Back Modifications (4)
Views: 138 (40 Unique)  Award Shortlist   


By xwang
This photo was taken at the same time as Conisborough castle.The view was on the right side of the castle.I liked the contrast of the light.The sky looked like a thick blanket, the sun was narrowly shining on the buildings ,trees&grass.It was beautiful,but my photo doesn't say so, the sky lost it's 3D,became flat.I wonder what's gone wrong.I didn't do any post process work,it an original photo.
Settings:EXIF said: shutter speed 1/99sec(6.63),Exposure time 1/100sec[I wonder what they are,and which one I shoud put on for reference];F8;Focal length 35mm;ISO200;AV-priority.All comments, criticisms and MOD are welcome.Thank you.

Tags: General

Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here

This photo is here for critique. Please only comment constructively and with suggestions on how to improve it.


gary_d 10 576 13 Wales
14 Sep 2010 12:49AM
I like the shadow forming the foreground in a nice shot, my only niggle and I know its nit picking is the small branch peeping in to shot on the left it just catch's my eye. - gary

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

LexEquine 12 19 United States
14 Sep 2010 1:22AM
Very nice capture, Xwang, with very good color & clarity. I would suggest a little cropping from the top of the image frame(I think that it would improve the impact of your image). Regards...Peter
User_Removed 9 26 2 United States
14 Sep 2010 1:36AM
Beautiful color and contrasts.
xwang 9 56 8
14 Sep 2010 7:36AM
Thank you Gary, I'll get rid of it.I didn't do any post process work.I can't see the 'real cloud and light' that I saw at the spot on my photo.But why it's not there? I wonder if there is any technical problem.
Thank you Peter.Yes, I rolled up a bit, it looked better without the 'dull' part of the sky...
Thank you Christina for your compliment.
clicknimagine 8 221 88
14 Sep 2010 12:11PM
Hi Xiaoli,

if you are interested to know the features of the camera first, i am giving you some links, if you study these links you can better understand what the hell these are:-

1. links,

2. link,

3. link, graphical demonstration,

and after all these stuff, you should study your camera manual, every doubt will be solved,

God bless you my friend...
metro074 8 8 Australia
14 Sep 2010 1:11PM
Hi Xiaoli, this is a superb capture. I did a little mod by cropping three sides only thus giving your superb capture more atmospheric impact. This image is a belter. Very well taken indeed. Smile
clicknimagine 8 221 88
14 Sep 2010 6:16PM

Quote:Hi Xiaoli
You are right, what we see as 3 dimensional cannot be repeated by a single lens, we need 2 lenses offset as our two eyes are from each other, like those 3D viewers we used to play with all those years ago. I have attempted to put some modern-day 3D from 2D into it for you and have also moved the horizon away from centre by cropping some of the sky away. See what you think.

i really have no words to say after reading this,

we use two eyes that is why we see 3D? if i close one eye i can still see 3D, for 3D images two lenses might be better? LOL...

i am not sure what you are talking about...
xwang 9 56 8
14 Sep 2010 10:31PM
Thank you very much Rahul for your helpful links.I'll study them little by little in my slow way, I'm not very bright, but I'm going to try, see how much I can undersatandSmile,OK?
Thank you very much Carol for your compliment and MOD.It's really nice to see you are back, looking forward to seeing more of your photos.
Thank you very much Frank for your explaination and MOD.It does look different.As Rahul, I wouldn't understand what you meant if I hadn't visited a local museum and lenarned something about it last week.I was told that it was very easy actually,but it was a genius's thought, take one photo on right and move a bit on left take another one,done! Look them through a pair of glass. I even thought, surely the distance between people's eyes are different, so how much you move from right to left must be a tricky question. The 3Ds never work well with me, like the bineculars, I can't see it with my spectacles and I can't see it without them eitherGrin.
BTW,Rahul's links reminded me of a saying I learned yesterday, call it "Walking with P mode", basically speaking is when you walk around with camera on, set it at P mode.Does anyone ever heard of it? What's the theory of it?I's like to know.
Thank you all.
Jestertheclown 9 7.7k 252 England
14 Sep 2010 11:23PM
I know what you mean regarding the sky. I've taken many images of the sky, thinking "that looks good, I'll save it until I can use it", only to find that the version I get from the camera is nothing like the one that I saw and wanted.
In this case, it can be rescued to some extent.
I separated the sky and land in using layer masks then made a few slight adjustments to the sky in levels and some more using the shadows/highlights tool.
I've darkened the lower half just a fraction to increase the depth of the shadows and to reduce the "sunniness" on the grass but without darkening the buildings themselves.
Put it back together, removed some noise (that I'd created) and "voila"!
Hope it's OK.


Edit; I did add a bolt of lightning but I thought it was a bit OTT!
clicknimagine 8 221 88
15 Sep 2010 5:43AM
very interesting to know that which i have never heard before,

the theory mainly says that each one of the eye seeing different scene from a slightly different angle and in this way our brain interpreting the sense of depth,

i still wonder the person with single eye or if i close my one eye, will it be possible to see 3d scene, according to the theory it may not be possible, but i can perceive it (am i insane)...
KingBee Plus
12 529 2 Scotland
15 Sep 2010 7:35AM
Hello Xiaoli, there's a lot of good constructive criticism here, and I cannot add to it. It is a very moody picture in its way, and I like the contrats between sunlight and dark sky. Bob
clicknimagine 8 221 88
15 Sep 2010 10:29AM
ok, Frank, i am just trying to know elaborately how this theory works, i have raised this point because it is really interesting topic,

i have seen your mod, can you please explain where is the difference between your mod and the original one, which makes the image from 2d to 3d?

you have said people with one eye can not see 3d, can you provide some evidence or can you explain it a bit more?...
clicknimagine 8 221 88
15 Sep 2010 11:09AM
one eye can not see 3d?

No. It is the two visual fields (one from each eye) that, when combined in the visual cortex of the brain, produce our sense of depth and speed.

But, there are two different types of cues the brain uses to asses the depth of a scene. Mono occular cues and binocular cues. Depth information can be produced by the brain using mono ocular cues acquired by just one eye. So it is possible that with one eye we will get a 3D feeling, which is not complete. You can experience this effect if you watch a movie (2D) with one eye closed.
The small difference in images acquired by both eyes, called the binocular disparity, belongs to the class of binocular cues, and this is the mostly used cue by the brain to produce a 3D effect.


this information is utterly false lmao. you still see depth if you cover one eye with your hand, ie, if you close one eye you can easily tell what the distance difference between objects is. losing one eye simply reduces your field of vision, not your ability to see stereo 3D. people who loose one eye can still see depth, they loose 50% of thier field of view if an eye is dammaged, not the ability to see depth for real, just an inibility to use 3D products.
if you loose an eye you wont be able to see 3D anaglyphs or other products that use stereocameras.
not having two cameras or systems will not allow you to see 3D but your eyes see depth regardless if one eye is shut or close or if one eye has dammage. you dont loose depth perception if you close an eye, you simply loose the amount of area able to see. the human eye has both resolution distance and light based stereo 3D and parallel eye stereo features.your eyes 3D resolution improves based on how close you are to something and based on how much light is available.

How much confusion it is?...
James_C 8 36 56 United Kingdom
15 Sep 2010 2:48PM
An interesting discussion. With regard to 3D I can only really compare the situation I have, which is that some 20 years ago I totally lost the hearing in one ear as a result of an injury - when I listen to my hifi I can tell the difference between stereo and mono but can't tell the direction that the sound is coming from. I suspect the situation with sight is the same - you can still see in 3D but can't judge distance accurately.

Quote:the sky lost it's 3D,became flat

I think the real problem here is the same as when photographing a rough sea - it never looks as rough. Its a phenomenon that I can't explain, but I have NEVER seen a photograph or even a film of a sea that looks as rough as it really is.
My only suggestion is that looking at the various mods there is no doubt in my mind that adding contrast to the sky prevents it looking so flat and is a strong argument for using carefully controlled HDR.

xwang 9 56 8
15 Sep 2010 10:09PM
Thank you all for the interesting discussion about 3D. I really can't tell one eye can see 3D or not.So far as I know that our brain has to be trained to 'see' things, eg. judging the distance.If a person is blind when he or she was born, the sight is recovered through an operation,he or she has to learn to 'see', you may find that he or she bumps into things a lot till the brain 'learns' how to 'see' things and get the distance right.
What I am interested in is why we can't reproduce the real sky or as James said a rough sea,maybe there is a connection between our eyes see the real sky or sea to what we see through a sigle lens.
Thank you all for the interesting conversation.
Brilane 11 5 12 Wales
16 Sep 2010 3:45AM
I would suggest that using a circular polarising filter would probably have given you a picture nearer to the effect that you wanted.
clicknimagine 8 221 88
16 Sep 2010 7:17AM
Thanks James for your input, every images are 2d in the real, but if you include the sense of depth in the image that can give an illusion of 3d, but the image will still be in 2d form,

the problem you are talking about regarding the ears, i am not sure what actually happens to you, so i really can not explain, but one eye can see the distance and recognize, but this recognizances regarding accuracy about the distance vary from person to person, e.g

if i open my both eyes, i can hardly tell the distance accurately, but that depends on the person, some people can do it, and those people can do it even if their one eye closed,

theoretically it is true that one eye can see 3d,

so, creating contrast in the sky what you are talking about how can give the sense of depth as an essential ingredient to form 3d illusion?

the phenomenon about sea and sky, what you are talking about, is really difficult to explain, because i am not an expert in this regard,

but if i follow my logic, the roughness of the sea which we generally perceive is the result of repetition of waves constantly, when you are taking still images, you are capturing a certain moment where these repetition is not possible, thus psychologically the roughness will be reduced to a great extend, as well as this repetition in the nature is very fast, this roughness can be reduced by the insufficient shutter speed, e.g if you take an image of the sea with a high shutter speed, you can see roughness to a certain extend, but if you take the image with low shutter speed you can not see roughness, 10 stop lee filter is reducing the amount of light entering the camera, so that you can employ lower shutter speed (10 stop reduce), hence giving a smooth sea or sky (roughness reduced)...
Jestertheclown 9 7.7k 252 England
16 Sep 2010 9:35AM
Glad to be of assistance!

xwang 9 56 8
16 Sep 2010 10:30AM
Thank you Rahul for your further explaination.Could I understand way, If I want to have a 3d sky or sea, I need high shutter speed? I couldn't use high shutter speed on this photo, bucause if I had pushed the speed up, I would have had to reduce the F number,that would also give me a clear forgroung which I don't really want.Because I was hand holding the camera, I was worried about the camera shaken and ended with a blur picture as well.And also the contrast of the light was so strong,so I had to go to "a middle way", set the F number at 8.Think back, if I raised up the shutter speed, and tried the "Exposure comp./AEB "setting, do you think that is the way out?Could you give me a rough idea (precisely would be even better)about the proportions of settings?(if there is anySmile )
Thank you all again.
clicknimagine 8 221 88
16 Sep 2010 10:55AM
oh dear! Xiaoli no only employing high shutter speed can not ensure the 3d appearance( it depends on the light, composition, shadow etc.), probably you are not understanding what i am talking about,

i hope this link can help you further...

Settings:EXIF said: shutter speed 1/99sec(6.63),Exposure time 1/100sec[I wonder what they are,and which one I shoud put on for reference];F8;Focal length 35mm;ISO200;AV-priority.All comments, criticisms and MOD are welcome.Thank you.

after reading this, i have given you some links (first comment), so that your points can be cleared...
xwang 9 56 8
16 Sep 2010 11:39AM
Thank you very much Rahul for your links again. I just had a look, I got bonus as well...I took a photo of two ducks yesterday, It looked the whole picture was in a mess, I thought the tidy minded people would 'hate' this, and I just found out now, it may match "Monotonous Content"Grin...I'm really sorry, I don't read much about photography, still at the "point and shoot" stage,I'm trying to read a book about B&W which recommended by another EPZ friend, I still haven't finished it yet , oh, god knows for how long,weeks..I'm really embarrassed.I'll try to read more your links. I actually had a look of the link you put on about shutter speed,but it didn't explain what I read on EXIF on PSP.I perhaps need to find out how to read the exact data on PSP,don't you think so?Thank you again,nice to learn something new under your help.
clicknimagine 8 221 88
16 Sep 2010 6:32PM
Yes i agree Frank, the mod is better, i do not have any intention to cross what you have done and what you have said, i have just tried to discuss the interesting theory you have raised, so there should not be any misunderstanding because it is only a study where we can help each other, ok, James lets find another one for discussion...
MickS 13 23 14 England
27 Oct 2010 11:03PM
Watcha Xiaoli,
love this, excellent composition of an excellent bit of observation, the picture broken up by those flat, horizontal planes, perhaps, could have a little less depth by reducing contrast in the foreground.
xwang 9 56 8
28 Oct 2010 6:21PM
Thank you Mick for your kind and helpful comment.
Thank you all.

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.