In Need of Repair

[dje]

I took these shots of an old jetty around sunset at Cleveland Point. With the first, I in-advertantly had the ISO set to 800 from a previous shoot so the shutter speed was somewhat faster than I wanted. With the second, I wound the ISO back to 100. I'd be interested to hear any feedback please, such as which is the better image or anything else you might like to add.

Thanks
Dave

[gregj1763]

Second photo wins hands down Dave. The richer colours in the sky and the smoother surface of the water give a much mor serene feel to the image..
Nice

[Kris V]

I like both - but #2 wins, hands down!

[dje]

Thanks Greg and Kris for your comments. Looks like 2 it is !

Dave

[Gospelflier]

I like the top one better.

The top photo has a sinister feel to it with the choppy, dark water and the dark orange sunset reflected in the water.
The bottom photo has a dreamy, soft look to it.

[Bobobird]

I like both for different reasons. Perhaps #1 slightly more.

[dje]

Thanks for commenting Krista and Bobo. It's interesting to get differing views - just personal taste I guess.

Dave

[jamn4ex]

I agree with Krista and Bobo, I like 1 for the crisp realistic water and sky, I believe its more like it appeared to the eye. I like 2 for its artistic values. I would like it better with a myst clinging to the jetty. I would be real happy to have took both and caught best of both.

[Cantab]

I much prefer #1. For one thing, the water looks realistic; in the second one, the ocean looks like it was viewed through a blurry lens (but I'll admit I don't like deliberately blurred moving water). I also prefer the more detailed view of the decrepit wharf in the first one.

[Cogito]

The first one at ISO 800 has an exposure time of 1/4 sec. And the water's choppy. The second one at ISO 100 has an exposure time of 4 secs. And the water is still..... Oh, and the second was taken 10 minutes before the first. So, do you like choppy water or not? Both shots are OK, neither is spectacular. Your choice.
In the good (?) old days of film, when you developed an image you could adjust the exposure plus modify the RGB. Nowadays, if there's a bit of purple, accentuate it! If there's some green, remove it! Etc. etc.....
Your images are infinately modifiable.....
My choice?

[beachgirl444]

Wow ~ just beautiful!

[FootLoose]

They are shot from two different angles: the first seems a bit 'cluttered' to me. ie rocks poking out of water on lower left and stumps (?) poking up on middle right. I would want to clone those out. But the choppy water makes the water seem restless, and the colours feel colder to me.

On the other hand the second one has a much more sererene feel to it. The colours are warmer, the water is 'relaxed' and the clutter is absent. My only problem with the second one is that the longer exposure has blunted the edge of the clouds.

[dje]

Thanks everyone for your comments. Much appreciated.

Tony I do like your colour treatment. I'd be interested to know what you did so I can try it on the RAW images.

Dave

[Cogito]

Tony I do like your colour treatment. I'd be interested to know what you did so I can try it on the RAW images.
Dave

Have sent you a PM - possibly 3..

[Mark von Kanel]

These are both good shots which have their own merits. well done for both, but no1 is my favorite!

[dje]

Thanks Tony for that information, am playing with it now in ACR7 which is similar to LR4.

Thanks for your comments Mark.

Dave

[Nicola]

Hi Dave,
my vote is for #2...

[dje]

Hi Dave,
my vote is for #2...

Thanks for commenting Nicola. It looks like the preferences are about 50-50.

Dave

[Nicola]

Thanks for commenting Nicola. It looks like the preferences are about 50-50.

Dave

yes, it does.
IMHO both are as good as similar, but also as similar as different
they "paint" the same scenario with different interpretation: calm and peaceful feeling in the #2, anxiety for the time passing the #1. The preference comes from how the viewer read the image...