JULY 4th at the Lake....cc's okay!!
- Thread starter Christena
- Start date
PNWPhotos.com a friendly and growing community of photographers with an interest in the Pacific Northwest region.
We feature a Photography Discussion Forum and Pacific Northwest Photo Gallery. It's a fun and friendly place to talk with other photographers, ask questions, share you knowledge, view and post photos and more!
There are so many varying degrees of editing for sure. I may crop a little and play with color, contrast etc but I don't tweak it till it doesn't look like what I saw. I do appreciate all the special effects that editing programs give. Adds a new artistic element too things HOWEVER I don't like having too compete with the digital art in contests. The two should be separate.
It would have been very difficult to get the leaves in focus and the mountain. Maybe if you'd used tripod, and a very small aperature. But it would have required an extreme depth of field, and would be tricky.
Another option would have been to make them even softer focus. As it is, they're almost in focus, so your eye tries to focus on them. If they're really blurry, then maybe it would work. (Or maybe it would look even worse, sometimes these ideas sound good, but don't actually work.
)
Snuffy, you edit every shot you take, in one way or another. You're choosing the brightness and contrast and sharpness somehow.
There's a lot of extremes to that, from shooting in RAW and making all those choices in post processing, to shooting in JPG and letting the camera make the decisions. But no matter how you do it, there are choices being made. Shooting on full auto and jpg doesn't change that, it only says "OK, I'm going to use the settings the camera designer picked..."
That may work OK, but the problem is that the camera designer is trying to accomodate all situations. For example, the exposure is based on the metering spot being on an object that's light grey (18% grey), or roughly the typical value of caucasian skin color, since people are often the primary subject for photos.
Point that same metering point at bright white snow, or a greasy black locomotive, and the meter doesn't know the difference, and so it says "OK, I'll make that light grey!".
Don't get me wrong, it's fine to use the default settings. But you should be aware you're still making a choice, and at times there may be a reason to change it.
Hmmmmmmmmm thanks Bob...maybe I can work with some blur options in ps too soften the edges....thanks for the comments
Affiliate Disclosure: We may receive a commision from some of the links and ads shown on this website (Learn More Here)
Christena
New Member
@Snuffy....thanks for the comments Yeah I wish the leaves were in focus too but I still like the shot...maybe if I zoom in a do a crop it will help. The location is Fish Lake Hwy 140 Southern Oregon. If you are in the Medford area it's only about 30 min or so away.
Mike Thanks so much I was up at 6am for that shot...I tried darker and yes the mist disappeared
Yeah I wish the leaves were in focus too but I still like the shot...maybe if I zoom in a do a crop it will help. The location is Fish Lake Hwy 140 Southern Oregon. If you are in the Medford area it's only about 30 min or so away. Mike Thanks so much I was up at 6am for that shot...I tried darker and yes the mist disappeared
Christena
New Member
There are so many varying degrees of editing for sure. I may crop a little and play with color, contrast etc but I don't tweak it till it doesn't look like what I saw. I do appreciate all the special effects that editing programs give. Adds a new artistic element too things HOWEVER I don't like having too compete with the digital art in contests. The two should be separate.
@Snuffy....thanks for the comments
Mike Thanks so much I was up at 6am for that shot...I tried darker and yes the mist disappeared
It would have been very difficult to get the leaves in focus and the mountain. Maybe if you'd used tripod, and a very small aperature. But it would have required an extreme depth of field, and would be tricky.
Another option would have been to make them even softer focus. As it is, they're almost in focus, so your eye tries to focus on them. If they're really blurry, then maybe it would work. (Or maybe it would look even worse, sometimes these ideas sound good, but don't actually work.
)
Snuffy, you edit every shot you take, in one way or another. You're choosing the brightness and contrast and sharpness somehow.
There's a lot of extremes to that, from shooting in RAW and making all those choices in post processing, to shooting in JPG and letting the camera make the decisions. But no matter how you do it, there are choices being made. Shooting on full auto and jpg doesn't change that, it only says "OK, I'm going to use the settings the camera designer picked..."
That may work OK, but the problem is that the camera designer is trying to accomodate all situations. For example, the exposure is based on the metering spot being on an object that's light grey (18% grey), or roughly the typical value of caucasian skin color, since people are often the primary subject for photos.
Point that same metering point at bright white snow, or a greasy black locomotive, and the meter doesn't know the difference, and so it says "OK, I'll make that light grey!".
Don't get me wrong, it's fine to use the default settings. But you should be aware you're still making a choice, and at times there may be a reason to change it.
Christena
New Member
It would have been very difficult to get the leaves in focus and the mountain. Maybe if you'd used tripod, and a very small aperature. But it would have required an extreme depth of field, and would be tricky.
Another option would have been to make them even softer focus. As it is, they're almost in focus, so your eye tries to focus on them. If they're really blurry, then maybe it would work. (Or maybe it would look even worse, sometimes these ideas sound good, but don't actually work.
Hmmmmmmmmm thanks Bob...maybe I can work with some blur options in ps too soften the edges....thanks for the comments