Sunrise Wed 19 Nov 08 for c&c

democrates

From Shankill this morning. It was cooooold.

~1~


~2~


~3~


~4~


Numbering system stolen from LPearse

Isar

The third one is my fav, think it would make a lovely black and white photograph. I'm personally not a big fan of those warm colours.

Morrisseeee

1st one for me.......it really shows what I saw this morning, great red/yellow color

AnCatDubh

I love the second one even though the focus is quite soft. It like something that would look well on canvas. The colouring in 1,2 and 3 is great. 4 is bland in my opinion - there is little in terms of contrast in the image particularly compared to the first 3 which have probably just spoiled my viewing eye Nice work overall.

superflyninja

first third n fourth get my vote

PaulieC

+1 for the third and keep the colours, although they could probably stand to be muted somewhat. The textures and shapes are amazing

jackdaw

Number 3 for me aswell .. excellent shot..

PonderStibbons

Love the third one - great to see so many textures in a detail shot: the sea, the sand and the stones! Great colours too of course!

smelltheglove

Exactly as ponder says above

feileacan

Number 1 is stunning but were the colours really that intense? Methinks someone was playing with the saturation levels.

I agree with everyone else, #3 is lush. Great contrasts, colours and textures.

SuprSi

#3 for me - made me look twice as I couldn't figure out whether it was a landscape or a close-up of a beach!!

Dades

1 & 3 for me.

#1 is a bit dark but I love the potential of trouble in those clouds!

djd80

Number 1 is the best for me...would like to see it with the darker top part of the clouds cropped out

fluffyVW

Number 1 is beautiful!!!
And number 3 is just wow!!! I love it!!! And keep the colours!!!

democrates

Thanks for all the feedback folks, much appreciated.

This is probably only of interest to other L-plates but there's a confession about #4 for superflyninja in particular.

#1 was with the sigma 10-20 at 10, -2 stops to prevent blow-out in the area where the sun was about to rise, -1 would probably have been ok technically but I just liked the dramatic look of it when I saw it.

#2 taken with the 70-200 + 2x extender so 400mm, x 1.6 for the 450d sensor is 640mm equiv, but it was a crop 1024px wide from the 4272px wide shot so x 4.17 = 2,503mm equivalent (small birds, far away birds ). That and my crap old tripod that suffers dropsy under weight (have a great new head but no proper legs yet) certainly made that a fairly soft one. Also, would I be right in calling that red fringe under the birdys wings a bit of the ca the lens is noted for rather than reflection?

#3 was taken the same as #2 but is not so savagely cropped. The only reason I spotted that oppertunity was trying to pan after a seagull (and failing miserably) when the composition just jumped through the viewfinder, pure luck. I still can't believe the colours we got this morning.

#4 taken as #2 and #3, the little feck flew off just when the 2sec timer started for the half second exposure, but at least I'd a shot of him at 1/250th so later in Gimp I copied him back into the long exposure where he should have waited.
I accept any flak for this and apologies for not explaining the pp up front, but it's only dawned on me in writing this that it would be really unfair not to point out that particular type of pp. Maybe those gulls never stand still for half a second that one sure looked caffeinated, or the wind would blow their feathers and there'd be blur instead of 250th sharpness, all I can say for certain is that I wasn't lucky or skillful enough to get a single shot as appears above, for all I know it could be a wild goose chase to try and replicate.
Anyway yes the final image is very grey and lacks contrast ok, so a bit of a turn off for most and maybe tweaking those settings and cropping tighter would help a bit. Since I'd left the colours and contrast on the other three as per the original exposures I left them alone on this one too, I still kind of like it as it is for the bleakness or something, can't quite put my finger on it.

Anyway thanks again for the feedback.

l pearse

Stunning, So drawn to the third shot.....it really pulls you in, love lt

Linda

superflyninja

democrates wrote: »

Thanks for all the feedback folks, much appreciated.

This is probably only of interest to other L-plates but there's a confession about #4 for superflyninja in particular.

#1 was with the sigma 10-20 at 10, -2 stops to prevent blow-out in the area where the sun was about to rise, -1 would probably have been ok technically but I just liked the dramatic look of it when I saw it.

#2 taken with the 70-200 + 2x extender so 400mm, x 1.6 for the 450d sensor is 640mm equiv, but it was a crop 1024px wide from the 4272px wide shot so x 4.17 = 2,503mm equivalent (small birds, far away birds ). That and my crap old tripod that suffers dropsy under weight (have a great new head but no proper legs yet) certainly made that a fairly soft one. Also, would I be right in calling that red fringe under the birdys wings a bit of the ca the lens is noted for rather than reflection?

#3 was taken the same as #2 but is not so savagely cropped. The only reason I spotted that oppertunity was trying to pan after a seagull (and failing miserably) when the composition just jumped through the viewfinder, pure luck. I still can't believe the colours we got this morning.

#4 taken as #2 and #3, the little feck flew off just when the 2sec timer started for the half second exposure, but at least I'd a shot of him at 1/250th so later in Gimp I copied him back into the long exposure where he should have waited.
I accept any flak for this and apologies for not explaining the pp up front, but it's only dawned on me in writing this that it would be really unfair not to point out that particular type of pp. Maybe those gulls never stand still for half a second that one sure looked caffeinated, or the wind would blow their feathers and there'd be blur instead of 250th sharpness, all I can say for certain is that I wasn't lucky or skillful enough to get a single shot as appears above, for all I know it could be a wild goose chase to try and replicate.
Anyway yes the final image is very grey and lacks contrast ok, so a bit of a turn off for most and maybe tweaking those settings and cropping tighter would help a bit. Since I'd left the colours and contrast on the other three as per the original exposures I left them alone on this one too, I still kind of like it as it is for the bleakness or something, can't quite put my finger on it.

Anyway thanks again for the feedback.

Ill forgive you just this once ;p

democrates

feileacan wrote: »

Number 1 is stunning but were the colours really that intense? Methinks someone was playing with the saturation levels.

I agree with everyone else, #3 is lush. Great contrasts, colours and textures.

Thanks a mil and the same again to everyone else.

It's just as well you asked about #1, though I didn't go near the sat or contrast in pp, I just fell downstairs and confirmed that the hoya cpl is on the sigma, I forgot that was there from the previous shoot (it's screwed on better than my head). By accident then this is the first time I've seen just what a difference it makes to bring out the pre-dawn colours, also that shot was -2 stops (1/50s@f6.3).

If I'm lucky someone else will have a cpl shot from this morning to confirm, I can't blaming you for raising an eyebrow at that result, it's exactly what I'd think.

Borderfox

Number 3 for me, the others have potential but fall a bit short of 3