Back Modifications (2)
Views 122 Unique 46 Award Shortlist   

York Shambles

By xwang
I always want to take some photos here, but it's always difficult. Either there are too many visitors around at the day time, or the light is too difficult...it is very dark in winter; strong contrast in lighter seasons. This time the light seemed fine, but I failed..
Problem: Noise in foreground.
Noise has been reduced, but there is still some. This is the best I can manage.. Any better idea please?
This is partially HDR, the sky was original. I think that because of the strong light contrast, the foreground was too dark, but I like the warm light on the buildings. I took another brighter set after this lot, but I couldn't get the top part as good as this one, so I had to work on the 'dark side'.
Thanks for looking, all comments and ideas are welcome.

Tags: House York Architecture People Shop Half-timbered Shambles

Save 15% On Excire Foto Software With Code: EXCIRE-EP

Comments


17 Apr 2015 3:14PM
Captured so well Jasmine, walked along there many a time.
TyChee Plus
16 275 1 United States
17 Apr 2015 3:34PM
I love the light here.

Ty
Nikonuser1 Plus
9 170 16 United Kingdom
17 Apr 2015 4:17PM
Have been there a lovely place to visit, well captured JasmineGrinGrin

Cliff
RonnieAG Plus
12 154 119 Scotland
17 Apr 2015 4:30PM
Never an easy place to get a well exposed image, and on first glance I felt you were just a tad underexposed here. But when I lightened shadows only marginally in Photoshop, the character of the image changed completely and I decided that the image was best seen exactly as you have shown it. With these narrow passages and overhanging buildings there are going to be dark shadows so I'd leave the image just as it is. I will be interested to see what others think and if any Mods are offered.
R.
cbrundage 8 4 United States
17 Apr 2015 4:41PM
I can see light would be tricky here with the buildings cutting out so much. Such an interesting photo - it looks like the buildings on the left are going to fall inwards! (When I saw the title of your photo in my mailbox, my first thought was of the original meaning of shambles as a slaughterhouse - I'm glad it wasn't!)
Niknut Plus
11 3.1k 82 United Kingdom
17 Apr 2015 4:52PM
Cracking shot !!......lovely light & aura !!.Smile
iancrowson Plus
11 215 168 United Kingdom
17 Apr 2015 5:34PM
An interesting photo. An attractive scene.
There is colour noise in the foreground but this must have been introduced during your processing. 500 ISO is low for your camera and should not have produced noticeable noise.
Really the shadows are too dark in my view. Some are lost or hidden. You have to consider just how dark it was in the street at the time .Yes it was well shaded from sunlight but all shadows would have been visible to the eye.
Had the image been captured in RAW and Adobe RAW used to process the image both the shadows and highlights would have been recoverable. HDR tends to look unnatural and often does leave artifacts.
Whether to use HDR or not really depends on how you want your images to look, the final choice is down to the photographer.
My mod lightens the shadows.

regards
Ian
paulbroad 14 131 1293 United Kingdom
17 Apr 2015 7:50PM
The HDR is well handled and not apparent. A generally good image burpt a little more brightness in the foreground would be nice. Difficult in the circumstances. I know the area well. My uncle was a butcher in York.

Paul
banehawi Plus
17 2.6k 4274 Canada
17 Apr 2015 8:08PM
Heres a tutorial you might enjoy Jasmine, - as might others.








W
banehawi Plus
17 2.6k 4274 Canada
17 Apr 2015 8:17PM
In answer to your question Jasmine, - dont use ISO 500; use ISO 100 for best possible noise performance. ISO 500 will produce noise, not a lot, but with HDR the process will extract detail in darks and ISO will be way better in terms od its noise level. Why use high ISO when you dont have to?

Loaded a quick mod.

Regards


W
xwang 12 56 8
17 Apr 2015 8:38PM

Quote:With these narrow passages and overhanging buildings there are going to be dark shadows...

Thank you Ronnie. you are quite right. The photo was taken at 5:10pm in early March, it was getting dark, the sun was going down, that's why I got the light shining on the left side of the building, but the lane was dark. The tricky thing is that the brightened set(1/125/100/15)didn't work..I lost the 'golden' light, the whole image became 'flat', it was not interesting at all, just one of the many visitors' Shambles shots, that's not what I wanted, perhaps it was the same as you said
Quote: ..the character of the image changed completely..
when you brightened up. So I had to use these dark set. The noise is a problem, the only way I could think out was to "surgically" remove the foreground, change one of the shots with less noise, but it seemed too much trouble..


Thank you Ian for your comment and MOD.

Quote:500 ISO is low for your camera and should not have produced noticeable noise.
It all depends on how dark it is.. 5D is not noise free...
You can imagine that at such light condition, and the original three images was not bright, so the shadow must be very dark. Yes, the main concern is if the detail has lost.. I can only tell from the RAW file, if there is any "blue" warning or not.. I didn't see any blue, so I thought it was fine. My question is: "Is this not enough? Any better way? Let me know please. I know the histogram is not a perfect one, but I still remembered that Ronnie's comment about histogram on one of my photos a few years ago,.. I can't recall the exact words, but something like,.. I could have an ideal histogram, but a boring photo... Ronnie might remember.Grin That was a very important learning curve for me.. I don't care histogram as much as I used to.. (Thanks, Ronnie)

Thank you Paul.
York has changed a lot in the past few years... I sense that it's become kind of trendy and commercial nowadays. Some of the old shops are gone.. I don't remember butchers' shops at the Shambles area, but there is a new Pie shop. I bought a Chili Pie the day when I took the photo, perhaps 2.8, if I remember clearly, but forgot it all and just cleared it out from the fridge a couple of days ago...Grin

Thank you Willie.
Quote:Why use high ISO when you dont have to?
It was very dark, if I get a better exposure, the +2 one is 1/15sec, at ISO 500. I'm not sure about the clarity even at ISO 500 on the second lot ( hand holding). I think that ISO 100 would be too dark..don't you think? I don't have the detailed technical measurements in my head.

Ah.. I perhaps had watched the video some time ago, if the picture is a restaurant, and the photographer took a tripod with him. He is a tripod everywhere man. I can't take the tripod with me..Smile Thanks a lot, Willie.

Thank you all.
17 Apr 2015 9:42PM
Wonderful lighting and depth to this one, Jas, and The Shambles has such fantastic medieval buildings.
Fine image!
Dave Wink
banehawi Plus
17 2.6k 4274 Canada
18 Apr 2015 3:17AM
ISO 100 would be no darker than ISO 500, or ISO 1600, because the camera will adjust the exposure; slow shutter as you mention if hand holding. That lens has excellent IS remember, and 1/15 is well within its capabilities at 80mm. BUT, you could have used also f/5.6 for more light, in addition to a lower ISO, so that 1/15th would be closer to 1/40th, which is only ONE stop of IS with a lens that capable of three stops!. Bracketing at +2 and -2 should cover most situations, as you have done here.

If you get a very good light weight carbon fibre tripod, you will carry it everywhere. They are quite expensive, but serious togs end up buying them eventually, after three cheaper and heavier aluminium ones that stay in a closet. A really good one is smaller and lighter than an umbrella.



W
paulbroad 14 131 1293 United Kingdom
18 Apr 2015 8:39AM
Whilst a tripod is best, I still find I rarely carry one. I have a carbon tripod, but bought it to also deal with heavy gear so it is hardly travel friendly. I would rarely carry a tripod of any kind when just out for the day with photography as only part of the reason. It would be in the car boot.

I regularly push the monopod but no one seems to comment. I have a carbon monopod with lightweight tilt head. Doubles as a walking stick or, dare I say, a weapon. (Not a silly comment in this day and age!) I often carry that and use it. It gives you great support, much like carrying your own gae post, and allows a degree of free movement.

Everyone says tripod, rarely does anyone say, monopod. I suggest people Google monopod and consider one. Portable and cheap.

Paul
xwang 12 56 8
18 Apr 2015 11:11PM
Thank you Willie for the technical advice and MOD. I do agree with you about changing F number at low light. I actually only began to ignore my "old setting" at low light this year, used large aperture even for the large area indoors. So far, it worked out OK, but I didn't realize that this outdoor one was that dark.
Tripod, I agree with every word you said, I just can't use it. I don't stay in a place longer enough to use it...

Thank you Paul. Whatever tripod or monopod, the aim is to get a clear picture, you are absolutely right. If one can use a mono pod, and it's easier to carry, it is a good thing.. I didn't know such thing exists until I heard you mentioned it. Yes,
Quote: I suggest people Google monopod and consider one. Portable and cheap.

... One day, when I'm slowing down.. I'll try them both. They are lying in my pantry...Grin
Actually I learnt that in the old days, stick was used as a weapon for English gentlemen, regardless age, everybody carried one..Smile

Thank you gentlemen for your technical knowledge. I've learnt a great deal from you.. and enjoy it very much.
what a beautiful image with lovely light and wonderful colours, lovely photography, SmileSmileSmileSmile
BRITCHIE

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.