Blueboatman
Well-known member
The first roadster works for me because the first thing is the angle of lean... spirited .
I wish I could take pictures like this!!
- Thread starter claymore
- Start date
Blueboatman
Well-known member
I have -finally-discovered the pan ability of a phone in portrait mode , to widen the angle of view of the single finished photo .
dutyhog
Active member
I'll happily just crop, correct tones, remove distractions and sharpen. But that's often not enough. so I Photoshop a lot to produce what I feel about the scene. Here's an example where two overlapping shots captured a wider angle than allowed by walking back or zooming the lens . After merging them it seemed too boring - so I warmed the colour balance to the sunset colours that I often see here.
PS - there are several good anchorages hidden in the scene.
PS - there are several good anchorages hidden in the scene.
lustyd
Well-known member
Interesting because there's zero processing on that or in the camera so....you just don't like nature?
claymore
Well-known member
He loves nature but having been a professional (and very good ) photographer - he does enjoy winding people up 
dutyhog
Active member
I’m sure Caraway had his tongue in his cheek. The brightness of the moonlight on the sea is compatible with the flash light on the boat, so the range was OK. For this scene it doesn’t matter that the moon itself is overexposed. Even a new iPhone doesn’t have enough dynamic range to get all that in one shot, and it would have needed to be combined with another exposure of about 1/250 sec to see the face of the moon as well.
It's remarkably unblurred for being a 1/4 second exposure.
lustyd
Well-known member
Moon?
johnalison
Well-known member
Maybe in #36 rather than #33.
Caraway
Well-known member
Caraway
Well-known member
Motion blur is not necessarily an option when your quest is to have a sharp shot of the subject. Too much chance of a generally blurred shot.
Yes the rabbit could have been on a third. I have other versions cropped like that. But I took the shot because it is pretty rare to see a rabbit on a rock. so the bottom of the shot is needed.
Some shots of the cars are much less processed and nicer, to my mind.
lustyd
Well-known member
Oh fair enough, that's weird. Maybe I imagined my photo ? I can definitely see it, but that's not necessarily proof of sanity
I was indeed pulling your leg as I could only see a white space
dutyhog
Active member
Yes, sorry to add more confusion to this confusing thread - I’m havering. I meant Dutch01527's image taken with the supermoon in the early morning, using an iPhone XS Max with 1/4 sec exposure plus flash. According to the image's data he seems to have been passing the McCormack Isles, which are in my images of post 43.
Dutch01527
Well-known member
Where is this type of data about a photograph kept, I had no idea it was all recorded?
I am very surprised that the exposure was 1/4 sec concidering it was taken on a moving boat and is not completely blurred. Do modern cameras/phones have some sort of electronic technology that freezes an image even with longer exposures?
longjohnsilver
Well-known member
You can't please everyone all the time. But on YBW you generally can't please anyone any of the time. Here's another boaty pic from my trip last year for you
Nice pic but shame on you for missing out the Turks Head
wonkywinch
Well-known member
The same with sound. People have got so used to audio with pumped up bass and treble that a flat tonal curve sounds bad (to many ears)
mjcoon
Well-known member
1) Probably in embedded "EXIF" data. Not available in all formats and not all items are filled in. For instance even if the camera has location data the user might not want it to be recorded...
And cameras can remove the periphery, to an extent, of a slow exposure and keep the central portion that is not really "moving". So that can be done electronically without needing complex optics with moving parts.
Daydream believer
Well-known member
deleted
Last edited:
Caraway
Well-known member
Whilst the exposure is 1/4 second only the moonlight on the sea will record over that time period as they are the only bits illuminated by ambient light. The coach roof , winch, dodger and mainsheet are all illuminated by the camera flash which is probably about 1/1000th of a second (or maybe 250th of a second), but certainly fast enough to freeze any movement.
Adios
...
The point is that you probably have taken a picture like that. It really is very heavily manipulated so I bet you could go through your old photos, find one reasonably dramatic, run it through Lightroom and it would be like that. She would have shot in RAW which allows a lot more manipulation as well but even with an old JPG it can be done.Anyway - I still wish I could take pictures like it.
I think the give away is the blue in the sky behind the clouds, when the sky is still that pale it wouldn't be that dark under the clouds. She brought down the shadows like crazy and vignetted. Its really quite easy, the hard bit is knowing when to stop.
Last edited:
Adios
...
I like that A LOT! Obviously manipulated but the final product is reminiscent of vintage magazine artwork probably of the era of the car. Perfect! Why be slavishly realistic when you could have something evocative and dramatic on the wall