Analyze this.

[Neil]

On Sunday I bushwhacked up Cascade via Laramore Mountain and as usual took a bunch of pics.

I was disappointed in each one of one particular series. (Best one included here with a Photoshopped copy).

It was a brilliant day and the shots were taken at about 10:00 am.

What moved me was the lush grass with the open hardwood forest. One of my problems was the sh*tty display on my Powershot A540. I relied on the histogram to check the exposure.

I used Aperture Value with a small aperture, and "Spot" (as in Evaluative, Center Weighted Average and Spot) I played with a few other settings and kept this picture after deleting a lot of bad ones, mostly over-exposed. I depressed the button half-way while focusing on the foreground (about 10 feet in front of me) then swung the camera up to take THIS PICTURE .

How could I have taken a better picture? Feel free to include every element in the critique.

To get the pics on-line I used PSE's gallery creation feature in the Organizer and uploaded through the Organizer directly using my FTP client's protocol.

Select "slideshow" under "view" and you'll see slightly larger versions in the display. You can manually control which pic you see in order to flip back and forth.

I think that's about it.

Thanks gentlemen!

 

[kmorgan]

Hey Neil, can you email me a full size image? I'll post it for you on Webshots and it will be easier to judge. You can send me both the original and the processed if you like (or just the original).

[email protected]

Kevin

 

[kmorgan]

Hey Neil, what I see right off is the camera shot this at 1/20th sec., which is very slow if not on a tripod. Also there's a bit of noise present which usually is an indication of high ISO's. Your camera data didn't include an ISO #. If you look at the histogram you can see it's blown out in the high end and saturated in the lows. In the first adjusted photo I used plain old auto levels to fix up the contrast. The second I used auto levels, then went into LAB mode and used a noise filter on the Lightness channel to clean it up a little. In the third, I used Auto Levels, went into LAB and adjusted the Curves on the Lightness channel, then Noiseware Pro on the Lightness channel. Back to RGB and done.

Original Photo:

Auto Levels only:

Auto Levels and Noise Reduction:

Auto Levels and Curves adjustment in LAB on Lightness channel for super contrast.

Kevin

 

[Neil]

I guess the small aperture is what gave me the 1/20th second.

The ISO was set to 100.

 

[DougPaul]

I guess the small aperture is what gave me the 1/20th second.

The ISO was set to 100.

That sounds a little overexposed for a partially sunlit scene. A typical exposure for a fully sunlit scene is F16 at 1/ISO*. In general, P&Ses don't go smaller than F8. So F8 at ISO 100 would be 1/400 sec. Because of the partial sunlight, give it a stop for 1/200 sec (or 2 for 1/100 sec).

This scene probably strains the dynamic range of camera by having both sunlit and shaded portions--you have sections of "bright sunlit" and "open shade". (See table below.)

To me, the colors look oversaturated. (A review states "Slightly oversaturated color (reds and dark greens were the most affected), very typical of consumer digital cameras". http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/A540/A540A5.HTM)

A quick check of the 3-color histogram shows significant saturation of the green channel in the original pic.

* Kodak used to include estimated exposure info on film package inserts (maybe they still do?):
exposure time: 1/ISO
- F/22 for bright or hazy sun on snow or sand
- F/16 for bright or hazy sun (distinct shadows)
- F/8 for cloudy bright (no shadows)
- F/5.6 for heavy overcast
- F/5.6 for open shade (subject in shade, but lighted by a large area of sky

Obviously, any of the above can be converted to exposure equivalents: eg 1/100 sec at F/22 = 1/200 sec at F/16 etc.

Those of us who used manual cameras had to know these things... If your meter quit, then the above rules-of-thumb worked pretty well.

BTW, the evaluative mode of modern electronic cameras tries to implement a zone system that takes the full range of intensities in the scene into account.

BTW2, I couldn't find anything on the histogram display in review. If it is only a single "brightness" histogram, it is probably only the green channel. In practice, full rgb histograms are more useful (the individual colors saturate separately).

Doug

 

[NewHampshire]

Next time try a shot by underexposing. It will be easier to fix with photoshop later. Generally it is easier to bring detail out of underexposed areas than overexposed. If you had underexposed in this situation you most likely would have had perfect exposure for your highlights, and then adjusting "Lighten Shadows" with PS SHOULD bring everything back into parity.

Brian

P.S. I personally like the saturation level.....but then again I am know to be a sucker for a little extra saturation!!! (the first thing I do after highlights/shodows adjustments is kick the saturation up by 25%.....all the time, every time.)

 

[NewHampshire]

Oh, and one other thing. Composition. I know it is tough with random trees all over the place, but next time try and at least keep the center of the photo free of one prominant tree. The one in the middle of yours divides the photo almost cleanly in half and suggests it to be the main subject when I think you were not necessarily looking for it to be. Best to offset.

Brian

 

[Neil]

Oh, and one other thing. Composition. I know it is tough with random trees all over the place, but next time try and at least keep the center of the photo free of one prominant tree. The one in the middle of yours divides the photo almost cleanly in half and suggests it to be the main subject when I think you were not necessarily looking for it to be. Best to offset.

Brian

I think number 11 in the series linked here is a better composition.

http://adkhighpeaks.com/neil/outdoor pursuits/laramore_cascade/index.html

 

[NewHampshire]

I think number 11 in the series linked here is a better composition.

http://adkhighpeaks.com/neil/outdoor pursuits/laramore_cascade/index.html

Yes, I like that much better, and adding a hint of a panorama crop really adds the finishing touch.

Brian

 

[Mark Schaefer]

I think number 11 in the series linked here is a better composition.

http://adkhighpeaks.com/neil/outdoor pursuits/laramore_cascade/index.html

Yes, I also agree. That is the one image amongst the woodland scenes that caught my attention when I looked through the album.

This is a challenging subject, especially in bright sunlight. Another challenge is that you have a large group of trees which seem to equally vie for the attention of the viewer. It is always easier if you can find one or just a few elements in a forest that are prominent and become the clear subject; with the rest of the forest as a background. Group shots are more difficult to pull off, but not impossible.

Your shot #11 has more variety of tree shapes in the foreground making it a more interesting scene. You have fewer overlaps amongst the trees which is generally important in a group photo. The ferns are more prominent in #11 which adds some interest. The light is just a bit more diffuse in #11, so it also has fewer distracting dark shadows.

One significant problem with your first shot is the small fallen limb in the foreground. While it may have been what was naturally there, its relative brightness draws attention away from the other trees in the foreground. I am of the opinion that there is nothing sacred about where a branch or a leaf falls, and I have no problems removing them from a scene. Another approach is to move to a different vantage point that excludes the distracting element. That is what you did in #11, by moving a short distance into the scene. And you did find a more pleasing composition to boot.

Overall I think #11 would be a more interesting photo if you could find one tree amongst the forest that would have provided a strong subject. Such as one gnarled or other oddly shaped tree. Or an old tree amongst younger trees or vice versa. I still believe #11 is a pleasing spring green photo. You did a good job finding it in the forest.

 

[Neil]

Thank you for taking the time to respond. I put up a photo that I knew was pretty flawed because the scene was very inspiring but the result a disappointment.

The mistakes that I could go back and correct are

• compositional
• better observation of lighting conditions
• long exposure/no tripod
• settings on camera
• perhaps the camera itself

As for image editing software I only have Photoshop Elements, which restricts what I can do, post

 

[NewHampshire]

As for image editing software I only have Photoshop Elements, which restricts what I can do, post

Even though I have a copy of CS3, I still do a lot of my basic adjustments in Elements. My style of photography is sort of like "carpet bombing"...take a lot of photos of the same scene/subject but different angles, moving composition around a lot, etc. Then I pick the better ones and do simple adjustments. This is my typical adjustment session; 1:Highlight/Shadows adjustments, 2:Contrast, 3: No matter who, what when where or why I automatically bump saturation up to 25%, 4:if need be remove color cast......thats it. Nothing more except possible croping.

Like I said, I do have a copy of CS3, but I am still learning to use its more powerful features, and since I am so used to Elements then basic ajustments there is just easier for me.

Brian