Back Modifications (0)
Views: 101 (6 Unique)  Award Shortlist   

Sunset Over Arran 3

By rowarrior
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...

Tags: Sunset Beach Landscape and travel Dunure

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

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

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.

Comments


JohnnyGraham 10 98 Scotland
23 May 2008 11:11PM
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.

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

blondiebee 10 295 United Kingdom
24 May 2008 12:42AM
I like this. Nice foreground and lovely colours. Ness
riggwelter 9 165 United Kingdom
24 May 2008 12:50AM
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!!!
RosaB 9 61 2 Greece
24 May 2008 7:42AM
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
alansnap Plus
12 577 26 United Kingdom
24 May 2008 11:37AM
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
culturedcanvas 10 4.7k 59 United Kingdom
25 May 2008 1:48AM
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
Nickscape 10 708 9 England
26 May 2008 8:43AM
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

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.