Last edited by JK6065; 10th April 2011 at 09:28 AM.
Reopen the image in ACR or GIMP or whatever PP program you are using and see if you can add a simulated ND filter to the bottom of the frame where the riverbank/river is and lighten that area by at least 16%. Also, do a curves adjustment to set the white and black points within that area and adjust accordingly.
If you don't have that option, see if you can mask that area so as to only edit it and not the rest of the frame.
Next, when you save, save as a RGB file and not gray or you will lose a lot of fine tuning data.
I am going to be a pain and disagree with Chris on this one. Based on your usual style of b/w photography I would actually darken the foreground so almost black. I am also a little thrown with the composition. That pylon should either sit on a third or in the centre in my opinion. I am not a stickler for rules (in fact they irritate me to the point of distraction) but I think the compositional principles work best this this kind of shot. Of course it does not apply to the horizon since you need to accentuate the height and drama of the sky.
"I am going to be a pain..."
Oh dear, say it's not true...
If in the end, it is the image you like best, then it is the best edit. I thought your concern was in not having enough bottom detail and was trying to get you to that point...if what you have now is the initial vision, then far be it from me to argue...
You know me to well I am highly qualified in being a painOh dear, say it's not true...
Jeroen, I find the second edit far better than the first - I was going to say good luck with the exams but luck has nothing to do with it. I just somehow know you will fine. Becki is getting ready for her first year advanced level exams...a bundle of stress at the moment. Still she has been consoled by getting stage manager position for the college production of the "Sound of Music"......and I suspect it is nothing to do with patriotic Austrian naval officers in mid life crisis and young English nannies
Another couple of seconds would do it for me...but as it is, I find the clouds quite distracting as they do done match the tranquility of the water. Essentially, if you think about this shot as a piece of music, you have a Strauss on the bottom, a Wagner-ian middle and a post modern, heavy metal in th eclouds. It's disconcerting, to say the least; but then, that is my old eye speaking.
I love that analysis Chris However, for me personally, that is why it works. The contradictions provide a very distinct path through the image. I do not know whether I have said this before but I am not a great fan of fluffy water. But Jeroen, you made a point in another thread that it depends on how you apply that technique. I think you have shown here that it can be applied in a refreshing way. The centrally placed horizon does work because the image has three distinct components.
Thanks Jeroen I will pass on your best wishes. She is trying to balance work, social life (read; boys) and her love of live music and theatre at present. She did a very successful photo shoot last weekend. I did tell her to put some shots up on CiC but I guess she is getting timed out on everything at the moment.Anyway, Steve, Wish Rebecca good luck with her studies. I haven't seen her around here recently (or is it just me being too busy with exams ).
I shot this at 40s f/22 ISO 100 with a ND110 and a CPL filter (combined about 12 stops). I don't have any more filters for the lens I used (17-40mm f/4 L on a Canon EOS 400d) and the camera-lens combination wouldn't let me stop it down even more.
Interesting comparison you do between photography and music ( I think both can be quite similar). Combining the extremes wouldn't appeal to everyone for sure, so I guess it's just a case of interpretation anyway.
Last edited by JK6065; 10th April 2011 at 12:00 PM.