Landscape critique please

[Nigel_O]

Ever since jumping on the slippery slope that is (very) amateur photography, I've stuck almost exclusively to motorsport and airshows - both a big interest for me and my two lads, regardless of the photography angle.

However, I've been amazed by some of the landscape shots in the "random photos" thread, so I thought I'd have a crack.

I watched the weather forecast last night and worked out that North Wales would be sunny and very calm this morning, so I decided to try some reflections shots. A 4:00am start from the Midlands saw me at Lake Vyrnwy before sunrise. I was really disheartened to see a very ripply surface as I drove across the dam, but I remembered reading a post that said that just as the sun rises, the natural air movement from water to land (or vice-versa) stops and everything goes very calm.

Sure enough, about half an hour after the sun hit the slopes, it all went very calm and the water ended up extremely flat

My kit is fine (D810 with either a Nikkor 16-35 VR or a Nikkor 70-200 f2.8 VRII) - therefore, anything that's less than spot-on can only be my technique, composition, or post-processing. For what its worth, the majority of the day was tripod-mounted, running at f18-f22, with low ISO and about 0.5 to 1.5 seconds. Some would have been 1/10 sec or faster when the sun came out strongly. Also note - no post-processing at all on #5 & #6

So - constructive criticism very welcome on all aspects (hope the Thumbsnap doesn't crucify these too much - I might upload to Flickr as well)

[Nigel_O]

GetCarter said:

Good work getting up that early - few of us are that daft!

Here's a 10 second Lightroom edit of one (forgive the rush and the cheek!)

It was nice driving into Wales with no traffic at silly o'clock, but I'm flagging a bit now....

No problem with you playing around with an image - I use Lightroom 6, but I'm very much a novice - still getting to grips with the basics of the Develop tab, but it'll come with time. The main thing I struggle with at the moment is shots where only part of the image is under or over-developed - for example the spired pump house, against the dark trees, but with a really bright sky. Is it just a case of being extremely careful with the Adjustment Brush? Which is the best way to work - bring down an over-exposed sky, or bring up an under-exposed area?

[Nigel_O]

GetCarter said:

I always expose for the sky - you can bring back detail from dark areas, but never find detail in burnt out whites. If in doubt (and I do it all the time) I exposure bracket. Belt and braces.

As for the pump house... check out 'dehaze' in LR - it will sort you!

ETA - as long as you are shooting RAW.

Thanks - it looks like this is what I've done today - sky is fine(ish) but the heavily wooded area behind the pump house is way too dark

I don't have 'Dehaze' in LR6 - apparently its only in CC (which I understand is a monthly subscription?) - shame - it sounds like its exactly what I need for the hazy shot of the pump house

EDIT - turns out its a "straining tower" - its where the water is extracted from the reservoir, strained of any flotsam and jetsam before it flows to Merseyside. Either way, its still hazy.....

Edited by Nigel_O on Monday 29th August 20:43

[Nigel_O]

DibblyDobbler said:

Nice work

1,2,6 are very promising but as above a bit of processing would help - in my view of course but it's personal taste

Thanks - I was wondering about the "thirds rule" - I tried having the waterline at 1/3 or 2/3 of the image, but I felt that it either ended up with too much sky or too much lake.

I've only cropped one or two of the images I've taken today - composition is clearly one of the skills I've yet to even start on, never mind get decent with....

PS - what is it about 1,2 & 6 that show the promise, and what is it about the others that don't? - This will help me understand better what differentiates a decent shot from an ordinary one

Edited by Nigel_O on Monday 29th August 20:52

[Nigel_O]

Brilliant! - Exactly the sort of feedback I was hoping for! Thanks to everyone for their input so far - its very much appreciated.

There's only so much I can self-teach, so it means a lot to get some thoughts from the experts.

Signing off now, as the 4:00am start is taking its toll, but I've had a really enjoyable day and I'll be back with more. I just wished I lived somewhere closer to the kind of scenery I've seen today, but I guess there's good photos on lots of less spectacular areas of the country.

For what its worth, I'm just five minutes from Cannock Chase, so maybe I don't need to go very far for some nice shots

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannock_Chase

[Nigel_O]

And another couple for your CC please. Both are edited in LR

F22, 35mm, ISO31(!) 20 sec

Lumsdale falls 2 by Nigel Ogram, on Flickr

I should have moved the dead branch out of the way, as its bugging me now, and the top level of the falls is pretty washed-out - I guess 20 seconds was too long - half that would have been OK


F22, 17mm, ISO40, 8 sec

Lumsdale falls 1 by Nigel Ogram, on Flickr

Struggled a little with PP on this one as there was a lot of light coming in from between the trees. Fairly pleased with the fact that I've managed to eliminate a couple of hikers that were in the shot

As with the shots at the beginning of the thread, these are my first attempt - this time at running water

[Nigel_O]

Superb feedback - thanks. I'd never have guessed that an overcast day is preferable.

Not tried multiple exposures yet and I need to read the manual on bracketing - like I said, I have a lot to learn, but I'm enjoying it, which I guess is what counts

And I've learned something - "Orton effect" - time to do some research...

Thanks again

[Nigel_O]

Beggarall said:

Hi - you have already had some excellent feed-back and advice from the experts on this site but maybe just a couple of extra points. First, I wondered why you were using such a narrow aperture - f22? I know this allows for longer exposures and big dof but sometimes makes the images a little soft due to lens diffraction. Maybe open the aperture a bit and if you can't get the longer exposures you want use an ND filter. Perhaps experiment with different settings? Secondly, I assume you are shooting RAW images - gives you a much better dynamic range and more opportunities in post-processing. Just thoughts - I like what you have done so far and applaud the early rising!

Edited by Beggarall on Friday 16th September 12:54

Thanks for the feedback - it really is appreciated

I was at f22 (min for the lens) and ISO 31 (min for the body) in an attempt to maximise the shutter speed. I've now purchased a set of Cokin ND filters to allow me to control shutter speed without compromising too much on other aspects. Now I can try a running water scene with some different settings

Yes, I'm always shooting in RAW, but I'm still only at the basic level in LR

[Nigel_O]

Beggarall said:

do you have a Flickr account?

Yes, but I have no idea how to let you see it! - Pretty sure everything is set to Public

[Nigel_O]

I went back to Lake Vyrnwy today looking for some Autumn colours - FAR more challenging conditions than when I was there two months ago (photos earlier in this thread), with very low cloud, white-out skies and far less calm water for the reflection shots. Although I'd have preferred bright sunshine and still water, it was good to get some conditions that made me think a bit about what I wanted - all part of the (still steep) learning curve...

I'd be interested to hear critique again. I'm particularly interested in the two very hazy shots - the first is straight from the camera, the second is with some processing - which is better? Have I gone a bit too far bringing it back? It was so hazy that the camera couldn't get an auto-focus - had to switch to manual

Vyrnwy 2 by Nigel Ogram, on Flickr

Vyrnwy 4 by Nigel Ogram, on Flickr

Vyrnwy 5 by Nigel Ogram, on Flickr

Vyrnwy 3 by Nigel Ogram, on Flickr

Vyrnwy 7.1 by Nigel Ogram, on Flickr

Vyrnwy 7 by Nigel Ogram, on Flickr

Vyrnwy 6 by Nigel Ogram, on Flickr

[Nigel_O]

singlecoil said:

The first one would have worked better as a panorama, rather than the wide angle which has the trees converging in a rather dramatic way. You can do panoramas in Lightroom.

I wondered about the wide-angle distortion - is this any better?

[Nigel_O]

Simpo Two said:

The compositions aren't bad but IMHO the main problem is light. A camera can only record what's in front of it, and processing can only do so much. If a view looks poor in reality then it will probably end up poor in the photo - in which case look for something else or go back another day. Sometimes considering a b/w image can help overcome flat light. The last one is by far the best both visually and technically.

ETA Looking back at p1 your waterfalls are way better than your landscapes. I'm trying to work out why that should be...

Edited by Simpo Two on Monday 31st October 10:37

I agree - the light was very poor, but as I'd driven a couple of hours to get there, I wanted to try to learn from the experience. There's only a relatively short window to catch the autumn colours, so waiting for a beautiful calm, sunny day wasn't a luxury I could afford. I have a week off next week, so if there's a good day, I might go back, but looking at the weather forecast I think I've missed any chance of great light. Next trip there will be in the depths of winter to catch some snow / frost scenes.

Interesting comment about the waterfalls v the landscapes - what am I getting wrong with the landscapes that I'm not getting wrong with the waterfalls?

All good feedback BTW - much appreciated

[Nigel_O]

DavidY said:

Christmas Morning Dec 2012, no-one else there, very peaceful!! (handheld, Fuji X100)
Amazing Light 2 sm by Mr Perceptive X100, on Flickr

Oof! - superb

If I didn't know better, I'd say I was more impressed with the seriously beefy torch you have there..... I guess that was just a single spot of sunlight on an otherwise dull day? Either way, the result is very different.

Where was it taken from? I'm thinking the south end of the dam, but I think you may be further along the shore away from the dam