A chance to reflect

KenCo1964 · 28-01-2006, 11:57

I left the lens flare as it's included in the title.
Taken on a really bright sunny afternoon.
18-55 @ 18mm
F20
1/125sec
Handheld.
Iso 200 (error)

Comments appreciated.
Ken.

P-E · 28-01-2006, 12:16

I really like they way you process in Photomatix

I really want to sit down and learn how to use it.

GfK · 28-01-2006, 12:25

Hate to go all Simon Cowell again, Ken, but...

When I opened up this thread all I could see at first was the top 1/3 of the picture, and I thought I was really going to like it.

Then I scrolled down and saw it all. There's something about the water that I just don't like. I love the composition - don't get me wrong, but for me, it feels like its been processed to the point of looking fake.

Full marks for the top 1/3 anyway! Although I really would lose the lensflare as its distracting.

Maybe your pictures would work better for me if I saw them in a higher resolution...

***Dave*** · 28-01-2006, 12:25

Excellent stuff

Only things to notice are the 3 reeds to left are distracting, the conifer reflection has been processed as brown, some lens flare/white blob in top left, plus reflection of clouds looks a bit pixelated

I reckon you should sell this stuff, before others jump on the bandwagon

Boon · 28-01-2006, 12:30

i love it, but then again I love all your stuff. I agree about the lens flare though, although dont find the reeds distracting.
Nice stuff.

minimeeze · 28-01-2006, 13:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boon

i love it, but then again I love all your stuff. I agree about the lens flare though, although dont find the reeds distracting.
Nice stuff.

Totally agree

Mike Aiken · 28-01-2006, 14:21

Great Shot again Ken

I like also like the way you shoot and process you shots, I can usually tell a Kenco shot without seeing the name.

You have your own inimitable style.

Keep them coming.

KenCo1964 · 28-01-2006, 17:33

Sorry guy's your right....there is a bad case of pixeling going on, don't know what happened and it's the first time it has happened (I think). Checking the larger one but if it's the same then I'll reprocess and upload a new.
Thanks.
Ken.

KenCo1964 · 28-01-2006, 18:19

There you go, left the original for comparison.
Comments appreciated on the second image at the beginning of thread.
Thanks.
Ken.

barrymoir · 29-01-2006, 09:19

wow, i think this a an amazing photo, looks almost painted.

Matty · 30-01-2006, 13:31

lovely stuff Ken, again!

petemc · 30-01-2006, 17:12

I have to agree with Gfk. Its like its been ran through Raw Shooter using the Indoor and Outdoor settings. It does feel like something is wrong with it. The reflection seems too perfect too.

chuckles · 30-01-2006, 17:24

Been back to this several times in an attempt to "snatch" what's wrong with it! I have trouble with the density of the reflections. The sky doens't match the trees, etc,. And the shadow background distracts me.

Sorry to be so negative. The overall composition is good, but when somethings nags at me in a photograph I have to puzzle it through.... and I'm still puzzled!

CT · 30-01-2006, 17:57

Lovely shot Ken, but there's something very strange going on with the water. You seem to view the distant water at a quite sharp angle with little reflection detail of the sky, then suddenly, just this side of those stones, it's as though there's a waterfall, or the water is suddenly sloping towards you, and at the same time you get major reflection detail from the sky.

Looking at the banks, there clearly isn't a waterfall, it appears to be just some strange optical thing which really mars what could have been a great shot.

Matt · 30-01-2006, 18:12

Well I think its great Ken.

The colour in the shadow area is the riverbed.
Usually when you look into a shadowed area of water you can see right to the bottom (when its shallow), which is what I think has been recorded here.
I take it you used a polarizer.

I would have done a bit of gardening to get rid of the long grass stems.
Have you tried to bring back some detail in the trees on the left? It looks like the dodge tool has been overdone a tad.

KenCo1964 · 30-01-2006, 21:36

Thanks for the comments, I have struggled with processing this since I took it in the summer. The water was one of the things that bothered me, making it look to chocolate box sickly. BUT I didn't use raw shooter indoor/outdoor stuff and the reflections in the water were the reason for the shot, it looked really stunning. As I said it was in the summer and the sun would have been up above the pine trees I think at about tea time. The water as I remember is flowing away from me and becomes shallow making it run faster by the rocks. I can't remember if I had my polarisor then. The detail in the shadow area, especially at the pine tree reflection is the river bed, the water was a very rich red/brown and because of the sun reflecting the only site of the bed was in a shadow area. Suppose you had to be there really.
I am happier with this than my previous attempts but maybe I'll give it another go in another 6 months or so.
Thanks again for the comments.
Ken.
Ps. I did take others without the reeds but preferred this.

I did use shadow/highlight for the trees but I have never used the dodge tool....don't even know what it looks like or does.

Fangman · 31-01-2006, 23:10

Having see some of you previous images I downloaded photomatix - trouble is that when I under or over exposed I didn't take a duplicate with the opposite exposure. It will make me use my tripod and experiment.