Critique Llyn Celyn reservoir

D

droopsnoot

Messages
273
Name
Mike
Edit My Images
Yes
Had a quick trip out to Bala area the other day, and became quite fixated on the tower in this reservoir. Was a little choppy at the time.

1. Autostitch across the dam

pano3 by Mike Edwards, on Flickr

2. Tower

IMGP9619-web by Mike Edwards, on Flickr

3. Tower again

IMGP9609-web by Mike Edwards, on Flickr

I made a comment in another thread (ETA - this one https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/pontsticill-reservoir.631354/ ) about how my images never seem to be quite as sharp as others, I wonder if anyone has any thoughts or suggestions on why this might be? These are taken on my Pentax Kx, using a Sigma 18-200 zoom which has become my walkaround lens. I've processed them (a little, not that much) in a very old version of Photoshop, which basically means altering the levels a little, increasing the contrast, resizing down to 1024xwhatever and running the unsharp mask on them. The panorama was done by autostitch so I wouldn't be surprised if that lost a little clarity, it's the others I'm mainly thinking of. I am working with the jpg rather than the raw images, mainly because my old PS doesn't seem to like DNG files.

So any thoughts would be most welcome. I tried changing from PB to Flickr for hosting as a commenter on another forum suggested that (or maybe thumbsnap) might be doing something that loses clarity. If it's even possible, I'd be happy to post one of the raw unedited images if someone was willing to mess around with it in newer software.
 
Last edited:
It's a real shame about the blown highlights - could be down to you processing if you're not on a calibrated screen though. The first (pano) is the best I think as it has the best composition with a nice sweep and some reasonable light. The 2nd in particular doesn't offer anything much of interest, the last one you have used the foreground to anchor the scene which is good but the control tower is not well defined getting lost against the backdrop. The light is very poor in the last two which kills the images.

You mentioned sharpness - too much sharpening which is what you seem to have here will make things look less sharp. Perhaps remove all in camera sharpening if you're going to work with the jpeg images as that will then allow you to do more controlled sharpening in PS afterwards. Be aware also that flickr sharpens all the small versions of your images, so you only need to sharpen based on 100% viewing, you can forget needing to add any to cover resizing as flickr handles that.
 
OK, thanks for that. I used the default unsharp mask settings, and can never quite decide whether it makes the images look better or worse really. Interesting that you suggest there may be too much sharpening here, I will experiment some more with that.

Working with the JPGs was really just down to being able to get them done in PS - I have RawTherapee and keep having a bit of a play with it, but without really knowing what I'm doing - I suspect a bit like PS (and even my old version, never mind a newer one) there's so much that can be altered that I get overwhelmed with the options. That's my reluctance in buying something newer, I don't really want to drop ~£80 on Lightroom to find that the issue is elsewhere and I've wasted it. I resize the images prior to uploading to anything - I'm on a reasonably limited bandwidth connection, and there seemed any point in uploading massive images only for the host to resize them to be smaller, and for any forum I post them in to do the same thing.
 
I think you could lose most of the stones from the bottom of the third image, and a little off the bottom of the second and not miss it, and of course the second image needs straightening.
I like the "feel" of them...the sky adds to that.
 
Yes... I only noticed the wonky shoreline after I'd posted it. Cheers.
 
They're a bit dull. In the sense that I'm not sure there's an image to be taken. When you took the photo did you think this was the best photo you've ever taken?
 
No, but then I hardly ever think that :) - partly because I'm not really going to the locations that would inspire that. It was more of case of taking the camera with me on a trip, rather than selecting the trip for the photographic opportunities. The dam there isn't that inspiring, not least because all the side you can see is grassed over. But the main issue for me is the lack of clarity compared to those in that thread I linked to - which might be because the tower there is made of stuff that doesn't have such sharp edges, or many other things. But if it's down to something I'm doing it would be nice to figure out what, so I can stop doing it.
 
I can't do anything about the blown highlights as it's a jpg not a raw, but I have increased the vibrance and a small increase in saturation. Also as I'm sure you can see I've straightened it. If you want me to delete this just say and it will be gone. I can't see a lot wrong with the sharpness of the image in my opinion.

16013-1469646255-80ad8477de5301adf54dc47d8ca9feee.jpg
 
If you turn around with your back to the water on the dam wall, there is a fantastic pano down the valley in the right light.
 
Big Andy said:
I can't do anything about the blown highlights as it's a jpg not a raw, but I have increased the vibrance and a small increase in saturation. Also as I'm sure you can see I've straightened it. If you want me to delete this just say and it will be gone. I can't see a lot wrong with the sharpness of the image in my opinion.

16013-1469646255-80ad8477de5301adf54dc47d8ca9feee.jpg
Click to expand...

Thanks for that. I could post the RAW if it might give you any inspiration, if it's possible to post DNGs that is. Interesting you say you can't see any problem with the sharpness, maybe I'm using the wrong terminology - looking at the image of the tower in the thread I mentioned above, that just seemed to be much sharper or maybe clearer. I know the reflection will be better (or there at all) in that one because the water is stiller, but the tower itself just looks somehow better.
 
Craig20264 said:
If you turn around with your back to the water on the dam wall, there is a fantastic pano down the valley in the right light.
Click to expand...

Yes, I wasn't sure this added anything really as the light was not that special, being early afternoon and neither bright nor cloudy. Also the stitching has added a bit of curve in the nearest fence.

pano1 by Mike Edwards, on Flickr
 
What you call lack of sharpness could be down to lack of contrast due to the light on the day/time you where there. Landscape photography is a hobby that can involve lots of early mornings and even then you have got to be lucky with the weather. Even in the winter with the late sunrise times it still involves me getting up at around 4:30AM if I want to be on top of some mountain or other to get that first light.
 
Last edited:
Maybe that's the issue. Anything I shoot is generally because I'm there, rather than as a special trip.

Just to see if any of the messing around I did with the image is making it worse, I've done a small amount in RT, not resized it down this time, and uploaded it to Flickr, using their sharing to share a reasonably-sized image rather than me doing it prior to upload. I don't recall the hillside being quite as dark when I was actually there, but the general appearance (to me at least) seems a little "better", though a lot duller.

IMGP9619-rt by Mike Edwards, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top