Back Modifications (2)
Views 72 Unique 32 Award Shortlist   

Switzerland Dec 8th 2013

By Melmount
I was trying to achieve a nice winter scene. Picture taken handheld and processed using Photoshop CC which I am not too familiar with. I would like some advice on composition and the processing off the photo.

Tags: Landscape and travel

Amazon Kindle Unlimited Offer: 1-Month For FREE!


chase Plus
15 2.2k 566 England
2 Apr 2014 6:12PM
A pretty scene of that lovely house with the smoke coming out of the chimney.
Perhaps just a wee bit on the bright side in the fg & any sky detail has been lost just because of the harsh contrasts.Maybe a little earlier or later in the day would have been a better time to take this shot when the light may have been a little less harsh & intense.
To improve this I would have cropped off the sky,darkened the fg a little & had a go at removing some of the blue tint to the snow on the house roof...all of which I have done in my modification.
That signpost doesn't really add anything to the scene for me,I see the back of the sign not the front & is a bit of a barrier to me getting beyond it to the better image of the house at the back.
I find myself wishing you had got much closer to the house with that nice dark backdrop from the trees behind,would have made this much better composition wise I feel.
Possibly slightly over processed which has lost you lots of detail in the fg,but,again the harsh light has not helped you here.
Do you have an ND grad filter ? using one would have retained some detail in the brighter parts ,alternatively you could take a couple of images,one exposed for the lighter parts & one for the darker ones,combine them in Photoshop CC on separate layers & mask out the bits you don't want in the scene ( Reckon you would have had to use a tripod though as both images need to be exactly in the same position.
Nicely the smoke.
Thank you for your constructive critique and modification. You have made some very good observations and comments which I agree with and will try to incorporate into future work. I didn't have an Nd filter with me I'm afraid. Yes moving closer would have improved composition and would also removed some of the brighter foreground. Your comments and modification are much appreciated.

pamelajean Plus
15 1.6k 2227 United Kingdom
2 Apr 2014 10:36PM
It's an attractive scene, Seamus, with the cottage nestling beneath the tree canopy.

It's difficult to advise on your processing without seeing your original image, but I feel that you have made the colours a little too vivid, especially the gold, and have also over-sharpened the image.
Your exif says 1.15pm but it looks more like a sunrise or sunset picture with the golden tones and long shadows. Or maybe it's autumnal colours?
The other difficulty lies in your colour space profile. Itís a good idea to assign the sRGB colour profile to your pictures. The reason you should do this is that all Web Browsers are not created equal, so some people will not see the colours in your image that you do. Some web browsers will not accurately display the colours in your image when it has a profile other than sRGB.
sRGB is the WEB standard colour space, so that means, when you upload an image to EPZ, or any place on the Web, you MUST make sure that sRGB is the colour profile used.
If using Photoshop, assign the sRGB colour profile in Edit>Assign colour profile, and the drop down list has it near the top.

As to composition, I think you did well. You used the two trees as natural frames for the cottage, and positioned the cottage so that it didn't sit too centrally in the frame, the barn helping the balance. Including some foreground gives the image depth.

You are losing some detail at the bottom. For landscape pictures, you can use a smaller aperture, which gives you a greater depth of field, ensuring that most of your image will be in focus, whether it is close to your camera or far away.

I have done a modification where I cropped the bottom and right, then desaturated the colours, and cloned out the sign in the foreground.

The sky looks a bit washed out, and some of this could be caused by your processing, but it may have had very little colour at the time of shooting as well.

You have a good eye for a landscape scene that is pleasing to view.

paulbroad 13 131 1293 United Kingdom
3 Apr 2014 9:20AM
A nice composition but quite heavily over processed. Not easy to advise as you give no processing details but looks over saturated and too contrasty which leads to less than natural colours and a fairly blank sky. Be careful with saturation and never set the camera for vivid colours.

You used RAW. This is the route to the best most detailed images. It is also the route to ruining images if you do not full understand RAW processing. Thry shooting RAW +best JPG. Then look at the JPG. It is usually quite close to correct providing your initial exposure is correct.

Now process the RAW to look the same as the JPG. You may get a surprise as to the correct procedure. Then make it even better than the JPG with the tiniest tweaks.

You will get 'shoot in RAW' pushed at you a lot in this section. Take care, it is the best way, but you will actually get worse results frim RAW than JPG if yiu are not proficient with the procedure.

banehawi Plus
17 2.5k 4255 Canada
9 May 2014 2:42PM
Your white balance was set to shade, rather than sun, so its overly warm.

F/5.6 is too wide open for this shot, you need depth to get the apparent sharpness from near to far, so at least f/11 for this. This is why the near leaves are soft and blurry.

You had lots of room to move the aperture down and still have decent speed for the shot.


Maiwand 14 3 73 England
9 Sep 2015 10:59PM
Lots of good advice here.GrinGrinGrinGrinGrinGrinGrin

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.