# Washed Ashore



## Majeed Badizadegan (Aug 28, 2012)

Washed Ashore by Majeed Badizadegan (Rotanimod), on Flickr


----------



## Derrel (Aug 28, 2012)

I like this picture. It has simple, strong composition.


----------



## LaFoto (Aug 28, 2012)

Yes, well, what else can be said? Derrel has said it all! Nothing to add to his words. Good photography!


----------



## KenC (Aug 28, 2012)

I'm not sure what washed up, but I agree this is a good composition with nice tonal range and contrast.  I think I see a little haloing between the sky and the rocks.


----------



## Majeed Badizadegan (Aug 28, 2012)

Thanks all. 

I see what you're saying KenC, could be a result of a new sharpening method I was trying in CS5. Smart Sharpen @ 180%, 0.8 pixels. 

Not entirely sure, I'll have to backtrack a bit to see if I can figure out what caused it.


----------



## sleist (Aug 28, 2012)

I think this is a nice shot for the reasons stated, but I feel like something is missing.  The object that's washed up is not identifiable and I want to remove it.  But that doesn't work because then the balance of the composition is lost.  I guess I just want that black thing to be a cool piece of driftwood or something.  Because I don't know what it is, I get this feeling like the photo has no subject.  I know you can't change that, but it keeps this shot from being a really strong one for me.

Very subjective, I know.  Otherwise well done.  Perhaps slightly tilted (sorry ) but correcting would move the "thing" too close to the edge.  I'll go take some meds and try to ignore it.


----------



## sleist (Aug 28, 2012)

Rotanimod said:


> Thanks all.
> 
> I see what you're saying KenC, could be a result of a new sharpening method I was trying in CS5. Smart Sharpen @ 180%, 0.8 pixels.
> 
> Not entirely sure, I'll have to backtrack a bit to see if I can figure out what caused it.



Better to do something like 2 passes at 90 or 3 passes at 60.  180 seems a bit high even for .8.


----------



## Majeed Badizadegan (Aug 28, 2012)

sleist said:


> I think this is a nice shot for the reasons stated, but I feel like something is missing. The object that's washed up is not identifiable and I want to remove it. But that doesn't work because then the balance of the composition is lost. I guess I just want that black thing to be a cool piece of driftwood or something. Because I don't know what it is, I get this feeling like the photo has no subject. I know you can't change that, but it keeps this shot from being a really strong one for me.
> 
> Very subjective, I know. Otherwise well done. Perhaps slightly tilted (sorry ) but correcting would move the "thing" too close to the edge. I'll go take some meds and try to ignore it.



It's interesting because in Oregon this is something we are VERY used to seeing. It's a common type of seaweed here. I did not take into account that it's not common elsewhere, I had somebody else asking what it was too.


----------



## Majeed Badizadegan (Aug 28, 2012)

Oh I was going to ask you Sleist, where are you seeing the image is not level? What are you using as the point of reference for that? I'm having a hard time seeing that. Thanks for the other feedback about the sharpening too. It's the first time I've ever tried it.


----------



## sleist (Aug 28, 2012)

Rotanimod said:


> sleist said:
> 
> 
> > I think this is a nice shot for the reasons stated, but I feel like something is missing. The object that's washed up is not identifiable and I want to remove it. But that doesn't work because then the balance of the composition is lost. I guess I just want that black thing to be a cool piece of driftwood or something. Because I don't know what it is, I get this feeling like the photo has no subject. I know you can't change that, but it keeps this shot from being a really strong one for me.
> ...



Looks like a giant, black spermatozoa ....


----------



## sleist (Aug 28, 2012)

Rotanimod said:


> Oh I was going to ask you Sleist, where are you seeing the image is not level? What are you using as the point of reference for that? I'm having a hard time seeing that. Thanks for the other feedback about the sharpening too. It's the first time I've ever tried it.



You know, I downloaded the pic and used a line along the white, foam bordering the far shore and it looked tilted the other way  .  I think it may be distortion rather than tilt.  I'll see if I can get my edit to agree with my brain ... 
I use smart sharpen often on 64bit tiffs, but I use between 30 and 60 with a 1.0 - 1.3 radius.  I'm happy with 40 and 1.1 ant the moment.  I'll occasionally use unsharp mask using 2-5% for amount and 50 for radius, but that's more of a local contrast effect than sharpening.  I actually do some sharpening to the RAW image in Capture NX2 which is contrary to theory that sharpening should be done last (I think that is more for output based sharpening though).  I sharpen the RAW image slightly and convert to TIFF which gets me very crisp effects and no artifacts.  It also allows be to use less sharpening later when the chance for artifacts might be higher.


----------



## Trever1t (Aug 28, 2012)

it's Kelp, very prominent type of vegetation all along the pacific coasts.


----------



## cgipson1 (Aug 28, 2012)

Very nice, Majeed!


----------



## sleist (Aug 28, 2012)

Here's my straightening attempt.  I used a combination of distortion correction (+10%) and leveling (-.75) in Capture NX2.







Enough OCD for tonight I think.


----------



## Atari1977 (Aug 28, 2012)

I think it's a tad underexposed, other then that though it's a pretty good picture.


----------



## Majeed Badizadegan (Aug 28, 2012)

Trever1t said:


> it's Kelp, very prominent type of vegetation all along the pacific coasts.



Thanks for all your Kelp sorting that out!



cgipson1 said:


> Very nice, Majeed!




Thanks Charlie. 



sleist said:


> Here's my straightening attempt. I used a combination of distortion correction (+10%) and leveling (-.75) in Capture NX2.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




You're right, it looks more straightened! I did correct for distortion with lens profile in Lightroom 4. Nice edit!


----------



## Jaemie (Aug 28, 2012)

Rotanimod said:


> Trever1t said:
> 
> 
> > it's Kelp, very prominent type of vegetation all along the pacific coasts.
> ...



:mrgreen:  I love help/kelp jokes. (ya, I'm a dork, I know)


----------



## Jaemie (Aug 28, 2012)

In other news...  :roll:

My eyes keep darting back and forth from the hilltop to the kelp in this splendidly executed photo. Both elements fight well for my attention, and while that kind of ambivalence often indicates a weak composition, here it feels like a strength, though I'm not sure I can explain why. I think it's creating a kind of resonance in my brain. Well, whatever it is (or isn't), the effect is not at all unpleasant and it holds my attention and keeps this image in my mind well after I've clicked to another page. So, I like it very much.


----------



## Majeed Badizadegan (Aug 29, 2012)

Jaemie said:


> In other news... :roll:
> 
> My eyes keep darting back and forth from the hilltop to the kelp in this splendidly executed photo. Both elements fight well for my attention, and while that kind of ambivalence often indicates a weak composition, here it feels like a strength, though I'm not sure I can explain why. I think it's creating a kind of resonance in my brain. Well, whatever it is (or isn't), the effect is not at all unpleasant and it holds my attention and keeps this image in my mind well after I've clicked to another page. So, I like it very much.



Very nicely worded! I appreciate the comment and was hoping to achieve something like this. Thanks Jaemie!


----------

