1/250s f/8.0 at 120.0mm ISO 200 hand held

Sunset with the 24-120vrModerators: Greg B, Nnnnsic, Geoff, Glen, gstark, Moderators
Forum rules
Please note that image critiquing is a matter of give and take: if you post images for critique, and you then expect to receive criticism, then it is also reasonable, fair and appropriate that, in return, you post your critique of the images of other members here as a matter of courtesy. So please do offer your critique of the images of others; your opinion is important, and will help everyone here enjoy their visit to far greater extent. Also please note that, unless you state something to the contrary, other members might attempt to repost your image with their own post processing applied. We see this as an acceptable form of critique, but should you prefer that others not modify your work, this is perfectly ok, and you should state this, either within your post, or within your signature. Images posted here should conform with the general forum guidelines. Image sizes should not exceed 950 pixels along the largest side (height or width) and typically no more than four images per post or thread. Please also ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is.
Previous topic • Next topic
9 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Sunset with the 24-120vrNikon D70 ,Nikkor 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S VR
1/250s f/8.0 at 120.0mm ISO 200 hand held ![]() my gallery of so-so photos
http://www.pbase.com/kerrypierce/
Most sunset shots are dull, dull, dull but yours is very appealing. It has all the elements that make a great picture:
- framing (the trees) - foreground and background interest (water and bridge) - colour (great red - postprocessed?) - movement (the birds) All in all a fantastic 9/10 shot. Well done Regards
Jonesy
Kerry, I think the problem with this shot is the blurred tree branches on the foreground, particularly on the right. I find them very distracting, and they have the effect of making the shot feel out of focus or otherwise not sharp.
The bridge and the chimneys and the smoke are all great with the low sun, and the birds are well caught. But the trees take too much away. Just my opinion, others may take a different view. Greg - - - - D200 etc
Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see. - Arthur Schopenhauer
I think it's a great landscape (and much better than all the dog photos
![]() Nice composition, and as for the blurring in the front, I don't mind it... Just think of it as frontal boke ![]() Cheers, John
Leek@Flickr | Leek@RedBubble | Leek@DeviantArt D700; D200; Tokina 12-24; Nikkor 50mm f1.4,18-70mm,85mm f1.8, 105mm,80-400VR, SB-800s; G1227LVL; RRS BH-55; Feisol 1401
Thanks all, for the kind comments and critiques!
![]() I tend to agree with Greg about the OOF branches, but there was nothing to be done about it. I couldn't use hyperfocal focus. The trees were only about 40 to 50ft from my shooting position. Hyperfocal focus for 120mm at the minimum aperture of f/22 only gives me 62ft as the near sharpness limit. Focus on the trees would have only given me 20ft of DOF, throwning the birds and bridge OOF. So, what I did was focus on the large piece of ice, above and right of the birds. That gave me huge DOF to work with, even at f/8. While nothing in the shot is razor sharp, as a result of that, the shutter speed and f/stop allowed me to get "acceptable" sharpness ( less motion blur on the birds ) as a tradeoff for the things in the shot I deemed more important. ![]() Leek wants to see more photos from the dog show? I thought y'all would be tired of those by now.... ![]() my gallery of so-so photos
http://www.pbase.com/kerrypierce/
Thanks for the crop suggestion, Phillip.
![]() my gallery of so-so photos
http://www.pbase.com/kerrypierce/
Previous topic • Next topic
9 posts
• Page 1 of 1
|