[groesener]

I've got two pictures of the same shot. The first is with closed down f29, and is the one I think is best, although I had no tripod (and would like the feedback on most). the other is with wide-open F5 and 1/800 shutter speed. I'm not sure what I'm seeing in the difference that makes me like the one over the other. My biggest problem with these (and several shots over the last few days) is dealing with the wide dynamic range of light levels. I've got a lot of over-blown levels, and I can't figure out how to prevent it. Is it something simple? Any advice or thoughts are welcome.

Attached Images

   

[hcc]

Nice shots.

I tend to prefer the right one because of the stronger contrast of colours, and the tones/nuances

Thank you for sharing.

[DevKom]

I prefer the first one for 2 things. The composition draws me into the image more effectively (the eye is not distracted by the sky and branches in the upper left of the frame in #2, and the tighter crop makes the leaning branch more of an interesting design element. There is also more interest in the reflected light in the water. The 1st image also has more 'sparkle' to it - something I expect from sunlight on frozen branches. Not a big deal, but more satisfying. What I don't prefer in the 1st is the colour of the sky which on my system looks too purple/magenta. I see nothing that speaks to the f-stop difference at this scale and don't expect to see any, other than less sharpness due to diffraction effects at f29... Perhaps this is more obvious viewed full size.

[Gregory_51]

The framing of the first one is somewhat better than the second. On the first you've zoomed out and have some bushes on the right to help balance the photo. Also since there is nothing much to focus on the leaning tree over the water offers some contrast to the verticals. It's more prominent in the first image because you zoomed in and it's larger. The color tone of the first one is warmer and more appealing, the second has a green tinge in the shadows of the snow on the trees, I don't know why that would change between the two shots. I question the apertures used, one extreme to the other. The lens will be sharpest usually two stops in from the minimum or maximum aperture. The first one gives you more depth of field but I doubt you need f29 to get everything in focus and you lose sharpness due to diffraction, also it shows up dirt on the sensor ( small mark in the sky ). Wide open maybe isn't enough to get the required dof and also not the sharpest aperture on the lens. Seems like f8 or f11 would have been better choices for maximum sharpness and enough dof. I also wonder what your point of focus was as even with the f29 the foreground bushes don't appear to be sharp. For greatest effective dof focusing you should focus 1/3 into the scene. I don't know why you get blown highlights as the predominace of snow would likely have caused underexposure if anything. I assume you're shooting RAW which allows a stop or two of highlight recovery if highlights are overexposed and if not, why not? RAW is your digital negative with all the information the sensor captured, a jpeg has thrown away a large portion of that info and baked in your wb, sharpness, etc. If overexposure is constant in a certain set of shots dial in some negative exposure compensation. I always check my shots histogram to make sure it's not blowing the highlights or under exposing.
Regards
Greg

[groesener]

Well, now, there's some information! Thank, Gregory. In more or less reverse order:
- sadly, I didn't shoot these in RAW. I intended to, but I had been playing with a number of settings the night before and made a mistake on that. I'm still learning, and had meant to change over to shooting RAW that night. The good news is I got it figured out the next day, but it wasn't in time to help these pictures.
- I shot the extremes mostly to experiment. There was a range of f-stop variation tried, these are the only two shots that even came out reasonably well.
- I didn't know about the 1/3 idea for dof. I'll use that in the future - thanks!
- Since this day's shoot, I've talked with my brother and learned the same as what you suggest, that f8-f11 should work as a better balance. I'll be posting some more shots that bore that in mind in the next few days, to see if I'm getting any better results.
- I had kind of sensed something wrong with the second picture - when you mentioned the green tinge I immediately saw that was it! About 5 minutes passed between these two shots, and the light was changing fast - it was early morning and there were a few clouds, not to mention that this was in the mountains. That might explain some of it. Thanks.
- Your first two sentences confused me. Did you substitute the word "first" for "second" somewhere by accident?

[Gregory_51]

You're welcome. Hope it helps some. My mistake and yes the second line should read (On the first you've zoomed in and have some bushes on the right to help balance the photo.)