What's behind these photos?

[anita]

Hello all,

I'm back along with all my frustrations. . (we're arguing everyday).

So, i can't still figure it out how this photos are made. , and sadly the person doesn't want to share his experience. I'm starting to feel like i have to pay a lot to receive this kind of information ;'(. Recently i've read a book about landscape photography, and even it was telling in the introduction that will explain the technique part of taking the photos, half of the book were about 2 maximum advice.

So, can anyone tell me what's behind these photos?(tools, equipment, lens, post-processing,ecc.).

http://www.flickr.com/photos/tobia_s...7627548460463/.

Am i saying something that i shouldn't? Is this secret of photographies must be kept and passed by only after paying thousands? Hmm...

Anita.

[wlou]

Hello Anita,
after reading your post I must ask: what is it that you would like to know about photography? Or do you only want to know what the guy who took the pictures you pointed out did?
Am not sure what your point is???

[Harpo]

Someone else who took a similar photograph with the same kind of lighting shared that they used a warming filter and some other ND filters combined… Some photogs invest heavily in filters to get certain effects that may not be as easy to get in post processing.

Perhaps that was used here?

[William W]

can anyone tell me what's behind these photos?(tools, equipment, lens, post-processing,ecc.).

A beginning, the EXIF extract:

"Taken on August 17, 2011 at 8.00pm GMT-1
Posted to Flickr September 10, 2011 at 3.37AM PDT
Replaced on Flickr December 31, 2011

Exif data
Camera Nikon D300S
Exposure 0.001 sec (1/800)
Aperture f/8.0
Focal Length 24 mm
ISO Speed 200
Exposure Bias +2/3 EV
Flash No Flash
X-Resolution 72 dpi
Y-Resolution 72 dpi
Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 3.6 (Macintosh)
Date and Time (Modified) 2011:12:31 17:25:38
Exposure Program Aperture-priority AE
Date and Time (Original) 2011:08:17 20:00:52
Date and Time (Digitized) 2011:08:17 20:00:52
Max Aperture Value 2.8
Subject Distance 4294967295 m
Metering Mode Multi-segment
Light Source Fine Weather
Sub Sec Time Original 82
Sub Sec Time Digitized 82
Sensing Method One-chip color area
CFAPattern [Red,Green][Green,Blue]
Custom Rendered Normal
Exposure Mode Auto
White Balance Manual
Digital Zoom Ratio 1
Focal Length (35mm format) 36 mm
Scene Capture Type Standard
Gain Control None
Contrast Normal
Saturation Normal
Sharpness Normal
Subject Distance Range Unknown
Compression JPEG (old-style)
Coded Character Set UTF8
Date Created 2011:08:17
Time Created 20:00:52+02:00
Digital Creation Date 2011:08:17
Digital Creation Time 20:00:52+02:00
Viewing Conditions Illuminant Type D50
Measurement Observer CIE 1931
Measurement Flare 0.999%
Measurement Illuminant D65
XMPToolkit Adobe XMP Core 5.3-c007 1.136881, 2010/06/10-18:11:35
Creator Tool Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 3.6 (Macintosh)
Metadata Date 2011:12:31 17:25:38+01:00
Lens 14.0-24.0 mm f/2.8
Lens ID 146
Image Number 4195
Approximate Focus Distance 4294967295
Original Document ID xmp.did:8CCBA1A7192068118083B7D0A1E5BCBF
History Action derived
History Parameters converted from image/x-nikon-nef to image/jpeg, saved to new location
History Instance ID xmp.iid:8CCBA1A7192068118083B7D0A1E5BCBF
History When 2011:12:31 17:25:38+01:00
History Software Agent Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 3.6 (Macintosh)
History Changed /
Format image/jpeg
Color Transform YCbCr"


WW

[anita]

Exposure 0.001 sec (1/800)
Aperture f/8.0
Focal Length 24 mm
ISO Speed 200
Exposure Bias +2/3 EV

William.
If i send a newbe like me with those settings, i'm sure that i won't get the same picture. . I've seen the EXIF data but sincerely, isn't enoght. I can do 100000 combinations of Exposure and maybe find a picture that looks like this, but no, i want to understand the details. WHY? Because if i want to make such photos i need to know the steps, i need to understand first what he has done, and to be able to play with settings myself later. It's like telling you to go and shoot this kind of photo with a pinhold camera(box with a whole, if i understand what a pinhold camera is). Would you? You' ll get the same risult?

I think you are a little superficial regarding this topic.(no offence).

[anita]

1

[William W]

Thank you for your opinion on my approach to answering the specific question as asked and as quoted.
No offense is taken.

WW

[Black Pearl]

The photographer isn't telling you how they did this as there isn't really anything to tell.

You're right - EXIF won't help you as a newby but neither will knowing the original settings, or technique if you don't understand why it was used or how to use it.
Don't try to emulate others work, just go out and shoot your own shots. Learn how your gear reacts to light, settings, focal length etc and create your own style. Honestly the shot you linked to is hum-drum and not worth the bother you're putting yourself through.

[DanK]

Ana,

I think your question is simply too big. There are a large number of decisions that go into any photo like this.

First, you can learn something from the EXIF. It shows:

Exposure 0.001 sec (1/800)
Aperture f/8.0
Focal Length 24 mm (on a crop sensor--note that later it says 26mm in 35mm equivalent).

So this tells you that he used a slightly wide-angle lens to get the perspective he wanted and that other than that, any lens would do. He did not need a fast lens, as he shot at f/8.0. (this is common in landscape work, because people want a good balance of sharpness and depth of field.)

Timing was probably critical--to get not too much in the way of blown out highlights in the sky while preserving detail in the darker areas.

But for postprocessing--there are lots and lots of decisions, and I for one would have to try different things to see what worked. E.g., one critical element is white balance--you would not want auto, because it would try to get rid of the yellow-brown cast. If I were doing this, I would shoot raw and then try to replicate my memory of the color balance. Then you would have to try various tonal controls (to get the white point, black point, and mid-range where you want). Looks like he might have played with saturation (note the reds). then the usual--contrast, clarity, sharpening. There is nothing automatic about this, or at least, there wouldn't be for me. Maybe if one did lots of similar ones there would be.

[gcowan]

Ana,

I had a look at the photos you pointed to. They are varied and it is difficult to say anything specific that will help.

Can I offer some advice. The photos on this site are often extremely good. When you see something you like and want to learn from, ask the photographer what it is that they did. People are posting here because they are learning and prepared to share information.

Do the tutorials on this site take some photos and post them. You will find a lot of advice given some of which you will use and some you won't. You will learn much faster than you realise especially if you try out the advice and decide what is helpful and what you like and don't like.

The biggest thing to learn is to be in the right place at the right time. To do that you need to understand how the light changes with time and how to deal with it. Really the only way to do that is to find the subject and look at it and photograph it in different light situations from different positions and then accept criticism and advice. With landscape that means being there before the sunrises and after it sets.
Hope this helps.
Graham

[Glenn NK]

Ana:

Having looked at the image of the boats, my opinion is that this image is all about the light.

It was taken with the sun filtering through the clouds filtered (mimicking sunset) making the scene very dramatic with an orange cast over the entire scene (the colouration may also have even been obtained or enhanced in processing). If this image was taken at noon on a clear day, you would probably throw it away.

There seems to be nothing particularly great about the composition - its strong point is the great lighting, and the image looks great to some extent because we view it at a large size (which can make an ordinary image look good).

Graham's comments about the "right place at the right time" are what this image is all about. I would heed his post.

With the exception of lens focal length, f/stop, shutter speed and ISO, most of the data in the EXIF is of very limited value to us. One of the most important piece of information would be whether or not a tripod was used, but that never shows up in EXIF. We don't know if HDR was used (I doubt it because part of the sky is blown out, and the hills have little or no detail in the shadows).

Hopefully I haven't painted too negative a picture for you, but at the right time of day with the right cloud conditions, you could probably do as well or better yourself.

I seriously recommend this book by Tim Fitzharris - it is well worth the price.

http://www.amazon.com/National-Audub...9047289&sr=1-3

Glenn

PS - hopefully my post didn't send Ana running for cover.