Sunset,,,,pond,,,,photo,,,,C&C please!!!

[FITBMX]

Hiked to the watershed pond, hoping for a photo of one of the owls living down there.
But no owls.
So I took some sunset photos.

C&C welcome.

1

2

3

4

5
I think the ducks down at the pond are getting meaner!

 

[katsrevenge]

I really like 2 and 3. I think 1 might work better if the sun wasn't centered?

Ducks are evil, LOL. We have Canadian geese here. Such evil nasty things. Pretty but so smelly.

 

[FITBMX]

I really like 2 and 3. I think 1 might work better if the sun wasn't centered?

Ducks are evil, LOL. We have Canadian geese here. Such evil nasty things. Pretty but so smelly.

Thanks! People have said to try not to center these in the past, and I have tried not centering before, but it just doesn't click for me, so I stopped!

The watershed pond is nearly 15 acres of water, and I have seen it with so many geese and ducks, that the whole pond smell is almost overwhelming.
And it was a beever that ate the tree.

 

[katsrevenge]

I really like 2 and 3. I think 1 might work better if the sun wasn't centered?

Ducks are evil, LOL. We have Canadian geese here. Such evil nasty things. Pretty but so smelly.

Thanks! People have said to try not to center these in the past, and I have tried not centering before, but it just doesn't click for me, so I stopped!

The watershed pond is nearly 15 acres of water, and I have seen it with so many geese and ducks, that the whole pond smell is almost overwhelming.
And it was a beever that ate the tree.

I find that centered works after the sun is down but while it's still all visible putting it to the side is best. But hey, to each their own.

I live near a huge park with a large pond. I know the smell. Uck.

I know, LOL. Ducks are still evil. One chased me once. And the poo. Everywhere and so slippy.

 

[Tim Tucker]

Before I go any further, and so there's no misunderstanding, I'm not saying that what you've done is wrong. Only that by not fully understanding the principles of design, the way people see and perceive the image is highly dependant on the environment in which they view it. The image changes depending on the background it's viewed against.

I like to try and show you this, explain why it is, and how to remove the confusion because I see a lot of this and I'm not sure it's fully understood by photographers.

What I'm talking about is not utilising the range of tones available and how this affects the way the image is seen. Here's a threshold map of the 4th image showing the brightest two pixels at 143, (the colour histogram shows the red channel as having brighter pixels but on an RGB screen with no green or blue present this still only represents half the brightness possible).

So how does this affect the way the image is seen sand percieved? For this little experiment in vision and how we see you will need to download the 4 images and open them in your image viewer, with the images at 100% and the viewer set to 'full screen' with a black background. The idea is that you view each image against a full black background.

original_black_ground.jpg

original_white_ground.jpg

edit_black_ground.jpg

edit_white_ground.jpg

Now if you open original_black_ground.jpg so you view it against a full screen black background and view it for 30 seconds or more, to let the eye adjust, and you will see a near full range of tones, colour and contrast. The key point here is; let the eye adjust.

Now if you flick the image to original_white_ground.jpg see how the impression of tone, colour and contrast changes. If you view this image for 30 seconds you will see that this impression is maintained.

So what's happening here? The key point is that the eye adjusts. We don't see in absolute values only relative ones, we don't see that x is at a certain luminance only that it is brighter/darker than y. You brain then adjusts this information to try and see a full range of tones between these points, just like an 'auto levels' adjustment. What happens when you present the image on a white ground is that you give the eye a much brighter tone as a reference and it now sees the other tones as occupying only half the range of tones between the black and the 'new' white. We now see the tones and colours relative to the white ground and not the brightest tone in the image.

My edits are in no way presented as correct, but if you flick between them you'll see that the perception of tone, colour and contrast is far more stable simply because I've included the reference points with the image, so the background or border is far less critical.

There is nothing wrong with only using the lower half the tones available, but if you want the viewer to see it as dark then you must include the reference bright point (as simple as a white border) or the viewer's perception of tone, colour, and contrast will vary depending on the background against which it's viewed.

 

[407370]

3 is my fave but a good set all round.
If there is something to balance the sunset either to the side or in front then sure compose accordingly but nothing wrong with center sun. I also love minimalist sunset / sunrise pictures with little or no content to detract from the sun. I wanted a portrait version of a sunset just to be different and its still one of the first pictures I show people as my style of photography.

 

[Peeb]

^ I like having the bird in the foreground.

Oh, and as to the OP- I dig #3!

 

[Benjo255]

To me n. 1 is the best. I would crop away all the black space below in a 16:9 ratio.

 

[FITBMX]

Before I go any further, and so there's no misunderstanding, I'm not saying that what you've done is wrong. Only that by not fully understanding the principles of design, the way people see and perceive the image is highly dependant on the environment in which they view it. The image changes depending on the background it's viewed against.

I like to try and show you this, explain why it is, and how to remove the confusion because I see a lot of this and I'm not sure it's fully understood by photographers.

What I'm talking about is not utilising the range of tones available and how this affects the way the image is seen. Here's a threshold map of the 4th image showing the brightest two pixels at 143, (the colour histogram shows the red channel as having brighter pixels but on an RGB screen with no green or blue present this still only represents half the brightness possible).


So how does this affect the way the image is seen sand percieved? For this little experiment in vision and how we see you will need to download the 4 images and open them in your image viewer, with the images at 100% and the viewer set to 'full screen' with a black background. The idea is that you view each image against a full black background.


Now if you open original_black_ground.jpg so you view it against a full screen black background and view it for 30 seconds or more, to let the eye adjust, and you will see a near full range of tones, colour and contrast. The key point here is; let the eye adjust.

Now if you flick the image to original_white_ground.jpg see how the impression of tone, colour and contrast changes. If you view this image for 30 seconds you will see that this impression is maintained.

So what's happening here? The key point is that the eye adjusts. We don't see in absolute values only relative ones, we don't see that x is at a certain luminance only that it is brighter/darker than y. You brain then adjusts this information to try and see a full range of tones between these points, just like an 'auto levels' adjustment. What happens when you present the image on a white ground is that you give the eye a much brighter tone as a reference and it now sees the other tones as occupying only half the range of tones between the black and the 'new' white. We now see the tones and colours relative to the white ground and not the brightest tone in the image.

My edits are in no way presented as correct, but if you flick between them you'll see that the perception of tone, colour and contrast is far more stable simply because I've included the reference points with the image, so the background or border is far less critical.

There is nothing wrong with only using the lower half the tones available, but if you want the viewer to see it as dark then you must include the reference bright point (as simple as a white border) or the viewer's perception of tone, colour, and contrast will vary depending on the background against which it's viewed.

Wow! I totally get that!
It makes a huge difference in the viewing of a photo, will remember this and use it often.
Thank you so much for taking the time to explain it!

 

[FITBMX]

To me n. 1 is the best. I would crop away all the black space below in a 16:9 ratio.

Thanks!
I thought of a 16:9 ratio on that one, and since you say the same, I will have to try it.

3 is my fave but a good set all round.
If there is something to balance the sunset either to the side or in front then sure compose accordingly but nothing wrong with center sun. I also love minimalist sunset / sunrise pictures with little or no content to detract from the sun. I wanted a portrait version of a sunset just to be different and its still one of the first pictures I show people as my style of photography.

Thanks!
That is a nice photo, I see why you like it.

^ I like having the bird in the foreground.

Oh, and as to the OP- I dig #3!

Thanks.
And I agree about the bird.

 

[LarryLomona]

Great set

 

[FITBMX]

Great set

Thanks!

 

[manaheim]

Focus as much as you can on bringing out the darker areas without blowing the sun through the roof. Very difficult to do, but I think you can bring out more than you have here... at least assuming you shot these RAW. As they are currently, they're way too dark.

 

[FITBMX]

Focus as much as you can on bringing out the darker areas without blowing the sun through the roof. Very difficult to do, but I think you can bring out more than you have here... at least assuming you shot these RAW. As they are currently, they're way too dark.

Yes they were shot in RAW. I will spend some time in PS and see what I can do. These were edited with LR, I think I can do a better job in PS.
If it works out I will post it on here.
Thanks for the input!

 

[FITBMX]

Focus as much as you can on bringing out the darker areas without blowing the sun through the roof. Very difficult to do, but I think you can bring out more than you have here... at least assuming you shot these RAW. As they are currently, they're way too dark.

Is this any better?