Autumn along the upper Delaware
Dec 3, 2017 12:59:58 #
This pano was made from 4 stitched images using a 50mm lens at f/11, 1/500, ISO 500. Hand held. This was made last year, this year the color was AWOL.
Please download
Please download
Dec 4, 2017 00:48:48 #
Nice job Rich. Did you shoot with the camera horizontal or vertical? Color here in Dutchess County, NY was not good this year either.
Dec 4, 2017 05:41:52 #
Rich1939 wrote:
This pano was made from 4 stitched images using a 50mm lens at f/11, 1/500, ISO 500. Hand held. This was made last year, this year the color was AWOL.
Please download
Please download
The composition is very nice. However, if you look at the bottom right hand and upper left hand corners, there is a noticeable amount of cloning repetition. Along the top edge, just right of center, there is evidence of a poor merge. To my eye, contrast and saturation seem a little too "hot" - the sky is never that color blue, and the detail seems a little "crunchy" -
Did you process the images before merging? Did you shoot these as raw?
I don't usually offer unsolicited critique on forums, but I think this forum is a little different. When I post an image here, I expect critique. It will make me a better photographer. . .
Dec 4, 2017 09:03:15 #
Gene51 wrote:
The composition is very nice. However, if you look... (show quote)
I absolutely appreciate honest critique, particularly regarding color! I know I have a problem with that (AMD) so your input more than welcome.
To answer your questions, no and yes. The cloning stuff has me puzzled as I don't know why I would have done that.
Dec 5, 2017 21:13:27 #
Rich1939 wrote:
I absolutely appreciate honest critique, particularly regarding color! I know I have a problem with that (AMD) so your input more than welcome.
To answer your questions, no and yes. The cloning stuff has me puzzled as I don't know why I would have done that.
To answer your questions, no and yes. The cloning stuff has me puzzled as I don't know why I would have done that.
Ah, I often process images with a corresponding beverage alongside my keyboard. Could it have been a case of the beverage making editing decisions on your behalf? If not, I would certainly place the blame on them in any case.
Shooting raw is good, btw. I have not shot jpeg since 2006, and haven't missed it at all. I occasionally get student work that comes to me as jpeg, and I find it so confining to try and address simple issues without causing harm to the image.
Dec 5, 2017 21:41:31 #
Gene51 wrote:
Ah, I often process images with a corresponding beverage alongside my keyboard. Could it have been a case of the beverage making editing decisions on your behalf? If not, I would certainly place the blame on them in any case.
Shooting raw is good, btw. I have not shot jpeg since 2006, and haven't missed it at all. I occasionally get student work that comes to me as jpeg, and I find it so confining to try and address simple issues without causing harm to the image.
Shooting raw is good, btw. I have not shot jpeg since 2006, and haven't missed it at all. I occasionally get student work that comes to me as jpeg, and I find it so confining to try and address simple issues without causing harm to the image.
The Buffalo (Trace) has been known to share my office with me . I agree .jpg is mostly for web distribution.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.