# Little White Church on a lake



## SquarePeg (Oct 11, 2021)

Across the lake from this little church is a locally famous spot to shoot early morning when the lake is covered with mist.  That didn’t fit into our plans but we took a drive over there midday snd lucked out with amazing foliage colors and a completely still lake when the breeze suddenly died off. 

I like the 16x9 of this one.  Still a ways to go for peak color on the mountain behind the church but the surrounding trees were very vibrant and colorful. 



Little white churches by SharonCat..., on Flickr



Little white churches by SharonCat..., on Flickr



Little white churches by SharonCat..., on Flickr


----------



## Peeb (Oct 11, 2021)

Winners all, but I really love #1


----------



## SquarePeg (Oct 11, 2021)

Peeb said:


> Winners all, but I really love #1


Thanks I really appreciate your taking a look and commenting.  Saw your Flickr comment too but didn’t have a chance to reply at the time.  Yes - I’m totally in love with the xt2 and how easy it is!


----------



## Peeb (Oct 11, 2021)

SquarePeg said:


> Thanks I really appreciate your taking a look and commenting.  Saw your Flickr comment too but didn’t have a chance to reply at the time.  Yes - I’m totally in love with the xt2 and how easy it is!


I had a brief fling with an X-T20 (your camera's little brother), and I loved the colors.  My favorite photo, ever, was taken with the little Fuji that could.  The ergonomics were just a bit contrary to my Nikon experience, and I never found a way to sharpen without causing those odd artifacts, so I jumped onboard with the Z6 when Nikon finally got mirrorless right.  Being a bit nostalgic about the Fuji, so I just checked ebay, and wow- they hold their value well! 

You and the X-T2 are a perfect pair!  Well done.


----------



## Jeff15 (Oct 11, 2021)

Beautiful shot with amazing colours.....


----------



## ntz (Oct 11, 2021)

just like from photography books .... especially #1


----------



## SquarePeg (Oct 11, 2021)

Peeb said:


> I had a brief fling with an X-T20 (your camera's little brother), and I loved the colors.  My favorite photo, ever, was taken with the little Fuji that could.  The ergonomics were just a bit contrary to my Nikon experience, and I never found a way to sharpen without causing those odd artifacts, so I jumped onboard with the Z6 when Nikon finally got mirrorless right.  Being a bit nostalgic about the Fuji, so I just checked ebay, and wow- they hold their value well!
> 
> You and the X-T2 are a perfect pair!  Well done.


Yes the used ones get scooped right up.  I lucked into one at my local camera store so I have a back up now.  


Jeff15 said:


> Beautiful shot with amazing colours.....


Thank you Jeff.  


ntz said:


> just like from photography books .... especially #1


Thanks!  NH in fall is picture book perfect.


----------



## jeffashman (Oct 11, 2021)

Beautiful! Makes me think of a nice, brisk walk in a chill Autumn air, and then a mug of hot cider afterwards.


----------



## K9Kirk (Oct 11, 2021)

Such a beautiful place, I could look at it for hours.


----------



## Space Face (Oct 12, 2021)

Peaceful scene.


----------



## SquarePeg (Oct 12, 2021)

K9Kirk said:


> Such a beautiful place, I could look at it for hours.





Space Face said:


> Peaceful scene.


Glad you like the view.


----------



## SquarePeg (Oct 12, 2021)

Lez325 said:


> I feel this set is slightly under exposed - an easy fix in Photoshop
> 
> Boosting the exposure by 1 stop gives a greater dynamic range and more vibrant colours
> 
> ...


Thanks for the input.  I still prefer the darker image because it was an overcast gloomy day and that’s how I want to remember it.  I also think the colors are better when they’re darker, especially when viewed on a large screen.  You’re welcome to leave the edit up - I’m curious what others think?


----------



## K9Kirk (Oct 12, 2021)

SquarePeg said:


> Thanks for the input.  I still prefer the darker image because it was an overcast gloomy day and that’s how I want to remember it.  I also think the colors are better when they’re darker, especially when viewed on a large screen.  You’re welcome to leave the edit up - I’m curious what others think?


I've come to the sad conclusion that ever since PS, photos aren't about developing picture's accurately, but developing them to the taste of each and every individual so since that's an impossibility and no one seems to realize it, it's like you're suppose to know how they like their pics, there's only one person you need try and please and that's you. If you feel you processed the pics to represent that scene accurately then you hit the mark and that's all that matters. 
I have to be honest and say I am a little disappointed .......... I was hoping to see Michael Landon next to the little white church on the pr ...... lake.


----------



## SquarePeg (Oct 12, 2021)

K9Kirk said:


> I've come to the sad conclusion that ever since PS, photos aren't about developing picture's accurately, but developing them to the taste of each and every individual so since that's an impossibility and no one seems to realize it, it's like you're suppose to know how they like their pics, there's only one person you need try and please and that's you. If you feel you processed the pics to represent that scene accurately then you hit the mark and that's all that matters.
> I have to be honest and say I am a little disappointed .......... I was hoping to see Michael Landon next to the little white church on the pr ...... lake.


Don’t kid yourself, photos (especially landscapes and portraits) have always been about processing to please the artist and not for accuracy.  PS has just allowed the masses to do with digital what the few could do in a darkroom.   

I always process to my own taste but I’m also open to suggestions for improvement.  Sometimes with exposure it’s a matter of screen brightness or screen size.  I use a large screen to edit and sometimes details that I can see disappear when viewed on a phone or small tablet or a device that’s set at a dimmer backlighting.  If I’m sharing a photo then I want to know what others see, even if in the end I choose to please my own eye.


----------



## K9Kirk (Oct 12, 2021)

I think we're on a different wave length. I'm comparing PS to *film roll days *when the average person didn't develop their own pictures. Most people just did their best with their camera's and chosen speed of film and hoped the "Photo Booth" lab did a good job of developing "_thier pics_" so it _has not_ always been about processing to please the artist unless you believe those people or their machines behind the scenes working in the photo labs cared about your pics as much as you did. I couldn't count the number of pics that were poorly processed over the years. I stand by my statement. 
Also, _many people do try to reproduce their pictures* as accurately as possible*_ because they liked how everything looked to their naked eye ....... ( "I still prefer the darker image because it was an overcast gloomy day and that’s how I want to remember it." )  

Boy, oh boy. Mars & Venus.


----------



## SquarePeg (Oct 12, 2021)

You’re comparing photos posted by both professional and hobbyist photographers on a Photography discussion forum to photos taken with a point and shoot and developed at a photo booth in the 80’s?  I don’t get the similarity at all.  

To edit or not… Same debate that a few on this forum feel the need to start in every other thread. I’d prefer you not use my photo threads for that tired discussion.


----------



## limr (Oct 12, 2021)

SquarePeg said:


> Thanks for the input.  I still prefer the darker image because it was an overcast gloomy day and that’s how I want to remember it.  I also think the colors are better when they’re darker, especially when viewed on a large screen.  You’re welcome to leave the edit up - I’m curious what others think?



I prefer the darker images, too. The colors seem richer. The edit looks too saturated for my tastes.



K9Kirk said:


> I've come to the sad conclusion that ever since PS, photos aren't about developing picture's accurately, but developing them to the taste of each and every individual so since that's an impossibility and no one seems to realize it, it's like you're suppose to know how they like their pics, there's only one person you need try and please and that's you. If you feel you processed the pics to represent that scene accurately then you hit the mark and that's all that matters.
> I have to be honest and say I am a little disappointed .......... I was hoping to see Michael Landon next to the little white church on the pr ...... lake.



Isn't that the entire point of asking for C&C? To get feedback on ways to possibly improve an image, even if we have processed the image to our liking? To find out if there are things we've missed or didn't think of or don't know how to do? 

"Mars and Venus" = pop psychology hubris.


----------



## K9Kirk (Oct 12, 2021)

limr said:


> I prefer the darker images, too. The colors seem richer. The edit looks too saturated for my tastes.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


What are you two going on about? I wasn't criticizing her picture, I was agreeing with the way she processed it and supported her decision but I get taken the wrong way and ganged up on as usual. Geez! I've learned my lesson.


----------



## K9Kirk (Oct 12, 2021)

SquarePeg said:


> You’re comparing photos posted by both professional and hobbyist photographers on a Photography discussion forum to photos taken with a point and shoot and developed at a photo booth in the 80’s?  I don’t get the similarity at all.
> 
> To edit or not… Same debate that a few on this forum feel the need to start in every other thread. I’d prefer you not use my photo threads for that tired discussion.


"I don't get the similarity at all."
You don't because there isn't one. That's my whole point! Photography has changed, that's all I'm saying. i'd prefer you not tell me what I can or can not critique and how unless it is violating a forum rule.


----------



## SquarePeg (Oct 12, 2021)

Apparently not.


----------



## limr (Oct 12, 2021)

K9Kirk said:


> What are you two going on about? I wasn't criticizing her picture, I was agreeing with the way she processed it and supported her decision but I get taken the wrong way and ganged up on as usual. Geez! I've learned my lesson.



Where did I say you were criticising her picture? And why do you think you're being "ganged up on"? I am quite baffled by your response.


----------



## Lez325 (Oct 13, 2021)

I have deleted my edit- I don't want to be the catalyst that starts arguments

Sorry @SquarePeg I didn't realise it was shot on an overcast day- in which case your image as fine as it is 

Les


----------



## K9Kirk (Oct 13, 2021)

limr said:


> Where did I say you were criticising her picture? And why do you think you're being "ganged up on"? I am quite baffled by your response.


Lets keep this in perspective.  

Square peg:  "I'm curious what others think."

I spoke my mind and supported her decision and now we are here doing this.

Maybe if she had simply thanked me we wouldn't be here but she got defensive over the reason I supported her decision. 

I'm baffled beyond belief how it came to this.


----------



## limr (Oct 13, 2021)

K9Kirk said:


> Lets keep this in perspective.
> 
> Square peg:  "I'm curious what others think."
> 
> ...



Someone posted an edit, and Sharon responded but then asked what other people thought. Part of your response was: "there's only one person you need try and please and that's you. If you feel you processed the pics to represent that scene accurately then you hit the mark and that's all that matters."

In past threads, you have said that you wanted to see more critique and fewer posts of simple "nice pic" posts. And so that response confused me because it seemed like you were saying she shouldn't be bothering with feedback. Maybe I misunderstood this sentence. Maybe you meant something else. That's why I asked for clarification.

How does a question asking for clarification of your post lead you to thinking you were being "ganged up on as usual"? I just don't understand why you were ascribing such an aggressive intent to my questions.


----------



## K9Kirk (Oct 13, 2021)

limr said:


> Someone posted an edit, and Sharon responded but then asked what other people thought. Part of your response was: "there's only one person you need try and please and that's you. If you feel you processed the pics to represent that scene accurately then you hit the mark and that's all that matters."
> 
> In past threads, you have said that you wanted to see more critique and fewer posts of simple "nice pic" posts. And so that response confused me because it seemed like you were saying she shouldn't be bothering with feedback. Maybe I misunderstood this sentence. Maybe you meant something else. That's why I asked for clarification.
> 
> How does a question asking for clarification of your post lead you to thinking you were being "ganged up on as usual"? I just don't understand why you were ascribing such an aggressive intent to my questions.


With all due respect, I'm not explaining myself any further, you haven't asked her once why she couldn't have just thanked me, I can see the politics here and where this is going. Have a nice day!


----------



## limr (Oct 13, 2021)

K9Kirk said:


> With all due respect, I'm not explaining myself any further, you haven't asked her once why she couldn't have just thanked me, I can see the politics here and where this is going. Have a nice day!



You are mistaken but clearly you don't believe anything I say, so have a nice day.


----------



## snowbear (Oct 13, 2021)

I like all of them, but #1 and #3 really do it for me.  The church seems to get lost in the second one.


----------

