards



Willie

Hi Rhona,

Many of the finest bird shots on this site include barbed wire. The question for me would always be, does it distract from the subject or not, and if not, then leave it.

With this particular shot (which is quite a nice shot), I am first drawn by the fact the wire, post and bird are all tiled lower at the left than right, so I would straighten and crop to place the bird on a third. having done that, the shot is flat, with very little contrast, so I would address that issue, and then see how the result looks with the wire in. If the wire contributed to the shot, - for example it was on a third, I would be inclined to include it.

The result is in the mods, and I for one like it with or without, and that because the wire ends up very low in the straightened shot. I would have a personal preference for the wire to look old and rusted, as it adds to the shot, so this shot would work with or without since the wire is new.



Hope this is helpful,




regards



Willie