This is my first post on fstoppers. I've been reading the site and watching the videos for a while and have finally decided to actively participate in the community.
Recently, I spent two weeks exploring New Zealand and was excited to utilize all that i've learned from fstoppers on this trip. The first (and likely best) shot from that trip is attached. I've seen other similar compositions of this shot online, but i was the only one shooting here at sunset, so it can't be a terribly popular place to shoot.
I should probably say that this image was one of my first attempts at a composite. It's a pretty basic composite, though--I pieced together two shots that were taken about 3 minutes apart. One was a 20 second exposure for the water and the other was the best sky from the 90 minutes i was shooting.
I have one other version of the image that has a photographer shooting his model-looking girlfriend at the edge of the water in it. I thought the presence of those two people made the shot more interesting but others i showed the image to could barely tell there were people in the shot (because they were so small in the image), so i have chosen to upload the people-less one here. I can add the one with people it in if anyone wants to see it.
I'm curious what people think. Is there anything glaringly wrong with it? Is there anything i should have done differently? Would it be better with a human or two in it? etc. I'm interested in any and all comments.
Thanks!
A great start, Rich! It's an appealing image, and you clearly had a vision you wanted to convey. To paraphrase Ansel Adams - nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept. I think the lighting is beautiful, and it all looks natural, not like a comp. I particularly like the way you show the light on the underside of the arch.
I think people in it would immediately diminish the image for me, and make me think of tourist brochures. In fact, the heavily footprinted sand reminds me too much of human presence already, but not much you could do about that.
It looks like a difficult scene to get an ideal composition; to my eye, the tip of the big pale rock is a bit too close to the arch. Perhaps I'd have moved a little further in. In fact, I think I'd like a shot of the distant scene, without the arch, interesting though that is in itself.
Post more! You're off to an excellent start, with good technique and your own vision.
My biggest issues were the footprints in the sand and that the cave part was over exposed (relative to expectation). I experimented with a more silhouetted cave, but i found it to be more boring, and despite the fact that i had to bump the exposure on the cave portion, this is actually closer to how it looked to the naked eye. I could see some detail in the cave during the 90 or so minutes i was camped out in there.
I agree about location of the tip of the big sea stack relative to the cave. this was my first and only time (so far) at this location, and i had just arrived in town about two hours before sunset, so i didn't have a ton of time to experiment with other compositions. The others i did try each had something that i liked less than the one that i ultimately went with, but I'm sure with more time, there is a better version of the composition i ended up going with.
It’s a rather solid image. I’m on my phone, so I can’t be 100% certain, but there appears to be some kind of lighting issue going on with the shrub/bush/greenery on the top right side of the cave. Did you perhaps use a local tool to raise the exposure of that?
You're right, Jordan! That overhanging bush sits in a slightly paler halo of sky. From my own experience, I suspect it developed during global contrast adjustments. At this point, it could be fixed by gently burning in the highlights in the area.
(Chris - I want to give some feedback but I literally know nothing about this type of work so if this is off base, tell me so Rich doesn't get crazy feedback.)
Hi Rich - This is really beautiful. I love the color and composition. My feedback is more about compositing in landscapes in general. I want to mention the reason I don't like them so that, if this is your interest, this is a touch point to check on as you move forward. This is only relevant if your goal is to produce a landscape that you want people to believe is real (could have been a single shot photograph)
In my experience, the lighting is never right in this type of work and it always catches my eye and "composite" comes to mind. For examples, in this image, the sun is low and left. There couldn't be light on the left roof of the cave. There would be a sunshine glow around the edge of the rock in the water because it would be significantly darker on the back than the front and it would have a long shadow from the low sun. And I believe the water would be lighter on the sun side, not the darkening side of the sea.
So when I look at this, I think it is a beautiful piece of artwork but I don't think of it as a landscape photograph. Since this is your first attempt at compositing (which again, is not my thing) I thought this might be helpful. However, I may be totally off base and will trust my friends here to educate me about that.
Best wishes!
Perhaps, for the education of all of us, Rich could post his basic two images (you can add these under your original post at any later time, Rich). As they were only 3 min apart, the position of the sun would be essentially the same, though obviously not the lighting.
Confession: so far, I have never combined mutliple exposures in any way - HDR, pano, comp or focus stack. And I've stopped using neutral graduated-density filters. This is partly because the results often look unsatisfying and unnatural. (Largely, it's because of the tedium, even for meticulous me.) The latter is a moot point - nothing natural about a vignette either, but I'll usually apply a discreet one. But some things just catch my eye and say "fake" to me, distracting me from pleasurable immersion in an image.
In the case of Rich's image, I really don't think I'd have reacted like this, or wondered about combining multiple exposures. I suspect much of what you've noticed reflects post-processing generally. (Like that halo.) What you say makes sense, but the original images should be illuminating, if Rich is happy to give away his secrets this way!
Thanks for the feedback--
I mostly do single shot landscapes and have resisted combining multiple exposures for the reasons Ruth mentioned (mainly it doesn't feel authentic to me), but in this case i didn't like how the sky turned out in the 20 second exposure (but loved the water in that shot!)--so i figured i would experiment with compositing to get the image i wanted.
For what it's worth, the sea stacks and the sky were from the same image, so the lighting on them is the same.
I will have to look at the water in both shots in detail, but i don't remember any shadow differences between the two shots.
In this shot, there is a subtle gold highlight from the sky on the edge of the wave near the big rock that i ended up keeping from the sky image to make the water and sky look more proper together.
I will try to post the original two images today.
Hey Rich - Just to be clear - I think you did a great job making a beautiful image here. I don't want my comments to bring that down!
Just to see if I am totally off base, I played with the three things I mention about to see what happens. In this image I darkened the cave, took the bright blue off the right edge of the water where it seemed to glow too much for being on the side away from the sun and put a tiny glow on the butte.
Maybe this helps or maybe not. I'm an abstract photographer so please take this as from someone interested but not an expert by any means.
;)
Chris Jablonski & Jordan McChesney -- I definitely noticed the haloing on that overhanging bush when compositing. I am pretty sure it came about when I was post processing the sky image. I tried to just get rid of that bush altogether, but my photoshop skills are not good enough for that yet. I will look into burning in the highlights in that area.
Good commentary here. But all I can say about the capture is ..... I like it regardless of how it was produced. I love the composition and would very much like to be on that beach.
Late to the party, but what a wonderful first post. I often think it's better to not indicate how an image is taken in the initial posting as it can influence the critique.
I would also stress that the following is my opinion and I may not have the same feelings as others and definitely not the emotional connection you have with this image.
My first impression without reading other comments is that this is a well-composed image. the stacks are wonderfully framed by the cave, positioned well and the sky is beautiful.
The composite works well - I think using a single LE would not have worked with that sky (although results may have been interesting).
The one thing that catches my eye is the exposure on the inner cave. The roof/walls/base should be darker as you travel from the cave entrance. You may have started this but I'd take a little further. I think a series of judicious grad filters might help make this more realistic.
Overall a great image and one to be proud of.
I agree with most of the comments here. I think it is a good image, well composed and with nice colors. One thing that strikes me (someone already mentioned) is that there seems to be too much light inside the cave. I think it would benefit from some darkening and a touch of dodging to highlight some of the reflected ambient light. Also, there is a halo between the cave and the sky. Personally, I don't have anything against blending multiple shots (I personally do a lot of exposure blending, focus stacking, and even perspective and focal length blending) as long as the result is pleasing, and I think you did a great job here. Thanks for sharing.
It is good !
I would have moved in closer and maybe waited a bit more for a more saturated dramatic sky..
Note this ... an art director looks at a picture in a second like flash and says yes or no. They do not study images and produce a long text on this that and the other thing.
Many in this group should shoot more and critique or assult less.
The first 3 words i said is the bottom line !
Hey El Pic - you may want to go easy on the comments attacking others.... if a poster asks for opinions and feedback it should not be a surprise when the community responds.
As far as I'm concerned if that feedback is sincere and well-meant then it is helpful to both the artist and other readers. We all look to improve and should be grateful for the time spent by others for their review.
I believe we all understand that art and resultant feedback is subjective, and it is up to the artist to use or not to suit their own artistic direction.
No attack intended to you or them. We each contribute in our own way. If you want to be brief, be brief. If you want to be long-winded, be long-winded. It is really only the person who submitted the original post who should be pleased or upset by the feedback. I don't comment on yours because you don't seem to want it, in order to respect your interests. I don't think you should worry about the detail given by other people on other's posts. Hopefully the people here are well meaning. I am.