Pigeon Point

[oktronic]

Hi,
I'm not sure if this is considered processed, but it does have some 20 control points to enchance the colors and contrast of the picture. The most difficult part of this picture was to have some detail and lighting on the light house, even though the bright sun is behind it. I think I handled that part well. The "original" size on flickr is 25% of the original.

Overall, I'm pleased with this picture but what can be done to make it even better?

Thanks for any input!



Exposure: 0.001 sec (1/2000)
Aperture: f/13
Focal Length: 105 mm
ISO Speed: 3200
Exposure Bias: 0/6 EV
ISO Speed: 3200

[sk66]

Nice Picture!
I think I'd want a little more fill on the buildings. The poles/wires/antenna are not helping and could be removed. There are a couple spots above the horizon left of the tower (birds?). And I think I'd get rid of anything in the foreground that is not a building (fence?), it might be ok if it was more apparent what it is...
There's a bit of noise in the pic even at the 25% size....I'd guess you had too boost the levels quite a bit.
This might have been a good choice for a mild HDR treatment just to get more fill.

[oktronic]

HI sk66,

Thanks for you comments!

Unfortunately, turning the RAW into jpeg and 25% seemed to cause the noise. The RAW image doesn't have the noise and is much more sharp
I can try to enhance the wall some to bring it out a little more, but I'm worried it might become more artificial if the light doesn't fall on it in a natural way. I did remove a couple of the birds that stuck out in the sunlight, but only because they were too intrusive. I'll try a few edits on the poles and wires, but generally i try to keep the things I see in the picture and just try to enhance the experience.

Thank you for you comments, they are very helpful!

[Midwest Sunset]

I like the shot, I think the composition is good but would agree with cleaning up some of the pole silhouettes. I think the coloring is good, more detail on the light would be nice... it's such a beautiful structure.

As far as the noise, some it can be removed again in processing. I am also fighting "noise" in my shots & have been shooting in RAW, not saving as jpeg until I've finished processing - this seems to help some but I'm leaning now towards needing a new memory card. I'm wondering if it's been saved over too much & is compromising the quality of my pics. Like recording on the same VHS tape over & over.

I just noticed your ISO speed, could this have been lowered? I'm finding that the higher I shoot the more I seem to fight the noise.

[sk66]

Originally Posted by oktronic

HI sk66,

Thanks for you comments!

Unfortunately, turning the RAW into jpeg and 25% seemed to cause the noise. The RAW image doesn't have the noise and is much more sharp
I can try to enhance the wall some to bring it out a little more, but I'm worried it might become more artificial if the light doesn't fall on it in a natural way. I did remove a couple of the birds that stuck out in the sunlight, but only because they were too intrusive. I'll try a few edits on the poles and wires, but generally i try to keep the things I see in the picture and just try to enhance the experience. So in effect, presenting an idealized image may more truly convey the experience of being there.

Thank you for you comments, they are very helpful!

Converting to Jpeg before editing should be avoided. Sharpening should be the last step (or nearly). The high ISO is the majority of the problem (lower the ISO and use a tripod). Also look at softening the "luminance" during sharpening...That is a large part of low light noise.

I understand wanting to keep pictures original...heavy editing can feel like cheating. However, reality keeps many images from being "great", and conveying the feeling of "being there" may be more fully realized by presenting an "optimized" picture. Most of us would never have noted the poles or the birds etc if we were there in person and just taking in the scene. In person one tends to "overview" the scene, in viewing pictures one tends to be much more detailed.

[oktronic]

oops, I didn't even notice the iso. I could have dropped it down some, easily 200 with that light. I didn't see any noise before turning it into a jpg. The original image doesn't have it. I always do my preprocessing in RAW and reduce as the last step, but maybe the noise is there and gets exaggerated in the compression. Ill look into that aswell and see if I can correct for it.
Thanks again for your comments!

[oktronic]

Ok, lets see if this is better, I worked this for a while and I think this is the best its going to get.
Please let me know what you think



Camera: Nikon D90
Exposure: 0.001 sec (1/2000)
Aperture: f/13
Focal Length: 105 mm
ISO Speed: 3200
Exposure Bias: 0/6 EV

[Nicole]

I actually like the noise in the first one rather than the smoothness of the second one. Maybe that's wrong, but the second one seems overly smooth to me. A little noise isn't always a bad thing. Overall, I do like the picture though. I like the colours and the near silhouette of the lighthouse.

[Midwest Sunset]

Well done! Now it's just a matter of taste - I prefer the second, probably simply because noise is still my nemisis so I like to see someone beat it. lol

[oktronic]

Thanks for everyone’s comments!

I asked some other people as well. Some like the noisy one, others like the other one. *shrug*. Everyone has their tastes.
In the end though, I think me forgetting to check the ISO before taking the picture caused the problem. Its not as apparent in the RAW pictures, but the noise is there when you scrutinize it. Sadly, I was in too much of a hurry and I always shoot in manual mode so my settings are in the state they were in the night before.
Oh well, its still a good picture in my book

Thanks again!