The Crystal City Mill is one of the most photographed places in Colorado. It is difficult to get a really good picture of it since it sits in a narrow canyon-it doesn't get good dawn or sunset light. I took this photo on a very overcast day, so I tried to frame it without much sky. Lizard Lake is a small lake on the way to Crystal City, I liked the reflections, so I took a shot. Anyway, I would love some feedback on composition, exposure, etc. Both shots were taken with a Canon T1i with Canon EF 17-85mm F4-5.6 lens.
P.S. It was never actually a mill, it was something of a power plant to produce compressed air to run mining equipment.
Crystal Mill-F/22, 0.5 sec, ISO 100
Lizard Lake-F13, 1/15 sec, ISO 400
One of my favorite areas. I usually ATV to Crystal from Crested Butte, via Gothic, Emerald Lake, and Schofield Pass.
Hi, might be good to crop both top and bottom. The little bit of sky doesn't add and detracts a little from the subject. At the bottom, the rocks intrude upon the subject of the photo with their light color and negligible interest. They are also out of focus, but you could leave a third of them in the pic. Indeed the slow shutter speed used without a tripod has put the whole scene out of focus. While you obviously wanted the water to look creamy, the structure and trees show that the camera moved. Your composition is good overall, however, so your "eye" is working just fine! Just make sure the main subject is sharp when it should be as in this case. You might want to make the vertical dimensions closer to what most monitors can encompass without the viewer having to scroll. Closer to 700 than to 800 px.
While this scene is attractive, it isn't really in good light when you took it. The colors are muted and the sky is uninteresting. You have a tilt to the left. The viewers eye is led into the picture by the trees making a "V" but there is no reward there, nothing to give interest. You weren't lucky this day with the light!
Nikonian72 wrote:
One of my favorite areas. I usually ATV to Crystal from Crested Butte, via Gothic, Emerald Lake, and Schofield Pass.
Wow, you are hard-core! I cheat and go in by way of Marble, the road is terrible, but it's only five miles. If you have some photos of the mill I would love to see them.
bigfootmm wrote:
Hi, might be good to crop both top and bottom. The little bit of sky doesn't add and detracts a little from the subject. At the bottom, the rocks intrude upon the subject of the photo with their light color and negligible interest. They are also out of focus, but you could leave a third of them in the pic. Indeed the slow shutter speed used without a tripod has put the whole scene out of focus. While you obviously wanted the water to look creamy, the structure and trees show that the camera moved. Your composition is good overall, however, so your "eye" is working just fine! Just make sure the main subject is sharp when it should be as in this case. You might want to make the vertical dimensions closer to what most monitors can encompass without the viewer having to scroll. Closer to 700 than to 800 px.
Hi, might be good to crop both top and bottom. The... (
show quote)
I have to disagree. What you would loose by cropping out the tree tops and the rocks at the bottom would far outweigh anything you would gain. The teqnique used here makes excellent use of the wide angle aspects of the lense rendering great focus from a few inches to infinity. I'm betting the focus was only set to around a few feet in manual and the camera was near to the ground, I would also be suprised if some sort of camera rest if not a tripod was used. I have to say that you must have better eyes then I do because the focus looks fine to me. The framing is excellent, the colors are vibrant, and the ribboning of the water is dead on. All in all a picture worthy of framing.
Thanks for the constructive criticism. I was actually using a tripod with mirror lock-up and for some reason it looks sharper at 100% in PS than it does here. However, I do agree it could be sharper.
bigfootmm wrote:
While this scene is attractive, it isn't really in good light when you took it. The colors are muted and the sky is uninteresting. You have a tilt to the left. The viewers eye is led into the picture by the trees making a "V" but there is no reward there, nothing to give interest. You weren't lucky this day with the light!
Nothing is wrong with the light, any further exposure would have completerly blown out the sky, which incidently has some nice interest. Placing the tree/water line in the center of the frame was exactly where I would have put it because the rule of thirds does not apply to reflected images. As for the "V" line of the trees they do lead the eye to the center of the picture but they do it in both the top and bottom, as well as intersecting all 4 power points forcing the eye to bounce back and take in the whole scene. Another excellent effort.
lizardworks wrote:
Thanks for the constructive criticism. I was actually using a tripod with mirror lock-up and for some reason it looks sharper at 100% in PS than it does here. However, I do agree it could be sharper.
If there is any loss in sharpness it is because pictures are rendered here at 96 dpi. There is a slight lens flare on the left side upper. These are nice pictures, it is evident that you put some thought into them, good work! :thumbup:
P.S. I like your friend in your icon :mrgreen:
evandr wrote:
lizardworks wrote:
Thanks for the constructive criticism. I was actually using a tripod with mirror lock-up and for some reason it looks sharper at 100% in PS than it does here. However, I do agree it could be sharper.
If there is any loss in sharpness it is because pictures are rendered here at 96 dpi. These are nice pictures, it is evident that you put some thought into them, good work! :thumbup:
P.S. I like your friend in your icon :mrgreen:
Thank you for the encouragement!
P.S. My little friend's name is Pancho :mrgreen:
lizardworks wrote:
evandr wrote:
lizardworks wrote:
Thanks for the constructive criticism. I was actually using a tripod with mirror lock-up and for some reason it looks sharper at 100% in PS than it does here. However, I do agree it could be sharper.
If there is any loss in sharpness it is because pictures are rendered here at 96 dpi. These are nice pictures, it is evident that you put some thought into them, good work! :thumbup:
P.S. I like your friend in your icon :mrgreen:
Thank you for the encouragement!
P.S. My little friend's name is Pancho :mrgreen:
quote=evandr quote=lizardworks Thanks for the co... (
show quote)
Your quite welcome. You have talent and a good eye so keep on shooting. Is that your eguana?
If I've ruffled your feathers let me know and I'll not say another word.
bigfootmm wrote:
If I've ruffled your feathers let me know and I'll not say another word.
Nonesence, you have an obvious talent and valued opinion, nobody said I am the last word in photography, far from it. I'm sure lizardworks will take it all in, digest bits and pieces from everyone and build her talent thereby, after all that is why we are here. I think you were seeing the picture that is contained within the picture and, considering that, your views are quite valid.
evandr wrote:
bigfootmm wrote:
If I've ruffled your feathers let me know and I'll not say another word.
Nonesence, you have an obvious talent and valued opinion, nobody said I am the last word in photography, far from it. I'm sure lizardworks will take it all in, digest bits and pieces from everyone and build her talent thereby, after all that is why we are here. I think you were seeing the picture that is contained within the picture and, considering that, your views are quite valid.
I appreciate hearing both of your opinions. Not too worry, my feelings aren't hurt. I wanted honest opinions and I got some. Both of you gave me some very detailed reasons why you liked my shots or didn't and that is what really helps a photographer improve. Thanks again!
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.