- This topic is empty.
Panoramas/Letterbox Format – Savannah Pics
-
Hi Everyone
There are several images which I?ve wanted to post for a while but I?m working in Atlanta and away from my main PC, so I can?t get at them to post them. Anyway, this past weekend I went down to Savannah on the coast of Georgia and had a great old time with the camera. Few of the results are outstanding photos as they were all shot in stark afternoon sunshine, but many are good material for discussion topics. This thread has the first batch.
Elsewhere it has been said that good critique has been on the wane. I believe that posters should introduce their images better and then they might get more focussed critique. So here goes:
The five images below were all shot deliberately knowing that I?d later crop them to letterbox (panorama) format. That?s why I?ve posted them in this section ? they are the first of many panoramas I hope to post here over the coming months.
The main feedback I?m hoping for is on panorama format and composition ? focal points, balance, rule of thirds (if it applies in panoramas), line, tone, etc. I have converted all the images to B&W as the colour composition on several of them was weak and I wanted to kill off discussion about colour in favour of some more significant compositional themes.
The second area of feedback I?m hoping for is on black and white photography and even ?seeing in black and white?.
I?m posting these knowing that they are flawed and interested in hearing what others would have done. If there is enough interest in the thread, I?ll give more of my own analysis on the images later.
Thanks in advance?..
BertieOkay then, I hope you don’t mind comments from a complete beginner (If you do I apologise) so I’ll plough on with my tuppence worth.
Firstly, my initial reaction to your panoramas was pretty much ‘hmm.. so what’. Nothing really jumped out at me at all. As you say, they were shot in stark afternoon sunshine, so that obviously isn’t going to help much. Perhaps a little more contrast or dodge/burning might increase the texture of these shots, but they definitely lack something (IMHO).
Compositionally, with the exception of the second shot, there doesn’t seem to be any sense of ‘why’ the picture was taken in the first place. Panoramas by their very nature are bound to take in a great deal more subject matter than normal landscape or portrait images, though that shouldn’t necessarily mean that they should be cluttered with too many focal points as I feel these images are.
The second image is the only one I liked from a compostional point of view, though it seems to be slightly skewed. I’m not certain if the wharf or the roofline should be a sort of ‘implied’ horizon (I suspect it probably should be the roof).
Anyway, these are just my extremely unqualified opinions. I’m sure you’ll get plenty of feedback from members who know far more. Regarding the whole black and white issue, it might be worth your while talking to Ciar?n. Always a good man for useful tips. 8)
Nice to see you post some images Bertie :)
I guess, by way of a disclaimer, I’m not a landscape photographer. In addition to that I have never stitched together a panoramic or framed/cropped a shot to be panoramic after post processing. So my 2 cent may not even be worth 1/4 of that.
For me, the rule of thirds is all about putting points of interest on key points, or dividing a shot up into visually pleasing sections (2/3rds foreground and 1/3 background as an example). However, for panoramic shots this all changes. The panoramic photos I have seen tend to be read more like a book, with the viewer following the scene from left to right. As such, there aren’t key points but more so detail through out the shot to hold the viewers interest and attention as they “read” the shot. I’m afraid to say, none of these shots do this for me.
The first shot, which is my favourite of the batch by a mile does benefit from the panoramic crop as it fits the aspect ratio and scale of the bridge. But I’d be tempted to spend A LOT of time in Photoshop to see if I could remove a lot of the clutter, especially the crane which cuts into the bridges span. As I read the shot, it’s the span of the bridge that holds my interest which I guess is a good thing? And looking at it further the ship dead centre is also good framing. Conversion wise I think it’s cracking and you did really well with the exposure to hold detail in the clouds and the shadows.
After that, the other shots fall down. For me, there’s nothing to read. No main point or points of interest catching my eye. Conversion and sharpness wise they’re all great, but totally uninspiring and compositionally none of them make me think WOW. As for the debate about seeing in B&W, I think that’s a whole other thread.
Hi Winkauss
Thanks indeed for your feedback. I agree with virtually all you?ve said. I?d like to respond to one particular comment for now?. the comment on why these were taken.
I think that shooting images is, in some respects, like an ascending scale with a lower threshold and ascending levels of goals. There is a lower threshold somewhere, such that when the photographer looks through the viewfinder he or she knows that the image is just so poor that it is a waste of time pressing the shutter. Above that there are different levels of goals. My list would be:
1. Camera Club/Competition
2. Gallery
3. Documentary Recording
4. Personal Attachment
5. ExperimentationOn that weekend I shot around 150 images. I have only one that might make it into a Camera Club Competition. I have two others that might make it into my website in due course. All the others were shot because I was at a location where I might never be again and I wanted some level of documentary recording/travel shots. I also wanted to use the time experimenting with a few things ? especially panoramas.
So here?s the situation, which I imagine that others would experience too. I go somewhere and realise that there is probably no ?Wow!? shot to be had but I want to make the best of what is there. (Incidentally this first dawned on me on day when I visited a few scenic viewpoints in Ireland. They were very pleasing to the eye, but they didn?t lend themselves to being captured as outstanding photos ? good, but not outstanding.) So I?m in a situation, wanting to shoot what is there and wondering what tricks I can pull out of the bag to obtain the best shots that I can. And a little bit of experimenting comes into it. Shooting for letterbox format, and a few other compositional aims which I?ll mention in a later posting, were among my experiments on this occasion. I think that I have learnt a lot from these 5 images alone.
You didn?t quite ask why I posted these, but I?ll take poetic license to answer that as well. :-) If I have a really good shot and no particular point to make about it I?d put it straight into a gallery/website rather than a critique forum. Many posters put such excellent photos up for critique that it is no surprise that the feedback is a chorus of ?Great shot, mate?. I will generally post photos which I know are flawed and I?m interested in knowing what others would have done to make them better.
Hi Ciaran
Thanks for your feedback. Very interesting points. I regard photo 2 as the best of the batch at the moment but agree that photo 1 has the most potential after a lot of Photoshopping. I?ll reply more fully later when I get a few minutes but wanted to say thanks for now for taking the time to comment.
I like the ship in the middle of the first one. Starting from here would require a serious crop of the entire bridge but if the picture was taken with a much longer zoom, and left in colour I think that would make a great shot.
Edit: sorry, that’s not so much a criticism of this shot as a request for a different one, but that’s what stood out in the picture.
Composition-wise I always like some foreground interest in a panoramic and/or less elements in the frame. Theres just too much for the eye to process otherwise and you’ll scan left and right looking for the point of interest. Just my 2 cents.
Interesting idea in those shots.. in reality the only one I actually “like” is the first. The 2nd looks almost too commercial for my tastes… it looks like an ad for whatever that building is. The other shots just don’t carry that well in black & white, too much detail that’s merging together.
Sorry I don’t have any more constructive comments than that .. I’ve done any image critiquing before, and I’m a rank amature myself. I know enough to know what I like or don’t even among my own photo’s. But even then I’ve had people praise photo’s I wasn’t too happy with, and then have no interest in pictures that are among my favourites !
Just a comment on your note about sights in Ireland not being too conducive to conventional shots .. to me it’s all a matter of perspective & angles… certainly there’s occassions when you know there’s a lovely shot that could be taken, but there just isn’t any way to take it, or at least no easy way.
I had a blast on a recent trip to Oz/NZ… got incredibly lucky with sunset lighting at the 12 apostles on the great ocean road. And I will post a few of those for review as soon as I find some way of sharing the pic’s at the proper quality.
Thanks, everyone, for the feedback. Perhaps I could summarise it before I go on to add my own views.
Winkauss:
– more contrast needed
– too cluttered
– 2nd image bestCiaran
– panaroma different in that it reads more like a book
– 1st shot has most potential after a lot of Photoshopping
– no points of interest in the others
– seeing in black and white deserves a whole threadJ Lang
– request for longer zoom shotFinoblad
– too much clutterLahinch Lass
– don?t like photos/no interest
– Black and White doesn?t workUnfortunately I can?t provide the zoom shot J Lang suggested. I shot several more of the ship but no zoom versions while it was in that position. Cropping that first image would leave very few pixels and a very small image. These are letterbox formats from a single shot rather than stitched panoramas (which I?ll be posting more of in the future).
I agree with virtually all that has been said. I don?t think any of the images were strong and Nos 3-5 in particular would probably not have been posted if it weren?t as part of a learning exercise.
Clutter:
With the exception of No 2 they are all suffering from too much clutter, with No 4 having no dominant points of interest. Clutter can sometimes be counteracted if there is a very dominant point of interest. No 4, and several others, don?t come anywhere near achieving that. Some panoramas will have simple subjects and detail, conforming to the rules of other formats. Some panoramas will have a series of details, to be read in succession, but the series of detail needs some cohesion and can’t just be clutter if it is to succeed.Black and White/Tone:
The only image that has a good tonal composition is No 2. It is said of Black and White images that they should have a good proportion of blacks and a good proportion of whites and a good range in between. No 2 achieves that. No 3 just below it has probably the worst tonal range and lack of contrast. No 1 has potential as a photo but, among other things, needs help with the tonal range. A dark, foreboding sky might go a long way to counteracting that, but the whites would still be a problem. It was this issue that gave rise to the comment ?seeing in black and white?. If you?re intending to convert a scene to Black and White it takes a practiced eye to assess the colour image in the viewfinder and know that the later conversion will have a good range of tones ? or even enough blacks and whites.No Interest:
Strangely, this is the point others made which I learnt most from. As some will know, my main hobby is boating rather than photography. I love boats of every shape and size. In any scene or photo even a small boat will leap out and catch my eye. It has dawned on me that I have developed something like a ?subjective eye?. I see interest where others wouldn?t. The best example above is No 3 where my eye sees 2 foreground boats placed fairly well on the point of thirds as a clear focal point. Bar the background boat, the rest is just sheds, water and bushes. I realise that many other people, with less passion for boats, will not necessarily see boats as subjectively or favourably as I will and that needs to be taken into account. My subject is boats but it could be something else for other photographers.Lighting:
All these had to be shot in very strong afternoon sunlight and that has weakened them all.Compositional Notes on the Individual Photos:
No 1. Symmetrical shot with good potential. Good lines from the bridge pointing to the ship in the centre. But the crane spoils the balance and the tonal range is weak. Photoshopping could help address these. The width should also be cropped to bring the edge of the frame closer to the uprights of the bridge. Unfortunately the question remains as to whether the ship is large enough to be a strong focal point.No 2. Best of the batch as it stands. The wake of the boat leads the eye in from the bottom corner. The boat, a novel riverboat, is a focal point on the point of thirds. Best of all is the tonal range with lots of blacks and whites. But a minor flaw is that the boat funnel merges with the window. Worst of all, the image still fails to be interesting or inspiring.
No 3. Some might see the foreground boats as a focal point but many will see the image as cluttered. The background boat probably tips the scales in the direction of clutter. The tonal range/contrast is very poor, and needs a lot of Photoshopping.
No 4. A good example of clutter and total lack of a focal point.
No 5. A good example of a scene that was pleasing to view but didn?t make a good photograph. It has a focal point, even quite close to the point of thirds, but it is a bad one, in that the large building is boring and pulls the image out of balance. The rest of the detail is small clutter and the lines of the bridge don?t really contribute to the image at all.
I?m unlikely to print my own critique at such lengths again, but I wanted to convey the level of critique which I think is beneficial on these forums. As you can imagine, I haven?t a lot more to say, but will welcome any follow-up comments.
Thanks again
BertieBertieWooster wrote:
Many posters put such excellent photos up for critique that it is no surprise that the feedback is a chorus of ?Great shot, mate?. I will generally post photos which I know are flawed and I?m interested in knowing what others would have done to make them better…… I?m unlikely to print my own critique at such lengths again, but I wanted to convey the level of critique which I think is beneficial on these forums.
Tally ho Bertie… Good call, and makes for a very interesting thread. Nail on the head there!
I apologise for the brevity of my comment. I often stuggle to put down in words what my impressions are and its something I’d really like to improve on.
I’ve done some panoramas myself and have the use of an Xpan camera which is 35mm panoramic. If you google it and see some sample shots or go to photosig and look at others that use this camera, you might see what I mean.
Winkauss,
Jolly decent of you to say so, old chap. Jeeves couldn’t have put it better himself. :-)
Fintan
No apology expected or required. I appreciate all feedback whether brief or lengthy. I’ll do that google search later. I’ve often wondered if there’ll be a digital equivalent to the Xpan some day. Anyway, for the moment I want to put in a bit of practice in cropping to letterbox format and using a pano head and stitching software.
Thanks again
Bertiehi bertie,
have been lurking on this one. And I’m no professional photographer and don’t want to be, just enjoy taking pictures.
I agree the 2nd one is the best of the bunch but I feel the top of the boat causes some confusion where horizontal and vertical tangents hit the quay side.
ideally it would have been best to shoot it against a neutral background. either by taking a higher position to lift the horizon or taking the shot against a less cluttered background
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
