Back Modifications (1)
Views 100 Unique 30 Award Shortlist   

Pigeon tower Rivington

By Jas2
At the top of Rivington pike lies the Pigeon tower built in 1910 to keep ornamental pigeons on the first 2 floors with the 3rd floor to look over the whole borough of Rivington.

Tags: Black and white Architecture and buildings

Panasonic 'Nature' Competition - Win A LUMIX FZ1000 II!

Comments


dudler Plus
16 897 1507 England
14 Aug 2019 7:37AM
OK, there seem to be a couple of issues here.

A tiny aperture and a slow shutter speed, and then +5/3 exposure compensation seem odd choices - can you say why you chose these settings, please?

Compositionally, there's a severe tilt to the image.

Over to you: I can't really make suggestions if i don't know why you made the technical coices you did...

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

14 Aug 2019 8:41AM

Quote:OK, there seem to be a couple of issues here.

A tiny aperture and a slow shutter speed, and then +5/3 exposure compensation seem odd choices - can you say why you chose these settings, please?

Compositionally, there's a severe tilt to the image.

Over to you: I can't really make suggestions if i don't know why you made the technical coices you did...



Hi Sir
The small aperture was to have maximum depth of field. I mounted on a tripod as I knew that the shutter speed will be low.
The ex comp was because there were lots of dark areas which I also wanted details of , and it was a bright day behind the tower.
Also I cannot appreciate the tilt and you say itís severe!
Is it because of the tree? Itís beca the tree was on a mound and hence appears tilted.
Regards
Jas
14 Aug 2019 10:15AM
Taking an edge of the tower as a vertical there is no tilt, so I confess I don't understand what John is getting at.

The thing that puzzles me is why you chose to show foreground shadow detail at the expense of everything lighter than a mid-tone; everything beyond the tower, and the ground in front of it, is completely washed out, all detail lost. If you'd exposed for the distance and added +1EV, that might have given a better result, and you could even have lifted shadows a bit more in post if necessary.

But perhaps this is the result you wanted? You haven't actually said how you feel about the image yourself, or what kind of help/advice/critique you're looking for.

Alan
14 Aug 2019 10:20AM

Quote:Taking an edge of the tower as a vertical there is no tilt, so I confess I don't understand what John is getting at.

The thing that puzzles me is why you chose to show foreground shadow detail at the expense of everything lighter than a mid-tone; everything beyond the tower, and the ground in front of it, is completely washed out, all detail lost. If you'd exposed for the distance and added +1EV, that might have given a better result, and you could even have lifted shadows a bit more in post if necessary.

But perhaps this is the result you wanted? You haven't actually said how you feel about the image yourself, or what kind of help/advice/critique you're looking for.

Alan



Good morning Alan
I am not happy with the result because of the blotchy whites behind the tower essentially. Please help me regards :
1. Composition
2. Exposure
including Exif settings
Many thanks
mrswoolybill Plus
12 1.5k 2070 United Kingdom
14 Aug 2019 10:48AM
This does seem to be straight to my eye. But exposure is way off!

Various points: The blotchy whites are massively overexposed areas because of the big plus exposure compensation setting!

Foreground shadow with bright light beyond is a difficult combination photographically in various ways. Tricky to compose for, tricky to expose for. I would strongly suggest that if you want to get the more distant view right, you expose for that. Look to get a bit more detail into the foreground in post-processing.

This is the sort of scene where shooting Raw files really pays dividends, because the camera will record all the data available (jpegs edit down to around 25 to 30% of what is available, the rest is lost), and that gives a lot more scope for work on difficult areas.

The Exif is showing this as taken 4.35am, I assume that it's incorrect! This looks like fairly overhead sun, not ideal conditions.

You will get the best results from the lens in terms of image quality by sticking around the middle of the aperture range, best to stay within the F3.5 to F11 band. I sometimes go as far as F16, never knowingly beyond!

And this also looks like a fairly contrasty b&w conversion, which generally suits sunshine, but may have exacerbated the overexposed areas. Can you please upload the original colour file, as a Modification? Just click on the blue Modifications button below your upload and follow the links. It might be possible to retrieve some more detail.

I'll come back later.
Moira
14 Aug 2019 11:34AM
Hi Jas.

I think there's a very nice composition in there trying to get out. The thing that's stopping it is that very large and dominant area of tree foliage that occupies almost half the frame. The overpowering effect is heightened by the fact that so much has been lost in other parts of the picture. You've made it pretty clear that the subject of interest to you in this scene is the tower, but concentrating on that big tree has only worked against that.

It was obviously, as you mentioned, a very high contrast situation... giving extremes of light and dark beyond the ability of any camera sensor to record and show any detail. In a situation like that, unless you are going to make several exposures of the scene at different settings ( a setting to prioritize shadow detail, another to favour the mid-tones, and a third to preserve highlight detail ) and then combine them in editing software, perhaps using an HDR program, then you have to compromise... decide what's most important, and prioritize that. You simply can't have it all ways!

I made a suggestion about exposure in my first comment, so I won't say any more about that.
I'll upload a mod illustrating how I might have composed the frame myself, excluding most of that tree and giving the tower more importance. I can't pull any detail out of those blown-out areas because it's gone. So the mod is a suggestion purely for composition.
If you could include the original unprocessed file ( upload it as a modification ), a better result might be possible.

Alan
14 Aug 2019 11:37AM
P.S. Moira has posted a critique while I've been typing, so there's a bit of overlap in our comments.
banehawi Plus
15 2.1k 4023 Canada
14 Aug 2019 1:19PM
Thanks for the explanation Jas.

A better way, to get good shadow detail and highlights at the same time as you are using a tripod, is to bracket exposures, exposing one for shadows, one for highlights, and one for the average of bot. Combine the three in Photoshop for be best of both worlds.

Also, at 16mm using a full frame camera, f/8 - f/11 would have been more than adequate for the depth you required.

Its possible you have some sun flare spots from shooting into the light, - visible in the large tree on the left.


Theres a nice composition in there!


Regards


Willie
dark_lord Plus
15 2.3k 582 England
14 Aug 2019 8:09PM
It's all been well covered above.
Unfortunately your choices have resulted in lost detail in the bright areas without any benefit to the shadow areas. You can lift the shadows in software later, which shouldn't be too problematic with files from your 6D.

The shadows are an integral appeal of the image so I'd leave them as such, though I appreciate your intention to get as much detail as possible. As dexcribed above, iof that's what you want then a more considered approach is needed.

Mono is a fair choice, but did you shoot the original as a mono ? I don't know if the 6D has such a mode, in fact I can't recall if my 5D3 or EOS R have them but i wouldn't use them if they have. If you have a colour original it would be good to see it (you can upload it as a mod) so we can see what you had to work with. It's far better to create a mono image from a full colour original using softwarethan relying on the camera as you have infiniotely more control over getting the result yopu want.
dudler Plus
16 897 1507 England
16 Aug 2019 7:51AM
I've done a mod, and rotated a degree and a half clockwise.

The exposure is the big issue.

As a general comment, I'd say that you are taking things to extremes. The aperture, the exposure compensation - at the extremes, a bit like revving the engine of a car to the red line all the time...

The composition looks good - worth going back and doing it again...
paulbroad Plus
12 131 1285 United Kingdom
19 Aug 2019 7:59PM
As above. the main issue is gross over exposure. You must be able to see yourself ow totally burnt out the whites are over much of the frame. you did not need f22 for such a composition - f8 would be more than enough and I might have been giving negative compensation to control highlights, correcting shadows later in software. that is te correct way to do it.

paul

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.