A few recent shots of Snowdonia

•
There are two things I know may disturb in a good photo:
a. poles and wires
b. jet trails​
Your #4 is scarred with the second… this is easy to remove.
I like the idea in #5
#3 could be a version of a "watery moon", very cool
#2 great perception of depth
#1 too bright white range, great layering

Very good rendition
 
Kodiak Qc said:
•
There are two things I know may disturb in a good photo:
a. poles and wires
b. jet trails​
Your #4 is scarred with the second… this is easy to remove.
I like the idea in #5
#3 could be a version of a "watery moon", very cool
#2 great perception of depth
#1 too bright white range, great layering

Very good rendition
Click to expand...


Thanks.

Contrails....If I ever use the image for something they will be removed...quite lucky with the sky on that one an easy cut and paste.

1...taken slightly later in the day for my liking even in late September the light can be harsh...I just liked the way the sheep were grazing.

Thanks for the feeedback.
 
Good set Rory, the fort none is the stand out foe me, I like that you haven't been tempted to over pp it, --just one little thing that I do find a bit distracting is the side of your signature, especially in No2.---sorry to grumble, its just how I see it,

Geoff
 
Very nice set, I particularly like the colours & composition of #4 (without the car).

imo the logo and frame really don't add anything to the image but that's personal taste.
More problematically, there are some halos introduced by clarity / local contrast manipulations / sharpening in most of them, especially along the horizon. There's a couple of bright pixels just above the horizon and a wider 'glowing' region beyond that. It's most obvious on the left of the last one (Snowdon).

It's not that bad but I mention it 'cos I was guilty of this kind of error for ages before I realised.
 
juggler said:
Very nice set, I particularly like the colours & composition of #4 (without the car).

imo the logo and frame really don't add anything to the image but that's personal taste.
More problematically, there are some halos introduced by clarity / local contrast manipulations / sharpening in most of them, especially along the horizon. There's a couple of bright pixels just above the horizon and a wider 'glowing' region beyond that. It's most obvious on the left of the last one (Snowdon).

It's not that bad but I mention it 'cos I was guilty of this kind of error for ages before I realised.
Click to expand...

Halo's...I have looked at my Imac and expanded on my Ipad to something like 200%.....I have also cleaned my reading glasses. Not sure what you mean?


The glowing region is probably the moon reflecting off the mist in the valley as I was shooting with it just out of the frame.
 
Trappe said:
Halo's...I have looked at my Imac and expanded on my Ipad to something like 200%.....I have also cleaned my reading glasses. Not sure what you mean?

The glowing region is probably the moon reflecting off the mist in the valley as I was shooting with it just out of the frame.
Click to expand...

Well, you've removed the shot which was the worst culprit but I can still see it in some of the others. You can see it more easily if you add a curves adjustment layer and drag the midpoint down to the bottom, or a posterization adjustment. In fact it's often easier to see it if you zoom out a long way rather than in. Some of the glow is just the light but I'm 90% certain that it's partly the result of some form of sharpening or local contrast manipulation.

It probably doesn't make a blind bit of difference, I admit I'm somewhat sensitive to this kind of thing these days.
 
I can't remember exactly what the previous version looked like but that looks differently over-sharpened to me now :/

The foreground's gone a bit crunchy and the edges of the hills look a bit odd. I still struggle to get sharpening right myself - hopefully an actual expert will turn up and comment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top