Landscape Beachy Head lighthouse

juu · 02-01-2011, 06:14 AM

wffwii · 02-01-2011, 11:36 AM

Really like the composition and the way the light is playing, but I think I personally would have done a little more highlight recovery on the cliff face, to bring a little more detail up hopefully.

juu · 02-02-2011, 07:07 AM

wffwii, thanks.

The highlight recovery was already pretty high; I turned it up more but it starts to look a lot less white as it felt in real life if turned up higher. Another rendering:

There is something wrong with the picture and I'm not sure what. If anybody has ideas, please let me know.

wffwii · 02-02-2011, 01:19 PM

Wish I knew what to tell you as far as thinking there's "something wrong". I'm still learning the post-processing nuances myself. I personally don't see anything wrong with it except for what looks "right" to me when I edit something. And yeah, it's easy to over-recover. Been learning that with some of my latest pics.

**Scottnorwo** · 02-02-2011, 06:32 PM

This is one of those times to take two or more shots. shot one for cliff, sky, forground, beach and then put them all together.
the light on the cliff is making it hard to balance the shot.

**Ash** · 02-02-2011, 08:32 PM

The above comments are on the ball - this image could have done with some multi-exposure blending/HDR, but not all that much - just enough to balance the contrast a little better and enhance the colours.

juu · 02-03-2011, 05:04 AM

OK, thanks. So you think it's just too high contrast and too low DR in the picture to do it justice.

tibbitts · 02-05-2011, 09:03 PM

I'm not sure the image needs HDR if you have both highlight and shadow detail. I don't think there's anything "wrong"; you could, for example, have more interesting clouds in the sky, but you'd have to manufacture them, because they just weren't there.

Paul

juu · 02-06-2011, 03:12 AM

Well, I was thinking perhaps because the cliff was so vertical and so centrally positioned someone could advise on composition. As I had hoped the different diagonals and the depth (by this I mean having both the near glass and the far lighthouse in) would make it a keeper, but somehow the picture does not give the scene justice.

**Ash** · 02-06-2011, 04:32 AM

Perhaps it may just need some highlight recovery as the shadow details are reasonably well retained, but also shifting the colour balance a little to the cooler end of the spectrum may help improve texture and the overall look of the highlights in this image.

tibbitts · 02-06-2011, 08:06 PM

Originally posted by juu

Well, I was thinking perhaps because the cliff was so vertical and so centrally positioned someone could advise on composition. As I had hoped the different diagonals and the depth (by this I mean having both the near glass and the far lighthouse in) would make it a keeper, but somehow the picture does not give the scene justice.

Sorry but I'm guessing 99.999% of everybody besides you alrady thinks the image is a keeper and does do the scene justice. You can tweak highlights or shadows, but I don't see what the problem is with the image as-is.

Paul

**Fontan** · 02-06-2011, 09:19 PM

I am going to be a dick and offer an opinion unsolicited.

From the standpoint of composition, it does not work for me. Two major players in this photos are 1) the rock (or the face of) and 2) the light house. The contrast in sizes between these two objects to me is unnecessarily large. I think this kind of technique would work if you were trying to show two objects that are hugely different in size to appear the same, or something like that. so I say you get closer to the lighthouse, and I think you can still do this while maintaining the percentage of frame that is taken up by the rock. I wouldn't crop though. I say put on a longer tele on a tripod and shoot a few in different apertures and shutter speeds.

Sorry.

juu · 02-07-2011, 01:37 AM

Thanks, tibbitts. IMHO it is an OK picture, but not one I'd put in my "best of 2011" portfolio. I guess that's what I was trying to say.

Fontan, your opinion wasn't unsolicited at all, and is much appreciated. It could be exactly the problem you state which is my problem with the image too.

tibbitts · 02-07-2011, 06:21 PM

Originally posted by Fontan

I am going to be a dick and offer an opinion unsolicited.

From the standpoint of composition, it does not work for me. Two major players in this photos are 1) the rock (or the face of) and 2) the light house. The contrast in sizes between these two objects to me is unnecessarily large. I think this kind of technique would work if you were trying to show two objects that are hugely different in size to appear the same, or something like that. so I say you get closer to the lighthouse, and I think you can still do this while maintaining the percentage of frame that is taken up by the rock. I wouldn't crop though. I say put on a longer tele on a tripod and shoot a few in different apertures and shutter speeds.

Sorry.

I agree it would be a better picture if you could compose it similar to what it is, but with a longer lens. I'm not sure it was possible to move to a location that would permit that, however.

Paul

Gareth · 02-08-2011, 02:33 AM

Juu, did you shoot RAW or JPEG on the day? If you was looking to balance the light better you could do make on JPEG output from the RAW file thats had the exposure played with for the cliff and then another JPED file again from the RAW for the cliff top etc and then in Photoshop make one image from 2 ?

Oh, I like the light by the way, nice part of the world, over here in Wales we have very rocky cliffs !

02-01-2011, 06:14 AM	#1
juu Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 680	Beachy Head lighthouse Photo Location: near Eastbourne, UK ISO: 100

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Black & White Admiralty Head Lighthouse	tuco	Post Your Photos!	6	11-22-2010 09:00 PM
do you think Pentax can go head to head with Canon 1Dx and Nikon Dx series in sports?	Reportage	Pentax DSLR Discussion	40	10-01-2010 12:29 AM
For Sale - Sold: Amvona Carbon Fiber legs, pro head, travel head	jleecifer	Sold Items	4	01-21-2010 09:43 AM
Interesting head to head reviews K-x and Sony 550	NaClH2O	Pentax News and Rumors	15	12-10-2009 02:54 PM
Gear head vs. 3-way pan tripod head	heatherslightbox	Pentax Camera and Field Accessories	3	05-22-2009 06:54 PM

02-01-2011, 11:36 AM	#2
wffwii Junior Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Colorado Photos: Gallery Posts: 43	Really like the composition and the way the light is playing, but I think I personally would have done a little more highlight recovery on the cliff face, to bring a little more detail up hopefully.

02-02-2011, 07:07 AM	#3
juu Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 680 Original Poster	wffwii, thanks. The highlight recovery was already pretty high; I turned it up more but it starts to look a lot less white as it felt in real life if turned up higher. Another rendering: There is something wrong with the picture and I'm not sure what. If anybody has ideas, please let me know.

02-02-2011, 01:19 PM	#4
wffwii Junior Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Colorado Photos: Gallery Posts: 43	Wish I knew what to tell you as far as thinking there's "something wrong". I'm still learning the post-processing nuances myself. I personally don't see anything wrong with it except for what looks "right" to me when I edit something. And yeah, it's easy to over-recover. Been learning that with some of my latest pics.

02-02-2011, 06:32 PM	#5
Scottnorwo Millionth Poster! Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Stafford, New York Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,086	This is one of those times to take two or more shots. shot one for cliff, sky, forground, beach and then put them all together. the light on the cliff is making it hard to balance the shot.

02-02-2011, 08:32 PM	#6
Ash Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,920	The above comments are on the ball - this image could have done with some multi-exposure blending/HDR, but not all that much - just enough to balance the contrast a little better and enhance the colours.

02-03-2011, 05:04 AM	#7
juu Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 680 Original Poster	OK, thanks. So you think it's just too high contrast and too low DR in the picture to do it justice.

02-06-2011, 03:12 AM	#9
juu Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 680 Original Poster	Well, I was thinking perhaps because the cliff was so vertical and so centrally positioned someone could advise on composition. As I had hoped the different diagonals and the depth (by this I mean having both the near glass and the far lighthouse in) would make it a keeper, but somehow the picture does not give the scene justice.

02-06-2011, 04:32 AM	#10
Ash Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,920	Perhaps it may just need some highlight recovery as the shadow details are reasonably well retained, but also shifting the colour balance a little to the cooler end of the spectrum may help improve texture and the overall look of the highlights in this image.

02-06-2011, 08:06 PM	#11
tibbitts Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Oklahoma USA Posts: 2,196	Originally posted by juu Well, I was thinking perhaps because the cliff was so vertical and so centrally positioned someone could advise on composition. As I had hoped the different diagonals and the depth (by this I mean having both the near glass and the far lighthouse in) would make it a keeper, but somehow the picture does not give the scene justice. Sorry but I'm guessing 99.999% of everybody besides you alrady thinks the image is a keeper and does do the scene justice. You can tweak highlights or shadows, but I don't see what the problem is with the image as-is. Paul

02-06-2011, 09:19 PM	#12
Fontan Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: 5th floor Posts: 1,610	I am going to be a dick and offer an opinion unsolicited. From the standpoint of composition, it does not work for me. Two major players in this photos are 1) the rock (or the face of) and 2) the light house. The contrast in sizes between these two objects to me is unnecessarily large. I think this kind of technique would work if you were trying to show two objects that are hugely different in size to appear the same, or something like that. so I say you get closer to the lighthouse, and I think you can still do this while maintaining the percentage of frame that is taken up by the rock. I wouldn't crop though. I say put on a longer tele on a tripod and shoot a few in different apertures and shutter speeds. Sorry.

02-07-2011, 01:37 AM	#13
juu Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 680 Original Poster	Thanks, tibbitts. IMHO it is an OK picture, but not one I'd put in my "best of 2011" portfolio. I guess that's what I was trying to say. Fontan, your opinion wasn't unsolicited at all, and is much appreciated. It could be exactly the problem you state which is my problem with the image too.

02-07-2011, 06:21 PM	#14
tibbitts Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Oklahoma USA Posts: 2,196	Originally posted by Fontan I am going to be a dick and offer an opinion unsolicited. From the standpoint of composition, it does not work for me. Two major players in this photos are 1) the rock (or the face of) and 2) the light house. The contrast in sizes between these two objects to me is unnecessarily large. I think this kind of technique would work if you were trying to show two objects that are hugely different in size to appear the same, or something like that. so I say you get closer to the lighthouse, and I think you can still do this while maintaining the percentage of frame that is taken up by the rock. I wouldn't crop though. I say put on a longer tele on a tripod and shoot a few in different apertures and shutter speeds. Sorry. I agree it would be a better picture if you could compose it similar to what it is, but with a longer lens. I'm not sure it was possible to move to a location that would permit that, however. Paul

02-08-2011, 02:33 AM	#15
Gareth Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: South Wales, UK Posts: 768	Juu, did you shoot RAW or JPEG on the day? If you was looking to balance the light better you could do make on JPEG output from the RAW file thats had the exposure played with for the cliff and then another JPED file again from the RAW for the cliff top etc and then in Photoshop make one image from 2 ? Oh, I like the light by the way, nice part of the world, over here in Wales we have very rocky cliffs !