Ugly Hedgehog - Photography
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Photo Analysis
What can be done with this picture?
Page <<first <prev 3 of 4 next>
Sep 28, 2022 16:14:59   #
joecichjr Loc: Chicago S. Suburbs, Illinois, USA
 
profbowman wrote:
Here are a few ideas I had (some others have given similar suggestions already), but they are mostly personal taste except for the first couple of composition changes.

1. There is too much black cloud color at the top and too little building silhouette at the bottom. I suggest you put back the bottom you cut off and then cut more of the top.

2. Then cut the final photo to follow the suggestion of 2/3 rule, which is not a rule but which would help you composition in this case.

3. To me, you have too much contrast which makes the photo really dismal and hides some details in the shadows. In the photo attached, I reduced the contrast by 60 in IrfanView, which is a lot.

4. Just in case there was some noise in the original post of this i mage or my adjusts revealed any noise, I applied a 67 of plain Blur in IrfanView which is the same as de-noising in some other programs.

5. After changing the contrast, I sharpened the photo which is often needed after de-noising and changing the contrast.

6. Then I applied the smallest amount of Median filter (3) in IrfanView which helps to reduce any artificial artifacts. A bit of sharpening is usually necessary after this.

7. To me, there is very little color in the image, so I thought that making a black-and-white image by changing it to grayscale would have more punch. So the attached image is b&w.

Be challenged and intrigued by taking more photos and working with them. Hold off on direct sun photos which can be very hard to work with after taking. --Richard
Here are a few ideas I had (some others have given... (show quote)


Outstanding 🖤🍺🖤🍺🖤

Reply
Sep 29, 2022 00:57:04   #
gener202002
 
Seabastes wrote:
I think you may be overconcerned about this particular image.

Only advice have is keep submitting and shoot what you love and keep the lowsest ISO you can to keep noise from effecting your image. I would suggest that over sharpening images is to be avoided.

Curious as to what agencies you are with. I am with Getty and Alamy.

Please send me a private message and I will give you my image sites on these agencies. I would be happy to look at your images as well. I am retired but have been a professional stock shooter since 1970.
I think you may be overconcerned about this parti... (show quote)


Hello Seabastes.

I didn't see this response for sometime, until now in fact. I will send you a message

Reply
Apr 2, 2023 14:52:17   #
Powergroove75 Loc: Coeur d'Alene, ID
 
My 2 cents.

There's nothing interesting in this photo.
No clear subject
Way too much negative space
Over processed.

For me it is almost all due to no composition of the photo.

Reply
 
 
Apr 4, 2023 21:11:24   #
usnret Loc: Woodhull Il
 
To be honest with you, I don't see anything in your photograph that made it worth taking.

Reply
May 5, 2023 17:50:22   #
DanielB Loc: San Diego, Ca
 
Grahame wrote:
It looks overprocessed to me.

There's some strange things going on at what looks like a light at bottom 1/4 from the left, and also trees bottom right.


I see it also. Looks like a masking issue on both objects. Lamp post should go away for sure. The tree ghosting is a different problem. It would be nice to see the original.

Reply
May 5, 2023 18:38:37   #
gener202002
 
DanielB wrote:
I see it also. Looks like a masking issue on both objects. Lamp post should go away for sure. The tree ghosting is a different problem. It would be nice to see the original.



It's been a long time relatively, since I took this photo and I don't know where I have placed it.

Some have talked of Topaz sharpening and noise reduction, and I have tried it on a sampling basis. The latest version of LR has a new noise reduction program in it that I find quite useful. Maybe I will put out a picture here of the results of using that. I do find, however, that any sharpening at all creates a white fringe around pictures taken in the evening sunset, even if I use masking. But sharpening often doesn't seem necessary anymore with the types of pictures I have been taking, especially sunset pictures. I have been planning on doing photostacking and never got around to it. When I do I think that will really help. But the picture I put out here wasn't meant to show off some beautiful evening, just something to get some photo analysis feedback on.

The following is a photo I took recently of a sunset in which I used the new LR noise reduction and I think it came out pretty good. It may or may not be of any interest to anyone though. Hopefully some will like it.


(Download)

Reply
May 15, 2023 11:28:55   #
photosfromtexas
 
1) As someone mentioned, proof/tune your photo on what the “agency” is using for choosing what they buy. TV monitors are made for motion, not still photos. They generate a lot of funky colors that are not there in your photo. I assume agencies review on a computer monitor. 2) I am looking at your photo on an iPhone. Here I se a lot artifacts from over-sharpening: a) the dark band around the lamp post b) the white linear halos along the margins of the buildings and the windows, c) the lighter sky seen thru the trees. All are from over sharpening and remember that the new “noise reduction” apps, whether in LR, Topaz AI, or On1 NoNoise all sharpen the edges ( without telling you) when they “reduce” noise. And at the end, they change to exposure and colors automatically to make it look better. But they do this to areas they have selected automatically. And they repeatedly choose to not select the space between the branches between trees. That is why trees often come out funky.
But the big question has been asked by others: did bou need to sharpen at all ( beyond what Noise Reduction programs do)?
The answer, in this photo is: No. Clouds normally fade off at the edges. No need to sharpen a sky! (Admittedly, you might want to change the contrast, highlights or shadows in the sky, cut even that can occasionally cause halos or fringing…. So look at all parts of your photo at 100% magnification for these every time you make any change!)
You asked for opinions, hope this is to too much.

Reply
 
 
May 19, 2023 01:24:26   #
gener202002
 
photosfromtexas wrote:
1) As someone mentioned, proof/tune your photo on what the “agency” is using for choosing what they buy. TV monitors are made for motion, not still photos. They generate a lot of funky colors that are not there in your photo. I assume agencies review on a computer monitor. 2) I am looking at your photo on an iPhone. Here I se a lot artifacts from over-sharpening: a) the dark band around the lamp post b) the white linear halos along the margins of the buildings and the windows, c) the lighter sky seen thru the trees. All are from over sharpening and remember that the new “noise reduction” apps, whether in LR, Topaz AI, or On1 NoNoise all sharpen the edges ( without telling you) when they “reduce” noise. And at the end, they change to exposure and colors automatically to make it look better. But they do this to areas they have selected automatically. And they repeatedly choose to not select the space between the branches between trees. That is why trees often come out funky.
But the big question has been asked by others: did bou need to sharpen at all ( beyond what Noise Reduction programs do)?
The answer, in this photo is: No. Clouds normally fade off at the edges. No need to sharpen a sky! (Admittedly, you might want to change the contrast, highlights or shadows in the sky, cut even that can occasionally cause halos or fringing…. So look at all parts of your photo at 100% magnification for these every time you make any change!)
You asked for opinions, hope this is to too much.
1) As someone mentioned, proof/tune your photo on ... (show quote)



thanks, photosfromtexas

Yes, I have gotten away from sharpening a lot in my pictures, and I don't remember exactly what I did with this. I have found that sharpening almost always leaves a white fringe. I will still do it if the picture needs it. But more than often, they don't. I have found that even masking or other tricks do not solve the problem. And yes, clouds do not need to be sharpened. Occasionally, I might use a high pass filter for sharpening. Lightroom has recently introduced an ai noise reduction program that I find very useful. Not the same as sharpening at all. But it seems to me to do a very good job of noise reduction. That is usually a much bigger problem for me than sharpening. If the fringing is not too bad then it can be cleaned up to a certain extent with a clone healing tool, but best not to work with it at all, unless really necessary.

Thanks for the input

Reply
May 21, 2023 15:45:29   #
freediver808 Loc: Hawaii
 
Although I like the dramatic sky and rays of light a lot my eye is drawn to large overexposed sun . Sky looks over processed ( over - dehaze ?) It will be helpful to see your SOOC and settings .

Reply
Jun 1, 2023 10:36:51   #
Bill Gordon
 
gener202002 wrote:
Hello everyone

I am not a professional photographer, and have a lot to learn. That being said, I have sold a number of pictures over the last years by being lucky. But I have been having more problems than usual lately, and while I have a pretty good average of my pictures accepted by photo agencies, more lately have been not accepted than in the past. I have taken a much more critical look at my pictures lately, and am not happy with them. I feel it is time I learned to step up to a new level. Lately, the pictures have seemed noisier than usual, need more sharpening, which seems to increase noise, and when viewed on a 70 inch tv at 100% I see some color fringing, usually white or grey, around the limbs of trees and such. I am using a mirrorless camera with a professional 24-105 lens. I never used to notice this, but I do now. Getting rid of that fringe could take me a lot of time if I could do it at all. Especially around numerous tree branches. I am submitting a picture that I hope that those who have the time can give me severe criticism of the following picture, and/or suggestions for improvement. I realize that that does take time for people to do, and I do appreciate it.

Anyway, I wonder what criticisms can be thrown at this particular picture. It looks much brighter on my tv than on my pc, so I have darkened it some. I have, to a small amount decolored it as well, but not too much. I also cropped in on the bottom just a little due to a wall I thought was just a little distracting.

Any help would be appreciated.
Hello everyone br br I am not a professional phot... (show quote)


More fundamentally, I don't understand exactly what this image is showing me. Is this a rising ramp to the sun? Please explain. Until I know that, it's hard to judge anything else. But then, why bother. It's a non-starter for me.

Reply
Jul 25, 2023 21:36:46   #
usnret Loc: Woodhull Il
 
I'm curious to know what you like about the picture.

Reply
 
 
Jul 26, 2023 13:58:47   #
gener202002
 
usnret wrote:
I'm curious to know what you like about the picture.


I liked the sky. This is a colored sky though, not the original. Since I can't get out to take great landscape photos, I do this, but not anymore. I have a lot of pictures out available on stock agencies, and several of them sell. But I am not able to get out anymore to take good pictures. I just wanted to know if the sky was overdone, wrong color, or whatever. As some have said, it is a non starter, so I am not doing anymore of this, except may ocassionally put one of my best pictures out here.

Reply
Dec 24, 2023 10:45:50   #
Leinik Loc: Rochester NY
 
Who would need this photograph? For what purpose? The overexposure of the light rays and the not-so-strong composition makes the image look as if it could be taken by anyone with a cell-phone as a simple snapshot of the moment. In order to sell with today's competition you need to establish your own style and not just photograph stuff unless the stuff is really unusual or unique and creates a real surprise and/or teaches something new.

Reply
Dec 24, 2023 17:56:43   #
JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco
 
Leinik wrote:
Who would need this photograph? For what purpose? The overexposure of the light rays and the not-so-strong composition makes the image look as if it could be taken by anyone with a cell-phone as a simple snapshot of the moment. In order to sell with today's competition you need to establish your own style and not just photograph stuff unless the stuff is really unusual or unique and creates a real surprise and/or teaches something new.


The OP lead off with "I am not a professional photographer", and you are advising him how to sell with today's competition. It looks like you are going through and dragging up old threads with plenty of responses, and making irrelevant posts.

Reply
Dec 24, 2023 22:38:32   #
Leinik Loc: Rochester NY
 
What the instigator of this thread then wrote was: "I have sold a number of pictures over the last years by being lucky. But I have been having more problems than usual lately, and while I have a pretty good average of my pictures accepted by photo agencies, more lately have been not accepted than in the past."
Speaking of irrelevance, next time, before commenting on comment in a totally irrelevant fashion and not bringing anything to the conversation, make sure you read the whole tread and you actually understand it.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 3 of 4 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
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.