Discussion in 'Appraisal Gallery' started by Dougall, Apr 22, 2012.
See that looks like a photograph.
The sky still works. It's a place you like to be at for some peace and quiet.
Also your copyright name is much more discreet.
No need for HDR, no burn out no blocked in, just a pleasant picture of a nice place
Vastly better. The HRD version is a total loser in competition, or for most uses.
A nice shot. I think it works a lot better without the HDR.
Still not sure if the horizon's quite level though - seems slightly high on the right, even allowing for the far coastline.
Wow! That's more like it (well, much more to my taste anyhow )
The elements of the shot speak for themselves and, aside from a very nit-picky sliver cropped off the bottom (I'd put the shadow of the long rectangular rock at the bottom of the frame and do away with the one under the water), it works really well.
Non-HDR wins the day!!
That's so much better and the colours aren't fighting each other.
whilst I didn't dislike the HDR version this is so, so much better and makes a picture you can be proud of. Compared to the hdr1 picture you posted its a no brainer as to which is best
...but kill the watermark its pointless, 2 seconds with the cloning tool and its gone. If you must have one make it useful, use an email, web address or contact point.
yes thins is much better. If you really want to go "other worldly" with it why not try a high contrast B&W conversion with a red filter to make the sky go very dark
much much better than the hdr shot.
I liked the HDR...but HDR only works in certain conditions and done with minimal effect....this photo CLEARLY didn't need it at all. It's a great image all on it's own.
Sorry, but I have to disagree. The lighthouse tower works well and the sky is sort of OK but the foreground rocks and sand etc are flat and uninteresting. If you aren't going to HDR it (which, for the foreground would work well) then it needs some work in levels or curves to provide a bit of mid-range oomph
Like this maybe? Probably too far, but no way is HDR needed.
That's more like it Mike. Although, as you say, a bit too far. I tried messing with the image myself, just to give some idea of what I meant, but I don't know how to upload images to this forum
I agree with that - but HDR is not the way to accomplish that, as it does precisely the opposite and flattens the mid tones significantly.
a mono alternative.
It’s interesting that ramping the contrast up as uncovered some artefacts/halos round the tower. Are these echoes of earlier edits
Those halos really stand out in the high contrast image also a number of spots and artifacts in the sky. I know this really is nit-picking but my eye keeps being drawn to the wind farm on the left horizon.
Separate names with a comma.