[TIM]

Sorry about the boring title, couldn't think of anything better on the spot.

I am really not sure about this photo, sometimes I open it and love it, sometimes I want to delete it straight away...

Had a bit of the same problem I had with the kettle, either underexpose everything else and get the flame correct, or over expose the flame and get everything else correct. I rather like the way the flame came out though...

Thoughts and crits...? (please view higher res)



Higher res - http://farm1.static.flickr.com/158/3...82b24415_o.jpg

[Rob Barron]

Hi, I'll crit the actual picture in a sec but can I just mention the file first. You put a link to the image on flickr but there really is no need. You could have put the larger one on here if you had wanted to, it is 177kbs which is below the 200kbs limit on Pixalo.

The larger one is not actually higher res than the one shown here, it is simply larger. You have sized this one to 500px x 333px and the larger one to 800px x 532px. There is absolutely no difference whatsoever in the resolution and your monitor will show them at the same resolution, irrespective of what resolution you choose in Photoshop or whatever you use.

A PC shows images at 72dpi (Mac's a bit more). So, if you have an image that is 720pixels long, it will be seen on the monitor as an image which is 720/72 = 10 inches long. However, if you printed the image out at the usual resolution for printing, 300 dpi, the image would print out at 720/300 = 2.4 inches long.

So, your images on flickr are not higher resolution, they are simply larger.

Ok, as to the picture itself, I can see why you would not want to delete it because the lighter itself and the gorgeous colour of the wood are excellent. The only part that is not so good is the flame itself which doesn't look like a flame at all: it looks like a bright white splode where it has completely burnt out. If you lit a cigarette with a flame that hot, it wouldn't just light it, it would incinerate it!

I am guessing the exposure was long to get the lovely colours and richness in the rest of it and that is fine. The only real way to get the whole image looking perfect is to take two images and marry them together. Expose one as you have done to get the results here and the second one to capture the flame itself which will need a considerably shorter exposure. Put the two together and you'll have a cracking image

Cheers,
Rob

[TIM]

I replied to this earlier, but it somehow lost it...

I do not upload my photo's for pixalo, rather I upload them and link some to pixalo, my standard upload size is either 800 pixels wide or 1024 pixels wide, 99% of the photo's at those sizes are far above the 200kb limit, hence it is standard practice for me to put the 500 pixel wide resize (that flickr automatically offers) on here, and then link it to the bigger picture. I am aware that the resolution is not actually higher, but in lamans terms it is, that is like shouting at people for saying black and white instead of grayscale...

As for the actual picture, I am aware of the problem this creates, as i said here "Had a bit of the same problem I had with the kettle, either underexpose everything else and get the flame correct, or over expose the flame and get everything else correct. I rather like the way the flame came out though..." I guess I just need to get over my dislike for stitching photo's in post...

[Rob Barron]

No, it is nothing like the same as areguing about black and white or greyscale as they are the same thing. Resolution and Size are entirely different and I put the comment for everyone to read, not just one person. I simply hope that the information is helpful for some as not everyone has the same level of knowledge and/or experience, hence the point of using a forum.

My comments with regards the flame were simply to say that I don't like the burnt out flame. You do so that is fine. But as you keep on reminding us, this is the critique thread so we give our personal views

Cheers,
Rob

[TIM]

Black and white and grayscale aren't the same thing bud, but I'll leave it.

[danpen]

The lighter's great, I don't know of any way in which you could get the exposure right on that and the flame with taking two shots and stitching somehow.

I like your stuff, you seem to be trying to do something a bit different and that's always going to be challenging.

Rob, you should know better about the difference between B&W and Greyscale.

cheers

Dan

[Rob Barron]

If TIM thinks the point of my message has ANYTHING to do with greyscale and black and white or pinkscale and yellow with purple polka dots on then he needs to read it again and see what the real point was! I am not going into it here as it isn't the place. Tim, if you want to discuss this further, I will be happy to PM you.

Rob

[skipper954]

The eye travels first to either contrast or highlights. So the flame is burning into my retina. Unfortunately, there is no detail there.

So I think a perfectly acceptable thing would be to blend two exposures as Rob said and get the best of all possible worlds.

Cheers

Pangloss

[TIM]

Rob I really didn't mean to upset or offend you. I was just trying to illustrate my point as to why I had incorrectly said higher resolution, greyscale images are often incorrectly called black and white, even by people that know the difference, hence me saying resolution... I appreciate you putting it up for other people to understand the difference, just trying to make it clear I already do.

Enough with the OFF TOPIC, thanks skipper, seems everyone is pretty adament about the flame, so I will undertake a stitch if I get a chance, things are hectic at work at the mo...