O2

ianmarsh

ianmarsh

Messages
4,647
Edit My Images
Yes
A couple from this morning. Fuji x100 original, ten stop filter and a lot of random PP work:

1702_RyanX100_055-Edit by Ian, on Flickr

I'm tempted to try to clone the cable-car support pole on the LEFT (edited) hand edge out of this one
1702_RyanX100_061-Edit-Edit by Ian, on Flickr

And a bonus one of the London Assembly building spoiled (or maybe enhanced) by the contrails:
1702_RyanX100_021-Pano-Edit by Ian, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
I like the landscape aspect of the first one but prefer the balance of the second shot. The O2 feels a bit too far up the shot in #1 with too much water below. The cloud movement and the soft water works well in #2 but I'd prefer a bit more either side of the O2, especially the crane that's chopped off on the left hand side. Having said that I would have been happy to have taken either of them.

The 3rd one doesn't quite work for me but I'm struggling to put my finger on why, it somehow feels slightly crooked but the bridge and lampposts seem to be vertical so not sure that it actually is. I like the colours on the sky and the contrails don't spoil it for me.
 
The second is definitely my favourite: composition, contrast between hard & soft, spilt toning.

I like almost everything about the third, though would have rotated a touch to the right to make it *feel* level (my eye is taking a cue from the 2 level sections of tower bridge - the road slopes down at the LHS and the top section slopes down even more). It feels like it's been pushed in procesing just a little too far, creating a halo around the RHS glass building.
 
ancient_mariner said:
The second is definitely my favourite…
Click to expand...
+1 Great stuff there, Ian!

Re. #3, with such dynamic curves in the scene, my eye is searching
for anchor points and or lines… and I seem to have difficulties with
the keystoning and horizon! The London Assembly building is unknown
to me so it is may well be in the architecture!

As Tony noted, the PP halos… I would not say too far but lacking pre-
cision in the masking maybe?
 
For my taste, #1 works better as a panoramic shot, losing most of the water and putting the shoreline on the bottom third line.

#2 has a cable car support on the right side, not the left! IMO it should be left in since it's part of the scenery. Again, for my taste, a crop to the square format with the shoreline on the lower third line works better.

I rather like the odd shape of the LA building with the con trails behind it. Good luck getting the walls straight!!! ;)
 
Nod said:
For my taste, #1 works better as a panoramic shot, losing most of the water and putting the shoreline on the bottom third line.

#2 has a cable car support on the right side, not the left! IMO it should be left in since it's part of the scenery. Again, for my taste, a crop to the square format with the shoreline on the lower third line works better.

I rather like the odd shape of the LA building with the con trails behind it. Good luck getting the walls straight!!! ;)
Click to expand...

#1 does have a bit too much water in the foreground.

#2 the cable car support is definitely on the left of the photo. You could remove it as it does detract a little from the image, BUT, that whole area is under contruction (and will be for years) so you can't remove every crane and half-built building, so I'm more in favour of leaving as is.

#3 I think your camera was pointing up a little too much, hence the angles of the towers and lamps and it could do with a slight anti-clockwise twist to level it. The London Assembly building was designed wonky, so you can discount that ;)

I like the moody toning of the first two, with no 2 being my favourite.
 
Excellent set, love the last (y)
 
Thanks all for the comments.

I like the large amount of water below the dome in #1 as I don't think a more conventional crop has the same impact. But having said that (a) I agree with Nod that a horizontal pano crop works and (b) I wish I had taken a second shot with more sky so I could have made it a vertical pano with a lot of sky and a lot of water. I am going to print it tomorrow as i've a spare frame that will suit this shot.

I am going off #2. It is just a same old long exposure shot and looks like a million others. I agree that the crop is a bit too tight. If the support tower on the left of the shot wasn't right tight against the edge of the frame I'd have been happier. As it is partially cut off I felt removing it would help. But I will go back and have another go at this I think. The building work round there is a pain and the big (ugly) block to the right of the dome unbalances the composition so I am not sure I can improve it much. Maybe worth a go though. We were rushed this time as we were in a limited time parking bay and with a bit more time I'll make fewer daft framing mistakes, hopefully. (This is a blend of the desaturated colour shot and a very contrasty B&W by the way, rather than a toned B&W.)

I think the wonkiness of #3 could be down to several factors. First it is a pano from three 28mm-equivalent shots and a little distortion in each of the originals is highly likely. Second, I took all these with the wide-angle adapter on an x100 and I rarely remember to tell the camera when I attach the converters so the camera's built-in distortion correction is possibly wrong. Third, as the basic pano file looked even worse I corrected the verticals in Lightroom based on the towers in tower bridge (the only true verticals I could see). But as they are both to the left of the frame this probably distorted everything as well. I am pretty sure the pipe/handrail wasn't S-shaped where I was standing and instead follows a smooth curve, but the picture has a double bend in it. There is a similar slight S to the wall along the river and that really should be straight. I was hand holding but pretty careful to get the camera level according to the in-built spirit level, but that is probably not perfectly accurate and it is highly likely that the camera was tilted slightly up or down (or both depending on the three shots in the pano). Anyway, the contrails annoyed me too much to spend time getting rid of all the distortion. I have indeed been a bit heavy handed on the shadow recovery so the white edging is apparent. With a better sky I'd do it all again.

Once again, thanks for taking the time to comment, it is much appreciated.
 
If the original shots that make up the pano were distorted (ie you hadn't told the x100 that the wide lens was on) you could try using lens correction on each image individually in LR before stitching the pano.
I've done this with pano shots, exporting the corrected files from LR to be stitched in PS.
Also, when doing panoramas, do you rotate your body for each shot or rotate the camera on the axis of the sensor?
Doing the latter gives less distortion.
 
ABTog said:
If the original shots that make up the pano were distorted (ie you hadn't told the x100 that the wide lens was on) you could try using lens correction on each image individually in LR before stitching the pano.
I've done this with pano shots, exporting the corrected files from LR to be stitched in PS.
Click to expand...

Last time I tried that Lr wouldn't let me apply any built-in corrections saying it had been done in camera. I should check my memory is right on that though. I could do something manually, I guess, but I have no idea what would need correcting. With a bit of work I suppose I could do a preset constructed from a properly in-camera corrected x100+WCL and one using the WCL where the camera didn't know one was attached. I am sure somebody else has done this (and could do it better than me). I'm off to Google...

I use the Serge Ramelli technique of rotating around my thumb supporting the camera at the base of the lens, though that is tough with a tiny x100. Much easier with an XT1 and large lens.
 
ianmarsh said:
I use the Serge Ramelli technique of rotating around my thumb supporting the camera at the base of the lens, though that is tough with a tiny x100. Much easier with an XT1 and large lens.
Click to expand...
I think that's where I saw it too. Easier when you have a fancy tripod head/gimbal like him though ;)
 
I went back to the O2 again today and tried with a wider angle (14mm on XT1). Lots of broken cloud so most shots had hotspots where the sun broke through, but I quite liked this one:

O2 revisited by Ian, on Flickr

I've just printed it out and it looks better with a bit cropped off the left edge.
 
For me, there's just a bit too much featureless water still and I'd crop to 5:4 or even square, but that aside it's a lovely pic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top