«

"tony cooper" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Sun, 18 Dec 2011 23:34:15 -0000, "J" <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Pete A" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>news:2011121605132358153-pete3attkins@nospamntlworldcom...
>>> On 2011-12-15 22:40:07 +0000, tony cooper said:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 20:41:50 -0000, "J" <(E-Mail Removed)>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> These are some shots I took at night...'in the pitch-black really! My
>>>>> first
>>>>> attempts at this kind of photography, so any critique would be
>>>>> welcome.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.pbase.com/fred/photos
>>>>>
>>>> Overall, you've done a good job. You've asked for critique, though,
>>>> so here goes:
>>>>
>>>> You tend to center your images. Image 1, 2, 3, 7, and 8 are all
>>>> centered. Try some with more water and less sky or more sky and less
>>>> water.
>>>>
>>>> Horizons should be level unless there's some special effect, and
>>>> special effects seldom work.
>>>>
>>>> I'd take 5 and 6 out of the series. They don't work. At all.
>>>>
>>>> Try to get PeteA to comment. He does some very similar stuff of a
>>>> seaport town in the UK.
>>>
>>> OK, you've twisted my arm. Here are my comments about night shots that
>>> include water.
>>>
>>> I agree with Tony that centred horizons don't often work, especially in
>>> a
>>> sequence of three or more shots. When taking wide-angle shots, I centre
>>> the horizon to prevent converging verticals (I don't have keystone
>>> correction software), then I crop the image to de-centre it.
>>>
>>> I take meticulous care over horizontal levelling. This can be
>>> problematic
>>> because certain optical illusions cause a perfectly level horizon to
>>> appear skewed - when this happens I may decide to forgo exactness and
>>> rotate the image slightly to make it appear level.
>>>
>>> There is no "correct" colour balance so it's a case of artistic
>>> impression.
>>>
>>> And finally, I have to mention the somewhat thorny subject of image
>>> presentation, specifically, the surrounding frame/border/background. I
>>> think J's images are spoilt by their white borders. The correct choice
>>> of
>>> surround is particularly important with this type of photography because
>>> it controls "the crispening effect in luminance and colour" The effect
>>> on
>>> luminance is illustrated in Figure 8.3 near the bottom of this Web page:
>>>
>>> <http://www.huevaluechroma.com/081.php>
>>>
>>> and the effect on colour is shown on the next page - I had to prove to
>>> myself that blocks A and D are exactly the same colour before I could
>>> believe it:
>>>
>>> <http://www.huevaluechroma.com/082.php>
>>>
>>> Enjoy.
>>
>>
>>
>>Made some changes to my photos.....
>>
>>http://www.pbase.com/fred/photos__adjusted
>>
>>Hope these look more 'pro'.
>>
>
> I think you've done a good job of cropping to present the images
> better than they were originally.
>
> Image #5 is a problem image, though. The scene is interesting and
> well-worth photographing, but this version just doesn't work. That
> mass of darkness in the foreground dominates the image and the bridge
> and buildings become so secondary that they aren't part of the image.
> It's a photo of a rocky area with a pipe with the good part in the
> distant background.
>
> I think the scene is worth a go-back for a second try. I like the
> diagonal of the seawall coming down to the left corner, but for the
> bridge and buildings to stand out you need to get in closer.
>
> Now that PeteA has brought it up, I strongly agree with him that the
> very wide white border is wrong. The whiteness sucks up the eye.
>
> I use a SmugMug website with a black background like PBase, and I like
> a border to show where the image stops. I use a 3 px wide white
> stroke, though.
>
>
> --
> Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

Much appreciated opinion and I will re-do these shots I'm sure, keeping in
mind all you've said. Everything you said makes sense, but I just wish I was
armed with this information 'before' I fired a shot!

Thanks.
J