Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Night Shooting

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #46
    Well, first of all; worth to be noted, both images are exposed in a very similar manner. This usually is a point of discussion when comparing pictures, but not in this case.

    I prefer the first one. It's bit clearer and crispier. This has apparently more to do with the cropping than the camera parameters. The decreased aperture don't actually make any huge difference either. With a different lens(es) there could have been a difference though at the same focal points/parameters.

    Comment


      #47
      As there were more preferences for photo1 when for me photo 2 seemed the obvious “winner”, I thought I should have a look at them again. I was therefore so sorry this morning to see the Photobucket notices – but I have now found that at least clicking on them links to your Photobucket in other windows. I do hope this problem can be sorted out though for it doesn't look inviting to the more casual visitors to CVF.

      Anyway, after all that I still find that I prefer 2! Any differences in sharpness seem insignificant to me compared with what I feel is gained by the slightly darker look of photo2, and most especially the composition. I like the sail-shaped lights on the left of #2 in this respect, and the, to me, more “interesting” variations in the reflections - less uniform and with a balancing darker area bottom right. But myself I would crop to remove the top part of the sky. I just tried this (leaving a 545 pixel height image not including border - would then probably add a somewhat narrower border to suit the wider-shaped image).

      Comment


        #48
        but the sailingvessel issn't in the other image,so i didn't look at hem for comparing them.
        so there is more to see in the second one,so a ''other image'' as in 1
        best regards Thijs

        Comment


          #49
          As is to be expected, there are "for" and "against" reasons to set against each photograph.
          The first one is slightly crisper, and this shows in the church windows, the tip of the spire, the tree shadows against the church wall and the greater visibility of the solitary tree to the right of the church. BUT, and it is a big but for me and really concerns composition, not technical issues, I do like the way the reflections are portrayed in the second image. We see the tapering ends of many of them, more black between them adding depth to the water and a small sliver of dark at bottom right balances the sky and adds completion. In the other photo the reflections appear more fence-like. I don't know how far down the sky Cecilia's cropping would come, though I agree that a little judicious cutting would help, so long as the remaining amount of black does not equal the very dominant, though contrasting strip of reflections at the bottom. Where I certainly would crop, though, is at the right. I feel that that part of the image to the right of the seemingly solitary house on the horizon could well be cropped. Not right up to the house, of course, but maybe half or even two thirds of the distance to the edge of the photo could go.
          Oh, and I love the little "star" image of that street(?) light, which in the other photo is just a blur. And, yes, the lit outline of the yacht which, again, does not appear in the other image.
          But these are stunning photos - I'm envious! And my comments are mainly to do with composition, whereas I think that technical advice was asked for.
          All of Jan-Martin's photos in this thread seem to have been replaced by the clickable patch. Photobucket having a bad moment, no doubt.
          Ivy

          "To thine own self be true.......
          Thou canst not then be false to any man."

          Comment


            #50
            It's quite a lot of sky I'd remove, Ivy. And then I think you might find that with the new aspect ratio you wouldn't want to crop at the right at all. Indeed the continuing downward slope of the 'horizon' to the brighter closer buildings makes a nice balance with the hill on the left of the church.

            Anyway, I'd actually popped in here to report that clicking on those Photobucket notices when one is not logged in to CVF didn't bring up the photos at all, but now this afternoon I tried it again and now it does seem to work both when logged in and not logged in. But some of the notices in other earlier posts of Martin's are not clickable.
            Last edited by Seagull; January 26th, 2014, 16:02. Reason: ...update on the Photobucket problem...

            Comment


              #51
              Originally posted by Seagull View Post
              It's quite a lot of sky I'd remove, Ivy. And then I think you might find that with the new aspect ratio you wouldn't want to crop at the right at all. Indeed the continuing downward slope of the 'horizon' to the brighter closer buildings makes a nice balance with the hill on the left of the church.
              Yes, in that case if you were to crop a fair amount of sky then I agree it would be better to leave the right hand side as it is. It would echo the new proportions of the image, keeping the attractive shape of the skyline and stretching it down and out to the edge.
              Anyway, I look forward to more of Jan-Martin's great photos.
              Ivy

              "To thine own self be true.......
              Thou canst not then be false to any man."

              Comment

              Working...
              X