I live in London, so I photograph London. If I had more free time, I would photograph more not London.
This is a HDR composite. I still struggle to understand how to properly control the HDR settings in Photoshop, but in all my attempts previously, this one has come out pretty well.
One of the last sunsets of summer, in London. I dearly miss it.
HDR is used so you don't lose any details in the too-bright or too-dark parts of the image. But that doesn't mean that EVERYTHING SHOULD BE THE SAME BRIGHTNESS. It shouldn't. Really. Some details are more important, and should be visible. Other parts of the image are not important at all.
Tone mapping makes everything the exact same level, so if you made it grey scale, all the grey would be the same tone grey. Which is awful.
What is the darkest part of your very light top image? The shadow of a building. On the right. That is the thing with the most clarity. This isn't a good thing.
But you know what your second image has? Contrast! And lots of it! It could even have more, making the edges of the clouds pop more against the sky. And it's that contrast between dark and light that takes the viewer's eyes on a journey around the image. Just image the second image, but instead of the eyes being drawn the clouds to the setting sun, they could be distracted by the shapes of the buildings below the skyline. Because that's what you'd get with HDR tonemapped photography, and it would be utter shite.
I appreciate your emphasis for contrast. However It's an artistic choice how much of each attribute you leave in the image with post processing. I could export an array of edits, varying the exposures, contrasts etc. and they would all have appreciable qualities.
What I try to do at the very least, is not distort the colours too much, because then you start to get noticeable artefacts.
There is literally nothing appreciable in your first image. It's really shit. Really. The reason it is a shit image is because of the artistic choices you have made. And they are not artistic choices, they are technical operations on an existing image to see what results you can get. What you have shared has distorted and unrealistic colours, washed out contrast, many glaring artifacts and, worst of all, no subject. As in, it's not a photo of anything but bad tonemapping technique.
Keep practicing, by all means, but don't trick yourself into believing you are doing anything artistic here.
I borrowed a DSLR from my uni's library to make a print for my mom for Christmas. And I took some shots of some nearby stuff for fun. This is my first try at DSLR photography so it's probably not the best.
For the first time since the year 2000 I shot an entire roll of actual film. It all started when I bought some old Canon FD lenses to adapt for my digital camera. Then I figured, why not get an old Canon FD film camera? It's cheap! Also, I got the A-1, which is surprisingly easy to use. Film is about $5 a roll. But developing is more expensive than I thought, and black and white costs MORE!
Anyway, here is the first roll. Most of the later photos were taken on the way to the photo lab. I just needed to finish the roll and make sure the camera was actually working before I loaded in more film and started taking photos I actually cared about. But at the same time I didn't waste the opportunity to practice taking better photos. A few of them actually don't suck.
I've been told that the real advantage to using film over a digital sensor is colour depth. That even some labs still use film over digital for this reason.
However, for amateur photography you can still get great results with a good RAW workflow.
I do love black and white images. It's purely contrast. Especially UV and IR photography: which may require modifying your camera.
I've been told that the real advantage to using film over a digital sensor is colour depth. That even some labs still use film over digital for this reason.
However, for amateur photography you can still get great results with a good RAW workflow.
I do love black and white images. It's purely contrast. Especially UV and IR photography: which may require modifying your camera.
I didn't buy color film because it was like $1 more per roll. Then I found out later that developing black & white costs more! I'll get color film when I finish the black and white rolls I already have.
Moons out, sky is looking moderately clear in London. May be time to whip out the telescope and take some snaps. Especially with a solar eclipse approaching.
They updated the Welling Court Mural Project near my apartment. I don't have to work today, so I went over and took photos of the new murals, and also some of the old ones that weren't painted over. I took my favorite ones and made desktop and iPhone 6 wallpapers out of them. If your monitors aren't 16:10 - 1920x1200 and you aren't using and iPhone 6, why don't you listen to my advice?
I had some more rolls of actual film developed. Here are ALL the photos from them, except for one I messed up that was 100% gray. Pictures from PAX South, PAX East, the beach, etc. I didn't do any editing of any kind.
Got more film developed. This includes Fourth of July and Connecticon. Lots of trial and error with fireworks. Also did some double exposure experimentation to finish out the roll. Camera has the feature, so why not use it?
Very few good shots really. But I decided I'm just going to post everything, good or bad. Just like Penny Arcade, there will be a whole bunch of crappy ones to look back on when after many years I can finally capture some good ones.
I have my fifth (I think) magazine cover! It's an old juggling photo of mine, and it's being used for a feature about the European Juggling Convention which begins tomorrow in Italy:
Comments
This is a HDR composite. I still struggle to understand how to properly control the HDR settings in Photoshop, but in all my attempts previously, this one has come out pretty well.
One of the last sunsets of summer, in London. I dearly miss it.
HDR is used so you don't lose any details in the too-bright or too-dark parts of the image. But that doesn't mean that EVERYTHING SHOULD BE THE SAME BRIGHTNESS. It shouldn't. Really. Some details are more important, and should be visible. Other parts of the image are not important at all.
Tone mapping makes everything the exact same level, so if you made it grey scale, all the grey would be the same tone grey. Which is awful.
What is the darkest part of your very light top image? The shadow of a building. On the right. That is the thing with the most clarity. This isn't a good thing.
But you know what your second image has? Contrast! And lots of it! It could even have more, making the edges of the clouds pop more against the sky. And it's that contrast between dark and light that takes the viewer's eyes on a journey around the image. Just image the second image, but instead of the eyes being drawn the clouds to the setting sun, they could be distracted by the shapes of the buildings below the skyline. Because that's what you'd get with HDR tonemapped photography, and it would be utter shite.
What I try to do at the very least, is not distort the colours too much, because then you start to get noticeable artefacts.
I r still the practice.
Keep practicing, by all means, but don't trick yourself into believing you are doing anything artistic here.
Anyway, here is the first roll. Most of the later photos were taken on the way to the photo lab. I just needed to finish the roll and make sure the camera was actually working before I loaded in more film and started taking photos I actually cared about. But at the same time I didn't waste the opportunity to practice taking better photos. A few of them actually don't suck.
https://flic.kr/s/aHsk6EgcK7
However, for amateur photography you can still get great results with a good RAW workflow.
I do love black and white images. It's purely contrast. Especially UV and IR photography: which may require modifying your camera.
However with just a scanner you could digitize the negative. Archive it.
If you have a tricolour stack, you could Photoshop the results to get real colour depth. (3 BW negatives = 1 colour image)
...not-national retrographics
notrographics
nachographics
NACHOS!
HDR Panoramas with RAW control in Photoshop finally!
https://imgur.com/a/ImKy0
https://flic.kr/s/aHskc6DmY8
https://flic.kr/s/aHskfDB5Ba
https://flic.kr/s/aHskf19R5D
https://flic.kr/s/aHskf1TVr7
Forgot to share this, Venus, that small dot and the moon. Should have more interesting pictures to share soon.
Very few good shots really. But I decided I'm just going to post everything, good or bad. Just like Penny Arcade, there will be a whole bunch of crappy ones to look back on when after many years I can finally capture some good ones.
https://flic.kr/s/aHskgheGLF
https://flic.kr/s/aHskgi2BEL
These two I actually like.
https://flic.kr/s/aHskfhJCg2
https://flic.kr/s/aHskiQkSMp
https://flic.kr/s/aHskid1ATm
Here's Rym asking for trouble.
https://flic.kr/s/aHskni9wMm
Here are a few that I somewhat like, despite having some flaws.