[DanielT74]

A photographer I know has recently said that he only shoots in "sweet light". He does a lot of sunsets and he wasn't impressed with some of my high contrast ones like these. I tend to like high contrast scenes and wanted to hear more opinions - don't pull any punches, please!

[Adam]

I think that the colors here work very well, and that the composition in the second is fantastic! You timed the shot perfectly! The only think I don't like is that the sky is a bit flat, so perhaps it can be made more vibrant via PP.

The composition in the first shot isn't as good, but I still think it works. Cropping a little off the right side might make it better

[nuvolari]

Hi! I like both photos, but also have a complain. At first, sky is over bright (we said burned), on the left side of sky. Composition is good.
Other is too dark for me. Reflections and water drops are great, but overall I would make it brighter. Which software do you use? Both images looks like HDR, I use Photomatix Pro for HDR imaging, hope it is helpful. Regards

[smf]

They are beautiful photos. Thanks for posting them.
My eyes are drawn to the small, dark cloud at left in the first photo. Removal of that cloud — by cropping or with software — might or might not strengthen the photo.
In the second photo, you might experiment with toning down the sun. The center of the sun appears to be white on my monitor.
Best wishes.

[tweet25]

I love them both! i love the colour the lighting, they draw you in . like you are going to get wet if you stand and watch for too long.

[DanielT74]

Thank you very much for the feedback and suggestions.

I process is Camera Raw and PP in Photoshop.

I do agree that in the first shot, the light is not really great and the sky is burnt out. I should've tried to underexpose more and then bring out the water and the jetty in PP or better use graduated filter. The little black cloud on the left is a distraction, I agree but removing it would probably just underline the burnt out sky more.

In the second shot I have already used burn on the sun, but not quite sure how I could tone it down more (my PP skills are very rudimentary - I guess I could create a yellow layer and use soft light for blending?) I quite like it dark but thank you for the feedback.

[SpecialK]

A photographer I know has recently said that he only shoots in "sweet light".

Isn't he special...

#1 looks too HDR-ish, of which I'm not a fan. I probably would have aimed a bit more to the right to get more of the wood.

I like the composition of #2 though it seems a bit dark.

[westmill]

Mmmmmm what do they say..... beauty is in the eye of the beholder !
the one and only person that can say if a photograph is correct is the person that took it.
If you blew the contrast so high it burn out almost eveything and was under exposed etc
As long as it was the photographers intention for it to look that way, then it is simply correct ! As to wether some one else would have done it diffrently... thats nothing more or less than personal taste. Who are you taking photographs to please ? You or your freind ?
The first pic for me is a tad to high in contast, but as I say, That does not indicate that its wrong. All it tells you is about my taste. Unless your taking a pic as documentry then photography is a liscence for art and creation.

[Frogfish]

I think these are great Daniel - not at all realistic but of course we all know that. Some people just don't like any photography which is based on HDR - others like myself just love them.

[eddie1960]

the second is my favourite of the 2, though i think it needed to be shot with a hard ND grad filter to tone down the sun and given an exposure of maybe 1/2-1 EV more. The first would also have benefited from an nd grad which would have helped balance the sky exposure (some things just work better using filters instead of PP.)
Otherwise i think both photos are better than he gave you credit for, but we all have different tastes

[DanielT74]

Thank you again for the feedback, folks!

As regards HDR, yes the first one was postprocessed a lot to bring out the colour and light on the water and it shows.

With the second one, I did use a ND filter (just starting to use them!) and underexposed quite a bit but I needed a stronger filter I guess. Other than that it was postprocessed only a little to bring the dynamic range out.

[JohnA]

I like both of your photos, and as has previously been said - this is art, not documentary.

Personally I'd crop them both a little tighter and little lower. I don't think the sky in either shot is contributing much to the image.

For the first one, I centred the crop a little more on the dock to give focus. To me this turns all that lovely colour in the waves into a supporting element versus being the subject.

Similar crop on the second, plus I also brightened it up a little.

But that's just my eye and opinion. Keep up the good work.

john a

[DanielT74]

Thanks a lot for taking the time to experiment, John!

Yes, in some ways the crops work better. I am not completely sold on them, but I will return and take another look (I am probably just too attached to the images the way I took them and to the more pano crops...)

[JohnA]

Yep, I understand the appeal of the wide look too. My crops were done at the 5x7 ratio, but if you aren't tying to a print size, try keeping the wide look but just cropping down the sky. This may actually give you even more of a pano look, and I don't think the sky is adding much.

Anyway, have fun with it! john a

[Falke]

Technically very hard shots to take. You did well, especially with the second one. You said you used a ND filter and that you might need a stronger one. A darker ND filter will not help to capture the overall dynamic range. So you would need a grad ND filter to darken just the upper, bright portion of the shot whilst retaining the brightness of the foreground.

However, the other way would be to take several exposures on a tripod, at least two which you then can blend in photoshop. i.e. take one exposure for the sky and one for the foreground.

Keep up the good work.