Critics Corner

Status
The first post in this thread is a WikiPost, and can be edited by anyone with the appropriate permissions.

0007776

Suspended
Jul 11, 2006
6,474
8,053
Somewhere
Here's another one for you guys to pull apart.
DSC_3606.jpg by mrkramer, on Flickr
Due to the small size of the bird in the picture I had to crop it a good amount. Also as I look at it a bit more it looks like the camera focused just in front of him rather than directly on the bird.

It was taken with a 300mm lens
f8
1/3200
ISO 1600
 

Mark0

macrumors 6502
Sep 11, 2014
474
3,035
SW Scotland
Right, have at it. 6x17 slide of Velvia 50 shot on my GX617, scanned in an Epson V500 so shadow detail is difficult to extract as a result. I think there is a slight light leak issue, but I want to know if my eyes are deceiving me or not. Shot data: SWD 90mm lens, 2s, f22, ISO 50, Infinity focus, 3 stop soft grad slightly angled.

Larbrax Sample1.jpg
 
Last edited:

Apple fanboy

macrumors Nehalem
Feb 21, 2012
34,846
23,801
Behind the Lens, UK
Right, have at it. 6x17 slide of Velvia 50 shot on my GX617, scanned in an Epson V500 so shadow detail is difficult to extract as a result. I think there is a slight light leak issue, but I want to know if my eyes are deceiving me or not.

View attachment 766231
Stunning. The fact that it's from film makes it all the better.

I can't see a light leak either. So if it is there, it looks like it should be part of the image.
 

deep diver

macrumors 68000
Jan 17, 2008
1,622
1,480
I have no idea.
Right, have at it. 6x17 slide of Velvia 50 shot on my GX617, scanned in an Epson V500 so shadow detail is difficult to extract as a result. I think there is a slight light leak issue, but I want to know if my eyes are deceiving me or not.

View attachment 766231
I am not bothered by the lack of details in the shadows. It adds to the drama and pushes the eye back to those fantastic colors in the sky.
 

Mark0

macrumors 6502
Sep 11, 2014
474
3,035
SW Scotland
I'm not noticing it, but I'm a long ways from being a professional so I may have just missed it.
There is what I can perceive as a slight gradient mismatch in the image. It might be from a film loading issue or some uneven scanning. It's very feint, but I cannot help but notice it. I might have to do a test print to see the extent of it. Look just left of centre and you may see where there is a gradient change.

Stunning. The fact that it's from film makes it all the better.

I can't see a light leak either. So if it is there, it looks like it should be part of the image.
I hope it's not there and is just my eyes. I had a similar issue before when loading up Delta 3200 on one of my favourite images, which is way more sensitive and prone to loading light leakage - because the film needs pulled across a long way when loading, even a slight unfurling or crinkling may lead to a leak. It's way more noticeable on the Delta 3200 shot than than on this image.

I am not bothered by the lack of details in the shadows. It adds to the drama and pushes the eye back to those fantastic colors in the sky.
I'm not fussed about shadows in this case either. Velvia 50 does contain shadow detail, but due to the very contrasty nature of the film and also it's hugely limited Dynamic Range of around 4-6 stops, it is difficult to extract the shadow detail on a flatbed scanner. I'm not paying £20 for a drum scan though - even though they are phenomenal!
I appreciate the comment of the colours, the darks 'slide in' from the right to bring you into the sun that is close to the thirds power point and the foreground rocks, angle in that way a bit too. The lighter tones of the sea (and the angle the shoreline is at) pulls your eye the opposite way, feeding in towards the sun. The sun is barely visible because 1 second after clicking the shutter, it disappeared below the horizon. Panoramics need strong horizontals or angles that feed in to a focal point in order to work effectively. It's a difficult format to work with and is always challenging my compositional gut instinct. I think I've done ok with this one but I am keen to hear what others think.
 
Last edited:

deep diver

macrumors 68000
Jan 17, 2008
1,622
1,480
I have no idea.
Right, have at it. 6x17 slide of Velvia 50 shot on my GX617, scanned in an Epson V500 so shadow detail is difficult to extract as a result. I think there is a slight light leak issue, but I want to know if my eyes are deceiving me or not. Shot data: SWD 90mm lens, 2s, f22, ISO 50, Infinity focus, 3 stop soft grad slightly angled.

View attachment 766231
No one else sees the light leak. Where are you seeing it?
 

deep diver

macrumors 68000
Jan 17, 2008
1,622
1,480
I have no idea.
The bit I see is a slight transition line between the darker left side and a lighter right side. I used Markup on my phone to show the area the transition line is that I feel I see.

View attachment 766419
I don't shoot a lot of landscapes but most of the sunset photos I've seen (and the one such image I have shot) have an area of rapid light fall off. That's what it looks like to me. I'm interested to see what others think.
 

Janichsan

macrumors 68000
Oct 23, 2006
1,803
3,684
I had to download the image and view it in fullscreen on a dark background to even notice there is a fall off. And I only saw it after you pointed out where to look. It's really barely perceptible.
 

deep diver

macrumors 68000
Jan 17, 2008
1,622
1,480
I have no idea.
The bit I see is a slight transition line between the darker left side and a lighter right side. I used Markup on my phone to show the area the transition line is that I feel I see.

View attachment 766419
I had to download the image and view it in fullscreen on a dark background to even notice there is a fall off. And I only saw it after you pointed out where to look. It's really barely perceptible.
Mark0 -- it is a very good image. With respect -- if someone has to work so hard to see the issue, then you are probably over-thinking it.
 

Mark0

macrumors 6502
Sep 11, 2014
474
3,035
SW Scotland
I don't shoot a lot of landscapes but most of the sunset photos I've seen (and the one such image I have shot) have an area of rapid light fall off. That's what it looks like to me. I'm interested to see what others think.
Yeah I know what you mean. The 90mm actually comes with a 1 stop centre filter due to light fall off because the angle of view is so wide.

I had to download the image and view it in fullscreen on a dark background to even notice there is a fall off. And I only saw it after you pointed out where to look. It's really barely perceptible.
It’s the nature of it that caught my eye. Possibly from loading the film. I’ll need to look at the slide on my light table again.

Mark0 -- it is a very good image. With respect -- if someone has to work so hard to see the issue, then you are probably over-thinking it.
Thanks. I was curious to see if others noticed it as much as I did. Thanks for your replies :)
 

Mark0

macrumors 6502
Sep 11, 2014
474
3,035
SW Scotland
This image is well out of my usual comfort zone of landscape work. I had a group of 10 pupils out doing a photo workshop with me at school and knowing the location wasn't really what I would normally look for in terms of landscape stuff - I decided to spend some time challenging myself to try something out of the ordinary.

I liked the huge Lily pond, so looked for one that had a nice reflection. Then I noticed a lot of either Common Blue Damselflies or Azure Damselflies (not sure which!) and set the challenge of getting a shot of one or near the photogenic Lily flower and reflection. After about 20 minutes, I got a few passes and this was the pick. Set up was as follows:

Fuji X-T2 & XF 50-140mm f2.8 with XF 1.4x TC (@196mm or 300m equiv), on a Manfrotto carbon fibre tripod with remote shutter release. 1/2500s, f8 on camera (gave f11 with TC), ISO 1600.
I needed the deeper depth of field to ensure any Damselflies were rendered sharp enough within the focal plane as I set the nearest petals (lower front of part of the flower) as the focus point. I had to crank the ISO up to 1600 from the base of 200 to ensure I could get a shutter speed quick enough to freeze the Damselflies because they are so fast!

DSCF3181-Edit small.jpg



I know a lot of people here do this sort of thing regularly, so I'd like to hear your thoughts.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: akash.nu

needfx

macrumors 68040
Aug 10, 2010
3,883
4,089
macrumors apparently
The below image however is a botched one I captured this Friday last, and still in the process of trying to save.

This was shot moments before leaving the bride's-to-be residence, and was the last squirt she could afford before smelling like a chemical accident at the lynx factory (sic: Inbetweeners Movie).

Anyhoo, here are some of the issues.

1) The absolutely most obvious, the angle of the image is not very courteous to the subject. Also, despite corner-pinning, left frame on the wall is mega-wonky.
2) For some freak reason, the flash's refracting plastic thingy was over the bulb, thus creating a linear pattern all over the image. I have somewhat restricted its eye-catching obviousness by duplicating the image and budging it 5-6 pixels. Then I masked over the areas I wanted in focus such as the face, hand and sprinkles. Work in progress.
3) Flash placement was not that great either as it created a streak across her throat. I have clone stamped the heck of it, but still needs some work. Also, light outline is restricted to the left side of the subject.

Feel free to knitpick on this image or to offer any suggestions on how to save the bride's request of an image



edit, attached the unfixed version as well
 

Attachments

Last edited:

mollyc

macrumors 68020
Aug 18, 2016
2,447
11,025
The below image however is a botched one I captured this Friday last, and still in the process of trying to save.

This was shot moments before leaving the bride's-to-be residence, and was the last squirt she could afford before smelling like a chemical accident at the lynx factory (sic: Inbetweeners Movie).

Anyhoo, here are some of the issues.

1) The absolutely most obvious, the angle of the image is not very courteous to the subject. Also, despite corner-pinning, left frame on the wall is mega-wonky.
2) For some freak reason, the flash's refracting plastic thingy was over the bulb, thus creating a linear pattern all over the image. I have somewhat restricted its eye-catching obviousness by duplicating the image and budging it 5-6 pixels. Then I masked over the areas I wanted in focus such as the face, hand and sprinkles. Work in progress.
3) Flash placement was not that great either as it created a streak across her throat. I have clone stamped the heck of it, but still needs some work. Also, light outline is restricted to the left side of the subject.

Feel free to knitpick on this image or to offer any suggestions on how to save the bride's request of an image



edit, attached the unfixed version as well
I would clone some of the spray into the area where the flash was. I think if you'd been able to set up with the flash fully hidden behind her to act as a rim light it would have worked better. Since you have to fix in post, I'd try to minimize the hotspot.

Sometimes you just have to deal with the fact that a mediocre image is better than no image.
 
  • Like
Reactions: needfx

needfx

macrumors 68040
Aug 10, 2010
3,883
4,089
macrumors apparently
I would clone some of the spray into the area where the flash was. I think if you'd been able to set up with the flash fully hidden behind her to act as a rim light it would have worked better. Since you have to fix in post, I'd try to minimize the hotspot.

Sometimes you just have to deal with the fact that a mediocre image is better than no image.
cheers for the constructive feedback

I have not considered removing the hotspot altogether, I will try it out. I do find it kinda appealing, but distracting at the same time. Not sure how I feel about it evidently. Also considering giving a shot at:

-Adding a light rim on the rest of the subject by overexposing a separate layer and masking it out
-Distorting the image a bit by stretching it vertically to have the subject become more slender
-Creating a separate layer for the wonky frame on the left to become less "Dali"

Will post updates once concluded some extra work

Thanks again @mollyc
 

someoldguy

macrumors 68000
Aug 2, 2009
1,948
5,328
usa
This image is well out of my usual comfort zone of landscape work. I had a group of 10 pupils out doing a photo workshop with me at school and knowing the location wasn't really what I would normally look for in terms of landscape stuff - I decided to spend some time challenging myself to try something out of the ordinary.

I liked the huge Lily pond, so looked for one that had a nice reflection. Then I noticed a lot of either Common Blue Damselflies or Azure Damselflies (not sure which!) and set the challenge of getting a shot of one or near the photogenic Lily flower and reflection. After about 20 minutes, I got a few passes and this was the pick. Set up was as follows:

Fuji X-T2 & XF 50-140mm f2.8 with XF 1.4x TC (@196mm or 300m equiv), on a Manfrotto carbon fibre tripod with remote shutter release. 1/2500s, f8 on camera (gave f11 with TC), ISO 1600.
I needed the deeper depth of field to ensure any Damselflies were rendered sharp enough within the focal plane as I set the nearest petals (lower front of part of the flower) as the focus point. I had to crank the ISO up to 1600 from the base of 200 to ensure I could get a shutter speed quick enough to freeze the Damselflies because they are so fast!

View attachment 768412


I know a lot of people here do this sort of thing regularly, so I'd like to hear your thoughts.
I've looked at this several times over the last few days and TBH , I can't see anything to criticize , maybe a bit tighter crop around the lily , but that's it . Complements on both the shot and having the patience to sit there and wait for a 'customer' .
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mark0

Mark0

macrumors 6502
Sep 11, 2014
474
3,035
SW Scotland
I've looked at this several times over the last few days and TBH , I can't see anything to criticize , maybe a bit tighter crop around the lily , but that's it . Complements on both the shot and having the patience to sit there and wait for a 'customer' .
Thanks, I will try the tighter crop :)
[doublepost=1531826062][/doublepost]
The below image however is a botched one I captured this Friday last, and still in the process of trying to save.

This was shot moments before leaving the bride's-to-be residence, and was the last squirt she could afford before smelling like a chemical accident at the lynx factory (sic: Inbetweeners Movie).

Anyhoo, here are some of the issues.

1) The absolutely most obvious, the angle of the image is not very courteous to the subject. Also, despite corner-pinning, left frame on the wall is mega-wonky.
2) For some freak reason, the flash's refracting plastic thingy was over the bulb, thus creating a linear pattern all over the image. I have somewhat restricted its eye-catching obviousness by duplicating the image and budging it 5-6 pixels. Then I masked over the areas I wanted in focus such as the face, hand and sprinkles. Work in progress.
3) Flash placement was not that great either as it created a streak across her throat. I have clone stamped the heck of it, but still needs some work. Also, light outline is restricted to the left side of the subject.

Feel free to knitpick on this image or to offer any suggestions on how to save the bride's request of an image



edit, attached the unfixed version as well

I like it :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: needfx

The Bad Guy

macrumors 65816
Oct 2, 2007
1,137
3,504
Australia
The below image however is a botched one I captured this Friday last, and still in the process of trying to save.

This was shot moments before leaving the bride's-to-be residence, and was the last squirt she could afford before smelling like a chemical accident at the lynx factory (sic: Inbetweeners Movie).

Anyhoo, here are some of the issues.

1) The absolutely most obvious, the angle of the image is not very courteous to the subject. Also, despite corner-pinning, left frame on the wall is mega-wonky.
2) For some freak reason, the flash's refracting plastic thingy was over the bulb, thus creating a linear pattern all over the image. I have somewhat restricted its eye-catching obviousness by duplicating the image and budging it 5-6 pixels. Then I masked over the areas I wanted in focus such as the face, hand and sprinkles. Work in progress.
3) Flash placement was not that great either as it created a streak across her throat. I have clone stamped the heck of it, but still needs some work. Also, light outline is restricted to the left side of the subject.

Feel free to knitpick on this image or to offer any suggestions on how to save the bride's request of an image
The image (besides the flash placement) is great, a lovely captured moment and the client wouldn't notice most the stuff you mention, so therefore it doesn't matter.

The file on the other hand is a hot mess. I tried for about half hour to clean it up for you and maybe I could do something with a raw file, but yeah...I'd make this one look as 'arty' as you can and call it done.
 
  • Like
Reactions: needfx and Mark0

needfx

macrumors 68040
Aug 10, 2010
3,883
4,089
macrumors apparently
The image (besides the flash placement) is great, a lovely captured moment and the client wouldn't notice most the stuff you mention, so therefore it doesn't matter.

The file on the other hand is a hot mess. I tried for about half hour to clean it up for you and maybe I could do something with a raw file, but yeah...I'd make this one look as 'arty' as you can and call it done.
much appreciated!! both for input & effort!
Once I'm caught up to speed with my bu**-load/backlog of work, I will post the edit
and arty is the only way to go with this one :/
[doublepost=1531943927][/doublepost]
Thanks, I will try the tighter crop :)
[doublepost=1531826062][/doublepost]


I like it :)
I both like it and hate it. Its a pickle
 

RohitBoxer

macrumors newbie
Aug 5, 2019
3
3
Mumbai
The below image however is a botched one I captured this Friday last, and still in the process of trying to save.

This was shot moments before leaving the bride's-to-be residence, and was the last squirt she could afford before smelling like a chemical accident at the lynx factory (sic: Inbetweeners Movie).

Anyhoo, here are some of the issues.

1) The absolutely most obvious, the angle of the image is not very courteous to the subject. Also, despite corner-pinning, left frame on the wall is mega-wonky.
2) For some freak reason, the flash's refracting plastic thingy was over the bulb, thus creating a linear pattern all over the image. I have somewhat restricted its eye-catching obviousness by duplicating the image and budging it 5-6 pixels. Then I masked over the areas I wanted in focus such as the face, hand and sprinkles. Work in progress.
3) Flash placement was not that great either as it created a streak across her throat. I have clone stamped the heck of it, but still needs some work. Also, light outline is restricted to the left side of the subject.

Feel free to knitpick on this image or to offer any suggestions on how to save the bride's request of an image



edit, attached the unfixed version as well
The droplets looks a bit artificial. Or May be it just me. hmmm
 
  • Like
Reactions: needfx
Status
The first post in this thread is a WikiPost, and can be edited by anyone with the appropriate permissions.