Seascape - Abyss

[conranj]

I'm a newbie to DPS and Would love to get your critiques on my photo.
i.e - what I could do better, aperture detailing, etc.


Shot at Terrigal Beach, Australia at sunrise.

Nikon D90
Exposure: 1/100 sec
f-stop f/3.5
ISO - 200
aperture: 3.6
No flash
hand held manual mode

B&W conversion:

[Hill Country Hack]

Welcome to DPS. As per the forum rules one is supposed to ask a specific question. You may get a better response that way. Another hint is to post the photo directly on the page. There is a tutorial on how to do that using flickr.

Now to the image. Nice capture. Was this a B&W conversion? I feel it is too dark as I am wanting to better see the reflection of the stone in the sand. Otherwise I enjoy the composition.

Was there a specific reason you chose such a wide apeture and fast shutter speed? If not, landscapes are typically shot at f8-f11 to yield the maximum DOF from front to back. This will slow the shutter, therefore a tripod is pretty much a must.

I would like to see some color in the sky if it was there. Having said that, I do like a nice B&W.

Hopefully others will chime in and give you better feedback than I can provide. I do not know your skill level so it's my bad if I overstepped with the helpful tips.

[conranj]

Thanks. I will get around to looking up at the rules. I did however enquire for a general critique.

You are correct, it is a B&W conversion in photoshop. As to your question I am probably deemed an intermediate photographer but am still learning what ratios and apertures etc are best for what -- which your information helped with greatly -- I usually choose my aperture and shutter on what I feel works for the lighting and effect I want. I will upload the colour version for you

[wal]

Nice on the BNW conversion. But my first thought was that the overall exposure was too dark.. the shadows and black area infront of the boulder don't do much for this scene. Perhaps recomposing the shot or taking the scene at a different perspective.

[Krusty79]

Did you use f/3.5 so you could shoot it hand held? Usually, you want more DOF in landscapes and most lenses are sharpest around f/8. You really need a tripod to do these types of shots right. I would suggest f/11 as a good starting point for landscapes.

The relatively bright sky has caused the darker rocks to be underexposed so there is no detail. If you had a tripod, you could have bracketed your shots. You could then blend one exposure for the sky and one for the ground using a layer mask. I do not like the B&W version as much because there is almost no detail in large parts of the image.

I think both versions could benefit from some foreground interest, but to get the foreground and sky exposed correctly, you're going to have to do the exposure blend and/or get a strong graduated neutral density filter. You are shooting at a good time of day, though.

[conranj]

Originally Posted by Krusty79

Did you use f/3.5 so you could shoot it hand held? Usually, you want more DOF in landscapes and most lenses are sharpest around f/8. You really need a tripod to do these types of shots right. I would suggest f/11 as a good starting point for landscapes.

The relatively bright sky has caused the darker rocks to be underexposed so there is no detail. If you had a tripod, you could have bracketed your shots. You could then blend one exposure for the sky and one for the ground using a layer mask. I do not like the B&W version as much because there is almost no detail in large parts of the image.

I think both versions could benefit from some foreground interest, but to get the foreground and sky exposed correctly, you're going to have to do the exposure blend and/or get a strong graduated neutral density filter. You are shooting at a good time of day, though.

Yes, I shot in the 3.5 so I could shooot hand held and your observations are all really helpful to me, thank you.

Thanks to the others as well.

[crockny]

I much prefer the color version. Did you shoot in RAW? If so you could add some fill light to get more detail in the rock and rock shadow ... I like the composition ...

[conranj]

No I didn't shoot in RAW, I haven't had the time to experiment with it or photoshop enough to fully utilise it. But thanks, that does make sense.

[Markel253]

Welcome to DPS, from another relative newcomer.

I like the B&W conversion as it stands. I like the symmetry of the fade from dark to lighter coming both from the top and the bottom. And I love the small moon in the sky, breaking up the solid dark. I like the fact that the brightest band is just below the center of the photo, but does not go completely across. For me, the overall silhouette look works, and I don't want to see more detail. The B&W photo does work for me.

Having said that - with this particular photo, even though I do like the B&W version, I like the color version even better. The blues are quite spectacular, and so well set off by the little bit of orange sunset and the brighter water.

Works both ways in my opinion.

[conranj]

Originally Posted by Markel253

Welcome to DPS, from another relative newcomer.

I like the B&W conversion as it stands. I like the symmetry of the fade from dark to lighter coming both from the top and the bottom. And I love the small moon in the sky, breaking up the solid dark. I like the fact that the brightest band is just below the center of the photo, but does not go completely across. For me, the overall silhouette look works, and I don't want to see more detail. The B&W photo does work for me.

Having said that - with this particular photo, even though I do like the B&W version, I like the color version even better. The blues are quite spectacular, and so well set off by the little bit of orange sunset and the brighter water.

Works both ways in my opinion.

Thank You very much