Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Photo Analysis
Boathouse Row Painter
Page 1 of 2 next>
Jun 17, 2018 11:17:10   #
Hamltnblue Loc: Springfield PA
 
Hello
This is a picture of a Person painting Boathouse row in Philadelphia. The only post processing is On1 medium de-hazing and straightening.
Permission was given to take his pic.
I was trying manual mode for one the first times with a D7500 using a Tamron 18-400 Lens
The ISO is set at 100 with a Low F10 setting.
Should I have upped the ISO to get the f stop higher?
Also, I positioned myself so that part of the painting was visible. Is there different Angle that should have been used?
Thanks
Jim


(Download)

Reply
Jun 17, 2018 11:33:54   #
artBob Loc: Near Chicago
 
All in all, I think your shot is quite lovely and successful. Perhaps bringing out the painting might have worked, but it depends on what you want to be the main statement.

Reply
Jun 17, 2018 11:34:11   #
anotherview Loc: California
 
Overall, you have a good composition.

Four improvements appear. One, boost the midtones (using the grass as reference for a look of it as natural to the eye). Two, show the painting rig to identify it as such; now, it looks ambiguous. Three, clone out the overhanging branch because it distracts. Four, select the sky for balancing its brightness and contrast with the foreground.

I note that you could take the same photograph from the same perspective minus the painter, and you'd still have a satisfactory result because of inherent compositional strength.

Good luck.

Reply
 
 
Jun 17, 2018 11:57:28   #
R.G. Loc: Scotland
 
Hi Jim. Zooming in shows the distant stuff to be fine, and there's nothing in the close foreground that requires sharpness, so your choice of f/10 was OK.

Much depends on your choice of focus point, which ideally would be close to the hyperfocal distance (for that focal length and at f/10) and preferably slightly further. F/10 is quite low for getting front-to-back sharpness but you got away with it this time. If you focused on the painter, it looks like that was about as close as you'd want to make the focus point. If you focus at the hyperfocal distance or beyond, everything from the focus point to infinity will be acceptably sharp. The hyperfocal distance is the nearest focus point that will still give you sharpness to the horizon, so you can go slightly beyond it but you don't want to focus closer than that if you want the horizon to be sharp. And when you focus at the hyperfocal distance the DOF will come half-way back towards you - which in this case would need to include the painter. But a fairly small aperture of f/10 gives a bit of leeway.

It looks like the composition is as good as circumstances allowed. It was a good idea to include a glimpse of the painting, and it would have been nice to have the painter surrounded by clear space, but if you'd gone further left you'd have lost the glimpse of the painting, so what you have is a happy compromise. Now what you need to do is lift the shadows with a light hand to mitigate the poor lighting on the painter. It might be an idea to do that by selecting the painter and as well as lifting the shadows, slightly increase contrast and perhaps saturation for that selection (lightening can result in a loss of contrast and saturation). Or perhaps just select the whole shadow area to even out the lighting.

Reply
Jun 17, 2018 11:59:12   #
artBob Loc: Near Chicago
 
anotherview wrote:
Overall, you have a good composition.

Four improvements appear. One, boost the midtones (using the gras as reference for a look of it as natural to the eye). Two, show the painting rig to identify it as such; now, it looks ambiguous. Three, clone out the overhanging branch because it distracts. Four, select the sky for balancing its brightness and contrast with the foreground.

I note that you could take the same photograph from the same perspective minus the painter, and you'd still have a satisfactory result because of inherent compositional strength.

Good luck.
Overall, you have a good composition. br br Fou... (show quote)

I wonder about this advice, truly wonder. It produces a clearer, more "correct" photo, at least as I tried it. However, it seems to me that it makes the photo more a snapshot, minus the drama. The painter becomes the focus. The composition becomes a bit bland, minus the shadowy area. It might be a good discussion for other photographers to join in. I'd certainly be interested reading others' judgments.

Reply
Jun 18, 2018 01:53:55   #
anotherview Loc: California
 
I agree. My comments went to the fundamental of composition. It comes first in any photographic rendition to give it force. Exposure follows. Then the importance of subject comes into play. All in photography flows from these three considerations. Further, this approach allows useful analysis of any photograph, all in visual terms.

Here we have the photograph showing a painter painting. Does the photograph succeed in this concept? I say no because the painter figure and his easel as portrayed instead appear ambiguous, and thus present a distraction.

Without the painter, the composition stands alone for a visual satisfaction, yet as nothing special.

Reply
Jun 18, 2018 06:35:18   #
Bridges Loc: Memphis, Charleston SC, now Nazareth PA
 
Hamltnblue wrote:
Hello
This is a picture of a Person painting Boathouse row in Philadelphia. The only post processing is On1 medium de-hazing and straightening.
Permission was given to take his pic.
I was trying manual mode for one the first times with a D7500 using a Tamron 18-400 Lens
The ISO is set at 100 with a Low F10 setting.
Should I have upped the ISO to get the f stop higher?
Also, I positioned myself so that part of the painting was visible. Is there different Angle that should have been used?
Thanks
Jim
Hello br This is a picture of a Person painting Bo... (show quote)


I like the shot and the subject. I would crop a little tighter to eliminate the branch someone else mentioned and also the left most column of the structure to the left. This would get rid of the brightest of the columns which draws attention away from the rest of the shot and also eliminates the slight tilt due to it being close to the edge of the shot like wide angle lenses tend to do. The other columns do not have this tilt. While I like the artist in shadow showing his choice of being there rather than out in the bright hot sun, I would not mind seeing a little more light on him. I think if you can increase his exposure by one-half to a stop it would be good.

Reply
 
 
Jun 18, 2018 07:33:56   #
edwdickinson Loc: Ardmore PA
 
I saw the same guy in front of the art museum last week.
I was planning on doing some sunrise pix yesterday from the same spot, but couldn't drag my butt out of bed.

Reply
Jun 18, 2018 07:44:59   #
pjarbit Loc: Detroit, Michigan
 
I used lightroom. Added dehaze. Added saturation. Changed white point. Removed the distracting elements. Lightened Painter. Cropped slightly. Could use some additional work inthe sky by the gazebo. Much more pleasing result. Looking at your first pic vs. the edited one, the painter gets lost in your image with all the distracting elements. His packs and gear were really distracting. Now, he is the focal point. The updated image, still may have a little red cast but overall improvement.

Very good pic.



Reply
Jun 18, 2018 08:13:42   #
pappleg
 
Hamltnblue wrote:
Hello
This is a picture of a Person painting Boathouse row in Philadelphia. The only post processing is On1 medium de-hazing and straightening.
Permission was given to take his pic.
I was trying manual mode for one the first times with a D7500 using a Tamron 18-400 Lens
The ISO is set at 100 with a Low F10 setting.
Should I have upped the ISO to get the f stop higher?
Also, I positioned myself so that part of the painting was visible. Is there different Angle that should have been used?
Thanks
Jim
Hello br This is a picture of a Person painting Bo... (show quote)


To my eye the gazebo and wires in the background are distracting. Without being at the scene it is difficult to surmise different angles but it seems to me that a position to the left shoulder of the artist showing him working in the foreground with a close view of him and his canvas and the subject matter (what he is painting) in the background may have been a distinct possibility. You were there and are the only one who could say whether that would have been an option. Just a thought.

Pat

Reply
Jun 18, 2018 10:19:42   #
AzPicLady Loc: Behind the camera!
 
It's a nicely done image. I think it's perhaps a bit out of balance, with all of the focal points to the left side. The only way to have changed that would have been to move the gazebo (!), or the painter. Not sure either was possible! Now if you're REALLY good at PS, you might be able to move the painter and make it still look real.

Reply
 
 
Jun 18, 2018 11:02:50   #
fergmark Loc: norwalk connecticut
 
The painter seems incidental to the scene.

Reply
Jun 18, 2018 11:04:56   #
pjarbit Loc: Detroit, Michigan
 
Challenge accepted. I still like it the other way.



Reply
Jun 18, 2018 11:08:38   #
AzPicLady Loc: Behind the camera!
 
WOW! Very well done. The balance is better. I do understand that you like it better the other way. I always like things better the way I first saw them. But it's nicely done and has better balance.

Reply
Jun 18, 2018 12:01:47   #
artBob Loc: Near Chicago
 
Still think the original is the best. The distance and feel of the landscape is expressed by the asymmetrical balance. The painter is a supporting character, in the shade, as he should be if the expanse of the scene is the idea behind the photo. The structure works for framing and being part of the balancing.
Good shot.

Reply
Page 1 of 2 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Photo Analysis
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.