* Wednesday C&C "No Theme" Thread #856 / Revived #076 on 2024 09 11 *

Welcome to the Wednesday Comments and Critique (No Theme & No Brand) thread!

We are dedicated to continuing the great tradition of this C&C thread because we are convinced that looking at, and talking about images is vital for better photography.

Our tried and tested concept (15 years and running!) is a weekly "peer-to-peer" photo comments & critique encounter, in which you GIVE and RECEIVE.

The idea is simple: you post a photo or photo-based image that you have made and get critique on it. And in return you give other people your honest but constructive opinion of their images.

Any Theme, Any Camera, Any Style, Any Subject.

We are still figuring out how to create the convenience of threaded view on this new forum.
For now, let us agree that you post an image or essay with a title and short explanation, and that all comments include the image as a quote.
Replies to comments may or may not include quotes.

THREAD GUIDELINES – THE SHORT & SWEET VERSION
• This thread does not care about brands. It’s not about the tool, but the image.
• Post one image or essay that you have made and would like to get comments on.
An entry can either be a single image or a short essay. With an essay we mean not a collection of random images without any connection, seeking C&C on more than one of them. We mean instead a limited number (3 to 10) of connected images that together try to tell a story, create a fuller picture of a situation, event or location, etc.
• Add a clear title to your post to distinguish your entry.
• Look at the other images/essays and give your comments on at least one of those.
• For comments, try to go beyond a simple pat on the back or a short dismissal.
• Do you like an image (or essay) ? Try to explain WHY it appeals to you.
• Negative feedback is OK (we all want to learn), but be polite and constructive. Try to explain why the image (or essay) does not appeal to you and how it might be improved.
• Please stay on topic, i.e. concentrate on the image and the photographic comments, without getting into politics or other distractions. No non-photographic arguments.

The critique you give is vital.
What was your first impression? What catches your eye about an image? Why?
What do you like, and what distracts you? What would you change?

Fiddle with the image in your head - composition, perspective, color balance, exposure.

PLEASE NOTE CLEARLY:
Unless the original poster specifically states (for every individual posting offered for C&C) that they do not want their image(s) to be downloaded, altered or reposted, it is understood that within the context of this thread, other participants are free to download and alter the posted image and repost it in a reply for C&C purposes. That reposted image may remain permanently within the week's thread, or you may remove it after a short period of time if you prefer. The downloaded and altered images are not to be used for any other purposes nor uploaded anywhere else than within the context of the C&C in this thread. No copyright disputes here!

Encourage - it is a scary business putting your work up for other people to judge!

More general feedback is also welcome.
Do you know something about taking the same sort of image that would make matters easier - share your own as an example in your reply.

Have fun, be respectful and let’s stick together!

TO BE CLEAR - SOME GENTLE REMINDERS

Last week's semi-altercations convince me to post these extra guidelines once again.

In an ideal world, one would hope that further guidelines for respectful forum behaviour are not necessary.
But apparently this is not an ideal world, so here are some additional gentle reminders about how to behave in this thread.
I hope not to have to repeat this every week.

A. This thread is open to all images that are photo-based and the personal creation of the contributing poster.
Meaning :
1) "straight" (documentary) photos are welcome, whether they are straight OOC or have undergone processing.
2) equally welcome are images that have undergone extensive creative processes (collages, composites, layered photos, whatever)
(Basically, anything visual and 2D that has a photo as starting point, just to distinguish from straight drawings and paintings and other processes that do not involve any form or degree of photography.)

B. Discussions on all aspects of the entries are welcome : content, visual impact, technique.
Suggestions for improvement are welcome.
(If the poster agrees, you may work on his/her image. This agreement is implied. If you do NOT want it, please be explicit.)

C. There is no right or wrong, just differences of opinion.
The point of this thread is not only to learn to get (and accept) feedback on our own images.
But also to learn to express our opinions on other people's images in a motivated and respectful manner.
(I have been doing this for 15 years, and I have learnt as much if not more from GIVING feedback and having to think about it, as from GETTING feedback.)

D. Our skill levels are varied. Some are good at composition, others at processing.
We admire in others what they do well and try to help them within our own skill set.

E. With our differences in skill, comes a difference in focus and attention for what we value most in images..
Something that is not good for a person with processing focus, may be alright for the person who just looks at composition.

F. Ideally we can learn from eachother.
Learning (and tutoring) requires respect.
There will be no looking down on someone nor on his/her work (images), nor on his/her comments.
Be constructive, not disruptive. Say what can be improved, not what is "wrong" or "bad". Don’t call eachother offensive names. In general, do not post any comment that you yourself would be offended by if it was written about your own images or opinions.

G. Just like our photo skills, our language skills are also not equal. Keep that in mind when the desire hits to jump to conclusions about how someone expressed his/her thoughts. (Native English speakers are bound to have a linguistic advantage. Do not abuse that.

SWIMMING POOL BOEKENBERGPARK

Like the image from last week, this is another outtake (not selected by the editors and ublisher) from my images for the new upcomlng edition of "500 Hidden Secrets Antwerp" from Luster Publishers.

And like last week, it is an ultra wide angle (fisheye) image of a peculiar swimming pool

This is the Boekenbergpark outdoor swimming pool: a closely monitored but fairly natural (no chemicals) swimming pond in one of Antwerp's parks.
It is open year round. In winter, the local club of "polar bears" (cold water swimmers) take their dips and swims. In summer, the crowd is somewhat bigger.

I went there very early morning, because it would clear that shooting images there with bathers, would create a privacy- and rights nightmare for the book.

I happened to arrive when the pond cleaning crew was working.
This provided me with pretty free general access, also to the areas where normally only barefoot bathers are allowed

A stroke of luck.
I rely on these strokes of luck for my tourist guide photography.
Because meticulous (hour to hour) planning to photograph 15 to 20 locations in one day may sound like a good idea but is actually totally unpragmatic.
Making strict appointments for certain hours is even less viable. I try to get access when I am there, and if not, I move on to another item.
What I do prepare, is a clear list of the locations, and a map with all the adresses and opening hours (for shops, museums, restaurants). And then I wing it.

I'm not sure if I previously posted this image or another version of it in this thread but I couldn't find it using the "search" tool.

* ZEROING IN *

Thank you Allan.

Using Google Lens I found where I posted a similar version and the original in another thread here on dprevived.

dprevived.com/t/cornwall-photographer-catches-once-in-a-lifetime-kestrel-picture/4699/post/58798/

In this thread's version I toned down the background a bit and let a little of the underlying original come through.

Very nice scene and I like the composition but the lighting is a little too contrasty between the bright sky and foreground and the shadowy foreground. The water on the decking is a little too "glary" for my liking.

In this version I have tried to "even out" the lighting between the background and foreground while at the same time try to bring back some texture in the featureless clouds at the centre of the scene. This version is easier on my eyes.

Not a photo I wanted to post.
I'm on the Japanese island of Naoshima. It is home to some impressive art/architecture that grows from the work of Todao Ando. I wanted to take photos in the ChiChu museum. It has wonderful planes of colour, line and shape where architecture and art cross paths. This morning, off I went. I should have known. Getting there from the harbour was an exercise in frustration. At the door, I found photography is strictly forbidden.
3%^&#@)**!!!! Later I found the same info in very small print at the end of the online booking process. Not happy.
Inside was shot after shot I itched to take.
I'll have to make do with this. I might not have bothered but I have to get something back for the effort.

I understand what you did here and I like most of your interventions, but there is one "cardinal rule" for travel guide book photography and that is that the publishers do not like grey skies and clouds that look like rain...
(There are exceptions, like a dramatic sky over a medieval castle, but for a scene that must look inviting like "I want to go swim there", my brief is to try and avoid dark grey skies). An overexposed sky is preferred over one that spells rain.

Still, I like your efforts, of course.

Interesting - hadn't thought about that - but so obvious when you mention it! It would also be interesting to hear about any other cardinal rules (I'm sure there's more than one!)/guidelines

Finally, having never used a fisheye lens, I would find it interesting to be able to see a comparison of one of your scenes with fisheye & "normal" normal lenses

Tim

Oh there are many guidelines.
Some of them imposed by the editors/publishers, others a matter of common sense or experience.
Examples:
- when shooting a shop, try to avoid sign of clearance sales etc
- when shooting a bar or restaurant, shoot it empty ONLY when the architecture or interior design is a key feature; in all other cases images with people enjoying themselves are preferred
- ditto for shops
- eye contact with a seller/shopkeeper, bartender is a good thing
- for a museum, the interior is most often better than the exterior, but from the interior, pick a room with permanent displays, not temporary exhibitions
- a bar terrace should look inviting and summery (even when shooting takes places off season - I have been known to ask patrons visiting a bar to please step outside for 1 minute to sit on the terrace, and without jackets, if the terrace is a main feature of the bar
- etc
- etc.

As for the difference between regular wide angle and fisheye: I have many examples of that, because I often shoot both.
If you browse through (especially) the TRAVEL and ARCHITECTURE sections of my galleries, you will often find wide angle and fisheye images right next to eachother.
Maybe I will go search a few for you, but I am a bit pressed for time this week.

Fair enough 😊 I can understand the travel book publishers desires/requirements.

To be honest, I wasn't thinking of that at all when I did the edit. Feature less/texture less clouds (aka "over exposed") are for me a huge personal no-no for any type of photo, especially landscapes.

Nostalgic Ritual

Sharon Temple built 1832 has a long running annual tradition to illuminate the site on the first Friday of September to celebrate the "harvest" among the community with music (choir) and the "feast" of local produce etc.

Image taken on tripod with release cable and iso set for 2500.

Very graceful and at the same time fearsome image. Great effect with background to go with it.

Well, you have achieved to register an abstract and only you know the frustration you have endured which led to this.

Very attractive, inviting and interesting capture. It contains all the necessary features which contribute to successful image. The water, wet decking, vegetation and even human cleaning the pool.

I assume you set ISO 2500 because you wanted a nice looking jpeg sooc. Unfortunately the walls of the building are still very noisy which is a shame given the very nice scene and composition you chose.

Fwiw to anyone interested, to minimise visible noise, especially in low light scenes, you need to get as much light as possible onto the sensor within your DOF and blur requirements. It is a low amount of light onto the sensor which results in a low signal to noise ratio in the raw data which in turn makes the noise more visible.

In a scene like this where there is no movement, assuming the trees weren't swaying too much in a breeze, and you are using a tripod the best way I know to maximise the amount of light onto the sensor is to ETTR.

1. Set the widest aperture (smallest f-number) that will give the DOF you want.

2. Set base ISO

3. Use the camera's live-view with a histogram and slow the shutter speed until important highlights just begin to clip - ie...push the histogram as close as possible to the right hand side until just before important highlights begin to clip.

This will maximise the amount of light onto the sensor within your dof and blur requirements which will result in maximising the SNR within those requirements. This will result in the minimum amount of visible noise after you then dial back the image lightness to what you want either in your raw converter, preferably, or in your sooc jpeg image editor. The benefits of ETTR are greater when using raw files (16 bits) rather than sooc jpegs (8 bits).

Your denoising app will thank you for making it much easier to clean up an ETTR'd raw file than a non ETTR'd jpeg.

Assuming base ISO on your camera is 100 then had you set base iso instead of ISO 2500 and ETTR'd, you would have been able to put at least an extra 4.66 stops of light onto the sensor. That's a huge amount of extra light and would have reduced the amount of visible noise very significantly.

If the display on the outdoor screen was changing frequently I would just simply take a few separate shots of the screen displays (exposed appropriately) and then in post insert the one that works best into the final image.

Anyway, just some food for thought to maybe consider in similar situations in the future.