well, I sent my first two in to the PPG....

lodi781 · 05-07-2008, 09:49 PM

Thought I would post here to see what needs fixing..( maybe I should have posted them here first

atupdate · 05-08-2008, 04:44 AM

First, both images could use a little sharpening after downsizing for posting. Generally USM with a radius of .75-1 and a threshold (strength in PSP) of 75-100% will work.

On the waterfall picture ...

1) you need to shoot at a slower shutter speed to get the silky water look. Your exif shows 1/8 sec. I would guess for this amount of water and the rock interaction, a shutter speed around 1 to 1.5 secs would be best. I used a linear polarizer on a cloudy day to shot my favorite waterfall to date.

2) Crop - you need to crop out the tree on the left side of the image. Or better yet, take a step forward and get rid of the tree and its branches entirely.

3) The image looks a little dark on my computer.

On the building....

The overall subject matter is static looking. Nothing in the composition has a "that's really interesting" look to it.

Possilbe suggestions if you can retake the image:
a) expose for the windows
b) add people to the image somehow.
c) shoot when there is less cloud cover, as the sky looks like it is covered by one solid cloud.
d) shoot just after the sun goes down and the sky has a little blue in it - even better if there are some nice clouds in the sky.

Hope this helps.

Tim

lodi781 · 05-08-2008, 07:08 AM

It does...thank you...

SWEngineer · 05-11-2008, 01:20 PM

I will agree and disagree with Tim on a few points.

On the waterfall picture ...

You don't NEED to shoot with a slower shutter speed. Not everyone likes the "silky" look. I do like it but recognize that it has become rather cliche'. Your shot has a nice mix of silky and not-quite silky (and thus more energetic). I like it as is for shutter speed. I also disagree about cropping the tree on the left, especially excluding the branches. The trunk as a framing element has no problems IMO. But it doesn't add a lot either. The green branches, however, very much help balance the green rock on the lower right. Instead, the blown-out solid white pool at the bottom of the image deserves cropping. Maybe keep just a sliver of it for context.

On the building....

I agree with Tim for the most part, especially about exposing for the windows. I assume it was taken at night. If so, let the shadows rule. Finally, the perspective &/or lens distortions make the building appear to be collapsing in on itself. I think it needs some perspective correction unless you can work the rest of the composition, lighting, etc. to create a common theme of 'immenent collapse'.

-Mark

05-07-2008, 09:49 PM	#1
lodi781 Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: southern CT Posts: 219	well, I sent my first two in to the PPG.... Thought I would post here to see what needs fixing..( maybe I should have posted them here first

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
PPG and IQ	lavascript	Pentax DSLR Discussion	14	12-08-2010 11:18 PM
PPG	BillM	General Talk	4	09-15-2010 03:11 AM
Got my first two into PPG	davidreilly3207	Pentax DSLR Discussion	1	04-07-2010 11:03 AM
Abstract First PPG!	Kryosphinx	Post Your Photos!	5	01-15-2010 07:03 AM
three more for PPG... and for you!	rparmar	Post Your Photos!	0	04-26-2009 09:50 AM

05-08-2008, 04:44 AM	#2
atupdate Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Dayton, OH Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,724	First, both images could use a little sharpening after downsizing for posting. Generally USM with a radius of .75-1 and a threshold (strength in PSP) of 75-100% will work. On the waterfall picture ... 1) you need to shoot at a slower shutter speed to get the silky water look. Your exif shows 1/8 sec. I would guess for this amount of water and the rock interaction, a shutter speed around 1 to 1.5 secs would be best. I used a linear polarizer on a cloudy day to shot my favorite waterfall to date. 2) Crop - you need to crop out the tree on the left side of the image. Or better yet, take a step forward and get rid of the tree and its branches entirely. 3) The image looks a little dark on my computer. On the building.... The overall subject matter is static looking. Nothing in the composition has a "that's really interesting" look to it. Possilbe suggestions if you can retake the image: a) expose for the windows b) add people to the image somehow. c) shoot when there is less cloud cover, as the sky looks like it is covered by one solid cloud. d) shoot just after the sun goes down and the sky has a little blue in it - even better if there are some nice clouds in the sky. Hope this helps. Tim

05-08-2008, 07:08 AM	#3
lodi781 Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: southern CT Posts: 219 Original Poster	It does...thank you...

05-11-2008, 01:20 PM	#4
SWEngineer Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Albuquerque, NM Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 308	I will agree and disagree with Tim on a few points. On the waterfall picture ... You don't NEED to shoot with a slower shutter speed. Not everyone likes the "silky" look. I do like it but recognize that it has become rather cliche'. Your shot has a nice mix of silky and not-quite silky (and thus more energetic). I like it as is for shutter speed. I also disagree about cropping the tree on the left, especially excluding the branches. The trunk as a framing element has no problems IMO. But it doesn't add a lot either. The green branches, however, very much help balance the green rock on the lower right. Instead, the blown-out solid white pool at the bottom of the image deserves cropping. Maybe keep just a sliver of it for context. On the building.... I agree with Tim for the most part, especially about exposing for the windows. I assume it was taken at night. If so, let the shadows rule. Finally, the perspective &/or lens distortions make the building appear to be collapsing in on itself. I think it needs some perspective correction unless you can work the rest of the composition, lighting, etc. to create a common theme of 'immenent collapse'. -Mark