- Messages
- 2
- Edit My Images
- No
Unknown
Last edited:
None
- Messages
- 130
- Name
- Richard Toulson
- Edit My Images
- No
Personally, I much prefer the square on photograph of Catherine's headstone. I like the framing in particular, it works well for me. The second one I find the sky and its reflection too distracting making it harder to read the inscription.
The blue door is great, what a find. Did you take a shot of it slightly off centre so that it is centered in the branches of the trees? The left branch just detracts from the stone arch of the door.
Well done, I'd be happy taking any of them.
The blue door is great, what a find. Did you take a shot of it slightly off centre so that it is centered in the branches of the trees? The left branch just detracts from the stone arch of the door.
Well done, I'd be happy taking any of them.
- Messages
- 42,857
- Name
- 'Gramps'
- Edit My Images
- No
I also prefer the straight-on of the headstone, for the same reason as Richard.
I like the blue doors with the framing of the trees but your photo is out of perspective, the doors and stonework are leaning to the right ... and the focus is 'soft'.
Personally I don't like the framing around the photos, it does nothing to enhance them.
I like the blue doors with the framing of the trees but your photo is out of perspective, the doors and stonework are leaning to the right ... and the focus is 'soft'.
Personally I don't like the framing around the photos, it does nothing to enhance them.
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 41,101
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
As above, I think the blue door picture has issues and needs to be viewed as a learning experience and retaken. In the angled headstone shot it looks to me as if quite a large area of the sky is blown and I find it distracting. If it is indeed blown I think you need to watch and if at all possible prevent this. If this is just an effect of the downsizing and posting process then ignore what I've just said 
I'm afraid I disagree with using manual for consistency and editing reasons. I just don't see the logic here. Personally I'd use aperture priority until conditions and a falling shutter speed make manual exposure more preferable. I also think each picture should be edited for best effect as you can still have the same look and colours for consistency with the advantage that you can fix any slight exposure or colour issues which will naturally occur and clone out anything which shouldn't be there in each picture for better but still consistent with the look you want results. For example you may not encounter potentially blown areas of sky in every shot but sometimes this is going to be a possibility and you may need to expose accordingly and even then reduce highlights and / or increase shadows post capture and this is something that should IMO be done for best effect shot to shot.
Other than that. It's an interesting genre and if you can find a niche I wish you luck with it.
I'm afraid I disagree with using manual for consistency and editing reasons. I just don't see the logic here. Personally I'd use aperture priority until conditions and a falling shutter speed make manual exposure more preferable. I also think each picture should be edited for best effect as you can still have the same look and colours for consistency with the advantage that you can fix any slight exposure or colour issues which will naturally occur and clone out anything which shouldn't be there in each picture for better but still consistent with the look you want results. For example you may not encounter potentially blown areas of sky in every shot but sometimes this is going to be a possibility and you may need to expose accordingly and even then reduce highlights and / or increase shadows post capture and this is something that should IMO be done for best effect shot to shot.
Other than that. It's an interesting genre and if you can find a niche I wish you luck with it.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 95430
Guest
The main subject ( the stone ) is in shadow so I would look at letting the light change a little, otherwise looking good
lindsay
Admin
- Messages
- 6,159
- Name
- Lindsay
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Personally (and I'm being really picky here because they shots are all quite good from a non-tog pov):
1. It feels to me that the camera may have been marginally looking down rather than being completely vertical. I think use of a tripod with geared head to get absolutely straight and level may have been good
2. I can read the inscription ok, but I feel it may have been good to pull a bit more out of the sky in PP?
3. I think taking the shot from a bit lower might resolve the branch at left encroaching onto the door frame, but I like it a lot.
Alan @woof woof makes good points above.
1. It feels to me that the camera may have been marginally looking down rather than being completely vertical. I think use of a tripod with geared head to get absolutely straight and level may have been good
2. I can read the inscription ok, but I feel it may have been good to pull a bit more out of the sky in PP?
3. I think taking the shot from a bit lower might resolve the branch at left encroaching onto the door frame, but I like it a lot.
Alan @woof woof makes good points above.
- Messages
- 8,053
- Name
- Terry
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Exposure wise the difference between Aperture Priority with exposure adjustment and fully manual Is one of preference rather than result. you end up with the same settings. generally speaking it is quicker to use the former.
Shooting in raw with individual processing is the way to go for consistency.
Grave yard and grave stones are not the easiest things to photograph. and for many reasons.
A vast majority of Christian burials face East and the rising sun. so there is only a narrow time of day when the sun will be falling obliquely across the face of the stone to give maximum texture and detail. however one can choose to back light the stones as you have done, but this gives a very flat light on the stone itself. and for older stones will probably result in them being difficult to read.
many stone have vertical sides and this needs to be maintained in the image. This can be done either by careful positioning of the camera or later in software. which has the major advantage of being able to choose a wider range of viewpoints. The loss in quality, when using a 24megapixel camera like yours, is now pretty insignificant when making such adjustments. A costly alternative is is to use a tilt shift lens, which I think would not be justified for this work.
in terms of speed and convenience A mirrorless camera is far easier to use in these situations especially when using live view, But you have what you have, and the final result is unlikely to be any different.
I would not aim for an Identical look but rather the best that you can do in each situation.
The three images that you show show a similar full tonal range and general brightness level, which is good. however There are other occasions when such a look would not be appropriate, such as a grave stone in soft morning light through a light mist. or a grave stone at night lit by a shaft of street light.
Variety is generally more acceptable than sameness. the handling that you choose should reflect the location, the situation and the wishes of the family. However even if they only want the simplest record always add you own best interpretation as an alternative. ( this is true of almost any photography)
As to Comment on the three images that you show. The first two are very acceptable for shots of black grave stones in shadow.
I am not convinced that they are exactly vertical and the stones look nice and clean. however you did not check the surround very well and you should have removed the sticks and lumps included in the frame. such attention to detail are important. I would consider using off camera Fill flash in some circumstances to liven the images.
The shot of the door is a situation where the viewpoint and framing could be better. you have clearly chosen the height to minimise keystoning.
In this instance it would have been better to give priority to the framing of the door with the branches, and also reducing the emphasis of the drive way . Then making corrections to the vertical in post processing. again there are a few leaves gum on the path that would have been better removed. as the catch the eye.
That is a question of learning what to tidy up and what to leave to be cleaned up in PP. I do like the general concept and the lighting.
Shooting in raw with individual processing is the way to go for consistency.
Grave yard and grave stones are not the easiest things to photograph. and for many reasons.
A vast majority of Christian burials face East and the rising sun. so there is only a narrow time of day when the sun will be falling obliquely across the face of the stone to give maximum texture and detail. however one can choose to back light the stones as you have done, but this gives a very flat light on the stone itself. and for older stones will probably result in them being difficult to read.
many stone have vertical sides and this needs to be maintained in the image. This can be done either by careful positioning of the camera or later in software. which has the major advantage of being able to choose a wider range of viewpoints. The loss in quality, when using a 24megapixel camera like yours, is now pretty insignificant when making such adjustments. A costly alternative is is to use a tilt shift lens, which I think would not be justified for this work.
in terms of speed and convenience A mirrorless camera is far easier to use in these situations especially when using live view, But you have what you have, and the final result is unlikely to be any different.
I would not aim for an Identical look but rather the best that you can do in each situation.
The three images that you show show a similar full tonal range and general brightness level, which is good. however There are other occasions when such a look would not be appropriate, such as a grave stone in soft morning light through a light mist. or a grave stone at night lit by a shaft of street light.
Variety is generally more acceptable than sameness. the handling that you choose should reflect the location, the situation and the wishes of the family. However even if they only want the simplest record always add you own best interpretation as an alternative. ( this is true of almost any photography)
As to Comment on the three images that you show. The first two are very acceptable for shots of black grave stones in shadow.
I am not convinced that they are exactly vertical and the stones look nice and clean. however you did not check the surround very well and you should have removed the sticks and lumps included in the frame. such attention to detail are important. I would consider using off camera Fill flash in some circumstances to liven the images.
The shot of the door is a situation where the viewpoint and framing could be better. you have clearly chosen the height to minimise keystoning.
In this instance it would have been better to give priority to the framing of the door with the branches, and also reducing the emphasis of the drive way . Then making corrections to the vertical in post processing. again there are a few leaves gum on the path that would have been better removed. as the catch the eye.
That is a question of learning what to tidy up and what to leave to be cleaned up in PP. I do like the general concept and the lighting.