May 13, 2017, 11:44
May 13, 2017, 21:07
Hi MBS,
In my humble opinion, the image could do with a touch more 'punch'. I have attempted to do this in Lightroom with the effort that can be seen below. There are many on the site that are capable of presenting a better effort.
You will see that I cropped the sky. I have a preference for the horizon to be at the top third. Other small adjustments have been made to the contrast, clarity, mid tones. Last of all I de-hazed and sharpened.
In the end, photography comes down to preference. For me the hard part has been, and is, trying to discover what my preference consists off.
Regards, keep posting,
Mike.
[attachment=6978]
In my humble opinion, the image could do with a touch more 'punch'. I have attempted to do this in Lightroom with the effort that can be seen below. There are many on the site that are capable of presenting a better effort.
You will see that I cropped the sky. I have a preference for the horizon to be at the top third. Other small adjustments have been made to the contrast, clarity, mid tones. Last of all I de-hazed and sharpened.
In the end, photography comes down to preference. For me the hard part has been, and is, trying to discover what my preference consists off.
Regards, keep posting,
Mike.
[attachment=6978]
May 14, 2017, 01:13
(May 13, 2017, 21:07)Browser Mike Wrote: [ -> ]Hi MBS,
In my humble opinion, the image could do with a touch more 'punch'. I have attempted to do this in Lightroom with the effort that can be seen below. There are many on the site u are capable of presenting a better effort.
You will see that I cropped the sky. I have a preference for the horizon to be at the top third. Other small adjustments have been made to the contrast, clarity, mid tones. Last of all I de-hazed and sharpened.
In the end, photography comes down to preference. For me the hard part has been, and is, trying to discover what my preference consists off.
Regards, keep posting,
Mike.
May 14, 2017, 01:41
Hi Mike Thanks for the advice ,if you had taken this photo what settings would you have used? my settings where A 1/320 F 7.1 ISO 100 50mm contrast -0.7 I liked how you made the rocks stand out more and bringing down the sky and the sharpening of the photo but the blue are a little to deep to my eye but never the less you your opinion was appreciated . Regards M.B.S (mick)
May 14, 2017, 03:55
Hi again, Mick.
Settings ?. Now that is a can of worms. In my case, I operate with a camera that has a tiny sensor ( DMC-FZ200 ). In effect this means that f/4 on mine would be equivalent to about f/22 on a FF. I still think that no two cameras are the same.
Use of Manual is fun, but the use of AP can offer very rewarding images. Again it is a matter of choice and often time available. If someone wishes to shoot only in Auto or Landscape Mode then that is their choice. That's fine by me.
As a general method I try to get an Aperture to give the required DoF, ISO as low as possible, and Exposure to suit the shot. I have some really horrendous images to prove how wrong I can be.
Cheers,
Mike.
Settings ?. Now that is a can of worms. In my case, I operate with a camera that has a tiny sensor ( DMC-FZ200 ). In effect this means that f/4 on mine would be equivalent to about f/22 on a FF. I still think that no two cameras are the same.
Use of Manual is fun, but the use of AP can offer very rewarding images. Again it is a matter of choice and often time available. If someone wishes to shoot only in Auto or Landscape Mode then that is their choice. That's fine by me.
As a general method I try to get an Aperture to give the required DoF, ISO as low as possible, and Exposure to suit the shot. I have some really horrendous images to prove how wrong I can be.
Cheers,
Mike.
May 14, 2017, 04:21
(May 14, 2017, 03:55)Browser Mike Wrote: [ -> ]Hi again, Mick.
Settings ?. Now that is a can of worms. In my case, I operate with a camera that has a tiny sensor ( DMC-FZ200 ). In effect this means that f/4 on mine would be equivalent to about f/22 on a FF. I still think that no two cameras are the same.
Use of Manual is fun, but the use of AP can offer very rewarding images. Again it is a matter of choice and often time available. If someone wishes to shoot only in Auto or Landscape Mode then that is their choice. That's fine by me.
As a general method I try to get an Aperture to give the required DoF, ISO as low as possible, and Exposure to suit the shot. I have some really horrendous images to prove how wrong I can be.
Cheers,
Mike.
May 14, 2017, 15:21
Hi Mick, did you do any editing, or is your pic, as shot. Ed.
May 15, 2017, 09:39
Hi Mick!
Technically is a good picture! Is that place close to you? If yes, then go an experiment different framings,at different hours, usualy sunset,dusk and sunrise works the best, at noon the sun is above and the light is not so aesthetic, side lighting such as sunset and sunrise creates more depth.
best of luck!
Robert
Technically is a good picture! Is that place close to you? If yes, then go an experiment different framings,at different hours, usualy sunset,dusk and sunrise works the best, at noon the sun is above and the light is not so aesthetic, side lighting such as sunset and sunrise creates more depth.
best of luck!
Robert
May 15, 2017, 13:08
(May 14, 2017, 15:21)KEdMak Wrote: [ -> ]Hi Mick, did you do any editing, or is your pic, as shot. Ed.Hi Ed My photo is as shot. I have never edited as I never taught my self yet.
Regards (Mick) MBS
May 15, 2017, 13:15
(May 15, 2017, 09:39)KRobertMurariu Wrote: [ -> ]Hi Mick!Hi Robert. This photo was taken on Cruise to the Norwegian Fjords ,I live in ENGLAND so not close.
Technically is a good picture! Is that place close to you? If yes, then go an experiment different framings,at different hours, usualy sunset,dusk and sunrise works the best, at noon the sun is above and the light is not so aesthetic, side lighting such as sunset and sunrise creates more depth.
best of luck!
Robert
Thanks Robert. (MICK) MBS
May 15, 2017, 13:23
Good answer! This is a slight edit on Mike's post. Is this more what you envisaged. I have others. Cheers. Ed.