Lighthouse!

EdinburghGary

EdinburghGary

Reply not Report
Messages
19,065
Name
Gary
Edit My Images
Yes
Just a lighthouse and a slightly insane shutter speed :D I was stopped by the police taking this photo as 7 kids were running about on the rocks down by the water. I suspect someone called them and reported me :wacky: Police were friendly. Asked how long I had been there, what I was taking a photo of, and how long I planned on staying. After talking to me, they moved all the children from the area and then waited around 15 min. I stayed 45 min or so after they left. Felt like a criminal! :LOL:


1
sunburst800.jpg


View Large On Black


2: 15 minutes earlier
15minutesearlier800.jpg


View Large On Black

HONEST C&C most appreciated! :)


Gary.
 
Last edited:
Like that a lot Gary, can I ask the settings you used and what filters, am trying to improve my shots, and these are the sort I would like to take. :)
 
Yv said:
(y) for once I can comment on a pic of Garys that I have actually tried myself, albeit with not such insane shutter speeds and you know what I say...


I HATE YOU!! :LOL:


that is just stunning mate, can't really say anything else. Filters?
Click to expand...

10 stop B&W, 3 Stop Lee, Daylight & Cloudy White Balance, 15 Minutes exposure...I think f16!!

Had fun taking it. Lots I would change, and lots I don't like about it. Will wait on feedback before I destroy it :)

Gary.
 
cosmix3 said:
Like that a lot Gary, can I ask the settings you used and what filters, am trying to improve my shots, and these are the sort I would like to take. :)
Click to expand...

Hi mate, thanks for the kind words. See above for filters and settings.

Gary.
 
EdinburghGary said:
JFelt like a criminal! :LOL:
Click to expand...
Aye, you should be locked up for taking an image like that... throw away the key I say.

You want HONESTY you say... I'll give you honesty... I hate ya!















OK then... not really... another corker Gaz.(y) (can't see the EXIF though... is it me?)
 
Lovely shot. What grad filter for a shutter time of 899.3 second ?
 
theMusicMan said:
Aye, you should be locked up for taking an image like that... throw away the key I say.

You want HONESTY you say... I'll give you honesty... I hate ya!

OK then... not really... another corker Gaz.(y) (can't see the EXIF though... is it me?)
Click to expand...

Strange....it is on flickr too, www.flickr.com/scottishsnaps - and exif seems intact!!

I have SO MANY things on my list of "could have done better!" :D

Gary.
 
First issue. How do I sort the lean on the tower? Tried using Photoshop > Filter ? Lens Correction. Was not able to fix.....
 
Hey Gary, awesome shot, one i'b be very proud to have shot.

if i'm being overly picky (guessing that's what you want) the thinks i'd like to see are -

1. Image flipped to have lighthouse on the right (i have a thing for having things on the right of the frame)
2. Top of the lighthouse needs a tad more detail
3. Sky could possbily have done with a wee bit less exposure, or an extra half stop of ND
4. the little bit on the right of the lighthouse - just like a little spec bugs me

as i said these are me being overly picky (and also the straightening of the light house) but then as i said i'd be more than happy with it the way it is, sometimes having "issues" with an image is what makes it great :)
 
Honest critique:

The tower leans into the shot.
The background behind the tower is a little distracting.
Burnt sky, not too much of an issue but it's a little distraction.
Image takes you very much into the shot, but it's very left hand side.
Horizon is bang in the middle.

It's a shot with bags of potential. Sits behind rock and grabs pebbles with one hand ;)
 
ifotou said:
Hey Gary, awesome shot, one i'b be very proud to have shot.

if i'm being overly picky (guessing that's what you want) the thinks i'd like to see are -

1. Image flipped to have lighthouse on the right (i have a thing for having things on the right of the frame)
2. Top of the lighthouse needs a tad more detail
3. Sky could possbily have done with a wee bit less exposure, or an extra half stop of ND
4. the little bit on the right of the lighthouse - just like a little spec bugs me

as i said these are me being overly picky (and also the straightening of the light house) but then as i said i'd be more than happy with it the way it is, sometimes having "issues" with an image is what makes it great :)
Click to expand...

chewyuk said:
Honest critique:

The tower leans into the shot.
The background behind the tower is a little distracting.
Burnt sky, not too much of an issue but it's a little distraction.
Image takes you very much into the shot, but it's very left hand side.
Horizon is bang in the middle.

It's a shot with bags of potential. Sits behind rock and grabs pebbles with one hand ;)
Click to expand...

Cheers guys, wicked feedback :D I agree with all of it other than the flipper. Saying that, I will try it :)

The two things bugging me more than anything are the leaning, and the sky colour. The burnt out sky I left in to break it up, but I also have a 7.5 min exposure which is much less extreme in every way and has no burnt out sky. I will process it over the coming days to compare.

Thanks for the honest and in depth crit! :)

Gary.
 
Wow - stunning pic as usual Gary (y)

Only suggestion is that I wonder what it would look like if cropped to the top right corner of the frame? Not too much, it would just cut out a bit of the very black bottom right, which I feel is a bit large? :shrug: Alternatively, just crop the bottom of the image, and change it to a widescreen format - this might emphasise the height of the tower...

Awesome pic 'though, and as for: "Will wait on feedback before I destroy it" - that's just bloody annoying - I think it will take many years of practice before I can create anything close to this! [of course first step is getting off my fat lazy arse, and getting out there to take the shot :LOL:]
 
Last edited:
great shot
did you explain that anyone in the photo after 15 mins wouldn't show up!?!?
etc etc etc etc et
also did you put the kettle or read a book or something whilst taking the photo??
 
Exif fron 2nd pic,

very nice by the way!

Standard Information
Make: NIKON CORPORATION
Model: NIKON D3
ImageSize: 800x570
CreateDate: 2009:07:20 20:56:45+01:00
ModifyDate: 2009:07:20 22:33:59+01:00
DateTimeOriginal: 2009:07:20 20:56:45+01:00
ExposureTime: 419.6"
Aperture: F18.0
MaxAperture: F2.8
CircleOfConfusion: 0.030 mm
HyperfocalDistance: 1.07 m
ExposureProgram: Manual
ExposureBiasValue: 0
MeteringMode: Center-weighted average
ISO: 200
WhiteBalance: Auto
FocalLength: 24.0 mm
FocalLength35efl: 24.0 mm (35 mm equivalent: 24.0 mm)
SensingMethod: One-chip color area
SceneType: Directly photographed
ColorSpace: Uncalibrated
Contrast: Normal
Saturation: Normal
Sharpness: Normal

GPS Information

Other Information
APP14Flags0: [14], Encoded with Blend=1 downsampling
APP14Flags1: (none)
BitsPerSample: 8
BlueMatrixColumn: 0.14307 0.06061 0.7141
CMMFlags: Not Embedded, Independent
ColorComponents: 3
ColorMode: 3
ColorSpaceData: RGB
ColorTransform: YCbCr
Compression: Uncompressed
ConnectionSpaceIlluminant: 0.9642 1 0.82491
Creator:
CreatorTool: Capture NX 2.0.0 M
CustomRendered: Custom
DCTEncodeVersion: 100
DateTimeDigitized: 2009:07:20 20:56:45+01:00
DeviceAttributes: Reflective, Glossy, Positive, Color
DeviceManufacturer: IEC
DeviceMfgDesc: IEC http://www.iec.ch
DeviceModel: sRGB
DeviceModelDesc: IEC 61966-2.1 Default RGB colour space - sRGB
DigitalZoomRatio: 1
Directory: C:\Documents and Settings\Owner\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.IE5\VP7ZQS2S
DocumentID: xmp.did:03801174072068118DBBB34097211824
EncodingProcess: Baseline DCT, Huffman coding
ExifVersion: 0220
ExposureMode: Manual
FNumber: 18.0
FOV: 73.7 deg
FileModifyDate: 2009:07:21 00:00:46
FileName: 15minutesearlier800[1].jpg
FileSize: 342 kB
FileSource: Digital Camera
FileType: JPEG
FlashFired: False
FlashFunction: False
FlashMode: Unknown
FlashRedEyeMode: False
FlashReturn: No return detection
FlashpixVersion: 0100
FocalLengthIn35mmFormat: 24
Format: image/tiff
GainControl: None
GreenMatrixColumn: 0.38515 0.71687 0.09708
ICCProfileName: Nikon Adobe RGB 4.0.0.3000
ImageHeight: 570
ImageWidth: 800
InstanceID: xmp.did:03801174072068118DBBB34097211824
JFIFVersion: 1.2
LightSource: Unknown
LightValue: -1.4
Luminance: 76.03647 80 87.12462
MaxApertureValue: 2.8
MeasurementBacking: 0 0 0
MeasurementFlare: 0.999%
MeasurementGeometry: Unknown (0)
MeasurementIlluminant: D65
MeasurementObserver: CIE 1931
MediaBlackPoint: 0 0 0
MediaWhitePoint: 0.95045 1 1.08905
MetadataDate: 2009:07:20 22:33:59+01:00
Orientation: Horizontal (normal)
PhotometricInterpretation: RGB
PlanarConfiguration: Chunky
PrimaryChromaticities: 0.64, 0.33, 0.21, 0.71, 0.15, 0.06
PrimaryPlatform: Microsoft Corporation
ProfileCMMType: Lino
ProfileClass: Display Device Profile
ProfileConnectionSpace: XYZ
ProfileCopyright: Copyright (c) 1998 Hewlett-Packard Company
ProfileCreator: HP
ProfileDateTime: 1998:02:09 06:49:00
ProfileDescription: sRGB IEC61966-2.1
ProfileFileSignature: acsp
ProfileID: 0
ProfileVersion: 2.1.0
Quality: 100%
RedMatrixColumn: 0.43607 0.22249 0.01392
ReferenceBlackWhite: 0, 255, 0, 255, 0, 255
RenderingIntent: Perceptual
ResolutionUnit: inches
Rights:
SamplesPerPixel: 3
ScaleFactor35efl: 1.0
SceneCaptureType: Standard
ShutterSpeed: 419.6
SubjectDistanceRange: Unknown
Technology: Cathode Ray Tube Display
ViewingCondDesc: Reference Viewing Condition in IEC61966-2.1
ViewingCondIlluminant: 19.6445 20.3718 16.8089
ViewingCondIlluminantType: D50
ViewingCondSurround: 3.92889 4.07439 3.36179
WhitePoint: 0.313, 0.329
XResolution: 300
YCbCrCoefficients: 0.299, 0.587, 0.114
YCbCrSubSampling: YCbCr4:4:4 (1 1)
YResolution: 300
 
That's just the standard info, I can give you the full info if you want.
 
Think I prefer the 15 mins earlier one for some reason. One other issue you might want to think about - all the detrius (is that the word?) on the foreshore, especially on the large shots. Can't think what you could do about that other than some PP work.
 
Nice shot Gary prefer the first shot as the second one there is just too much purple on the light house & would be nice if in both it showed more of the white to stand out. If I can be honest it seems you are having a hard time with your photos and being over critical even before someone has given there critique on a photo.

I think since your highlands trip and the photo's you shot which where stunning you seem to be trying too hard to keep that standard up which is going to be very hard to do as you had perfect locations and light which as a landscape photography is 2 out of the 3 you need, the other is having a talent which we all know you have lots of (y) This is also how i feel after a few days up on Dartmoor when I have perfect light and the right location and the results are stunning but a few days laters when the light is not so good and poor location I tend to push myself further and sometimes get far to self critical. Hope this helps :)
 
Gary,

The light-house is wonky as the camera wasnt straight to the building and there is some slight barrel distortion too. You can correct it kind of in PS......

sunburst800.jpg



Nice shot though. Bit less psychaedelic than recently ;)
 
Great stuff and I like the composition better than mine when I have been down there not been there for a year maybe I need to go back.

It just shows what a better eye and composition will do for you and all the other reasons Gary is a better togger than me!:(
 
Last edited:
I love the shot mate, really makes me wanna get up of my ass and go shoot some landscapes!

I had a wee play in CS4, duplicated the layer and then with the marquee selection tool, selected the upper half of the frame, making sure the bottom half of the selection ran flush with the horizon/water.

I used the WARP tool to bend the tower back. (>EDIT > TRANSFORM > WARP), This got it roughly into place.

Duplicated the layer again but this time made a fairly tight marquee selection around the tower and bent it yet again, drag a rule or two in to get the best chance of being straight. I then added layer mask to blend the layers a little better.

Took around 4 minutes tops.

The blurring that's quite apparent comes from warping an image of low resolution, if this were the original high res image there would be no blur.

It's not quite perfect but I'm sure if more time was spent on it and a little more TLC (I haven't had any coffee yet) than it's a fairly stressless correction that would go unnoticed. (y)

sunburst800.jpg
 
Last edited:
admirable said:
That's just the standard info, I can give you the full info if you want.
Click to expand...

:LOL: Ta :D

Snap_Happy said:
That was the standard?? What does the full info contain? His phone number, NI number, and bank account details?
Click to expand...

Monies transfer details madaaaaame!

aberal said:
Think I prefer the 15 mins earlier one for some reason. One other issue you might want to think about - all the detrius (is that the word?) on the foreshore, especially on the large shots. Can't think what you could do about that other than some PP work.
Click to expand...

I think you got it. Either PP or even better, go back when the tide is in - zero foreground debris to worry about :)

Snapper73 said:
Nice shot Gary prefer the first shot as the second one there is just too much purple on the light house & would be nice if in both it showed more of the white to stand out. If I can be honest it seems you are having a hard time with your photos and being over critical even before someone has given there critique on a photo.

I think since your highlands trip and the photo's you shot which where stunning you seem to be trying too hard to keep that standard up which is going to be very hard to do as you had perfect locations and light which as a landscape photography is 2 out of the 3 you need, the other is having a talent which we all know you have lots of (y) This is also how i feel after a few days up on Dartmoor when I have perfect light and the right location and the results are stunning but a few days laters when the light is not so good and poor location I tend to push myself further and sometimes get far to self critical. Hope this helps
Click to expand...

Nail on head. I hate the fact that we can go for a few days up north and come back with photos I never dreamed of getting. It creates a horrible situation, as it renders taking photos at home more or less pointless. I mean, if you cannot reach the standard you have set yourself, why shoot? It's like trying to beat your best lap even though you know you will fail by at least a few minutes. So yes - happy to agree I am more than struggling :D I dunno what the solution is. I think ultimately, more experience. With experience I should learn how to take advantage of more situations, different light, less than ideal locations etc. Until then, I just need to keep on traveling I guess!

Gandhi said:
Gary,

The light-house is wonky as the camera wasnt straight to the building and there is some slight barrel distortion too. You can correct it kind of in PS......

sunburst800.jpg



Nice shot though. Bit less psychaedelic than recently ;)
Click to expand...

Thanks matey :) Looks sorted.

Bruce120 said:
Great stuff and I like the composition better than mine when I have been down there not been there for a year maybe I need to go back.

It just shows what a better eye and composition will do for you and all the other reasons Gary is a better togger than me!:(
Click to expand...

Better is a stupid word. We are all in the same boat, trying to learn!! :) Tough bloody cookie at times though.

Gary.
 
Hi Gary.
Like the shots. Wouldn't dare to crit as deep as you seem to want to dive (even if I did have the tech know-how).
You asked for crit and you certainly got it.
What the hell will it take before you're happy and can just sit back and enjoy your shots ?
The only slight niggle with me is the lean.

Oh, by-the-way, how many nights a week do you have to train to keep fit enough to carry all those filters :LOL:
 
Tomas Whitehouse said:
I love the shot mate, really makes me wanna get up of my ass and go shoot some landscapes!

I had a wee play in CS4, duplicated the layer and then with the marquee selection tool, selected the upper half of the frame, making sure the bottom half of the selection ran flush with the horizon/water.

I used the WARP tool to bend the tower back. (>EDIT > TRANSFORM > WARP), This got it roughly into place.

Duplicated the layer again but this time made a fairly tight marquee selection around the tower and bent it yet again, drag a rule or two in to get the best chance of being straight. I then added layer mask to blend the layers a little better.

Took around 4 minutes tops.

The blurring that's quite apparent comes from warping an image of low resolution, if this were the original high res image there would be no blur.

It's not quite perfect but I'm sure if more time was spent on it and a little more TLC (I haven't had any coffee yet) than it's a fairly stressless correction that would go unnoticed. (y)
Click to expand...

Thanks for the detailed instructions!!! Saved in my instruction bag for next time :D

What a cool place!

Gary.
 
Rockshifter said:
Hi Gary.
Like the shots. Wouldn't dare to crit as deep as you seem to want to dive (even if I did have the tech know-how).
You asked for crit and you certainly got it.
What the hell will it take before you're happy and can just sit back and enjoy your shots ?
The only slight niggle with me is the lean.

Oh, by-the-way, how many nights a week do you have to train to keep fit enough to carry all those filters :LOL:
Click to expand...


:LOL: I just hate knowing I could have got the photo better with some simple changes. You get home and start to see or think you see how subtle differences would have made a world of difference. The good news is, I am genuinely happy with most of my shots. What makes me even happier though, is KNOWING that I will get a better version when I revisit. Maybe not on the next visit, or the one after, or even the one after that! But eventually, I will get a shot that I will cherish. It's win win. I love taking the photos, bad or not. I love the photos, even when not perfect. I love even more knowing I have to try again and again and again :D

Gary.
 
EdinburghGary said:
Nail on head. I hate the fact that we can go for a few days up north and come back with photos I never dreamed of getting. It creates a horrible situation, as it renders taking photos at home more or less pointless. I mean, if you cannot reach the standard you have set yourself, why shoot? It's like trying to beat your best lap even though you know you will fail by at least a few minutes. So yes - happy to agree I am more than struggling :D I dunno what the solution is. I think ultimately, more experience. With experience I should learn how to take advantage of more situations, different light, less than ideal locations etc. Until then, I just need to keep on traveling I guess!
Click to expand...


I think thats why I like doing portraits and urban model shoots because it is so different from my landscape stuff. Kind of fills that hole when the weather and light are not right round here. I'm in landscape withdraws at the moment as I got some great locations sussed but just waiting for the weather to change ( peeing it down here at the moment) :crying:
 
Snapper73 said:
I think thats why I like doing portraits and urban model shoots because it is so different from my landscape stuff. Kind of fills that hole when the weather and light are not right round here. I'm in landscape withdraws at the moment as I got some great locations sussed but just waiting for the weather to change ( peeing it down here at the moment) :crying:
Click to expand...

Blue Sky and fluffy clouds up here :D I might go do some street again. I find I need to work up to it over several days though, takes a lot of courage.

G.
 
The sky is fantastic in both, but I prefer the colour of #1
The lighthouse would benefit from being whiter (and straighter) but the dark f/g does nothing for me I'm afraid.

What I will say though is that its always interesting looking at your shots, and reading the discussion that follows.
You're always happy to take honest crit, and I think we all learn from the thread.
Its almost like a cyber presentation/tutorial :clap:
 
i like the first one a lot , i also liked you explanation of how you obtained this shot (filters , exposure times etc) very very helpful for a newbie like me , nice to build up a picture of what works , the colours and composition are great

sadly for some reason the second one doesnt quite work for me , i think its the colour
 
Hi, Gary
For what did you steal my picture and insert the lighthouse?
It's not original one and everyone knows where the Kremlin is...
:wave:

19.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top