April 18, 2014, 07:47:53 PM

Author Topic: San Francisco Long Exposure Cityscapes!  (Read 7667 times)

2n10

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 252
    • View Profile
Re: San Francisco Long Exposure Cityscapes!
« Reply #15 on: May 08, 2013, 10:43:51 AM »
Love the shots and thanks for sharing. 

I think the crop, if you did crop, on number two cut off the right end of the bridge where it connected to land making it seem a little awkward.

Ignore the troll.
Canon EOS 7D, EF-S 10-22, EF-S 17-55, EF 100 Macro, EF 50 1.4, EF 70-300, EF 100-400L

canon rumors FORUM

Re: San Francisco Long Exposure Cityscapes!
« Reply #15 on: May 08, 2013, 10:43:51 AM »

dilbert

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 2370
    • View Profile
Re: San Francisco Long Exposure Cityscapes!
« Reply #16 on: May 08, 2013, 10:45:16 AM »
Anyone could have taken those photographs as there is nothing special about them.

Really constructive criticism(!)

If you want to make your photos stand out, there needs to be something special about them, be it style, composition, post, etc.

I suppose dawn/dusk/night photos that are long exposure is a phase that photographers go through.

So my advice is go take a bunch more long exposure night time photos and get it out of your system.

Jura

  • PowerShot G16
  • **
  • Posts: 12
    • View Profile
Re: San Francisco Long Exposure Cityscapes!
« Reply #17 on: May 08, 2013, 10:47:57 AM »

The second shot is awesome in terms of the reflections but I feel there's something ever so slightly awkward about the crop. I cant quite put my finger on it.
I like the second one because it makes the bridge look very dainty and elegant. I think it is the contrast of light and darkness that attracts me to the picture. Do you feel about the crop because it breaks the rule of thirds? I like it because it breaks that rule. I think the other thing is that a catenary is indeed a thing of beauty and this picture highlights that.


Looking again I think it might be that there's too much sky above the bridge for my taste and that has the effect of reducing the impact of the bridge and reflection... Perhaps its the small size of the picture. It might look awesome as a 40 inch print....
5DII, Olympus XA, 24-105L, 40, 100L, 70-300L, Pentax 50mm F1.4 SMC Takumar, Kenko DGX 1.4x, 430EX II and some bits; on shopping list Samyang 14 canon 7d/1DIV and 400 f5.6

distant.star

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1342
    • View Profile
    • Tracy's Shooting Gallery
Re: San Francisco Long Exposure Cityscapes!
« Reply #18 on: May 08, 2013, 10:53:25 AM »
Anyone could have taken those photographs as there is nothing special about them.

Really constructive criticism(!)

If you want to make your photos stand out, there needs to be something special about them, be it style, composition, post, etc.

I suppose dawn/dusk/night photos that are long exposure is a phase that photographers go through.

So my advice is go take a bunch more long exposure night time photos and get it out of your system.

Perhaps true, but then civility is a phase most adult humans eventually grow into. Stay on the path, and eventually you get there.
Walter: Were you listening to The Dude's story? Donny: I was bowling. Walter: So you have no frame of reference here, Donny. You're like a child who wanders into the middle of a movie and wants to know...

dilbert

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 2370
    • View Profile
Re: San Francisco Long Exposure Cityscapes!
« Reply #19 on: May 08, 2013, 10:56:59 AM »

Anyone could have taken those photographs as there is nothing special about them.


I just looked up your profile for more inspirational photos and found this one

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=5334.msg103060#msg103060

I guess difficult for anyone to take this?


Personally, I liked your photographs of SF - thank you for posting them.

Do you have any pictures of penguins, so we can make a fairer comparison to dilbert's work?


Eh, that penguin pic was not a "look at how good this pic is" rather a "for once noise is very well controlled at ISO 3200 in the dark". Go figure.

RAKAMRAK

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 282
    • View Profile
Re: San Francisco Long Exposure Cityscapes!
« Reply #20 on: May 08, 2013, 10:57:10 AM »

Anyone could have taken those photographs as there is nothing special about them.


I just looked up your profile for more inspirational photos and found this one

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=5334.msg103060#msg103060

I guess difficult for anyone to take this?


Wow, that is a penguin? It took me some time to understand, modernistic rendition of a penguin. Probably taking lots of penguin photos in low light will let that get out of the system too.
Need to learn a lot more.
My Flickr Page

dilbert

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 2370
    • View Profile
Re: San Francisco Long Exposure Cityscapes!
« Reply #21 on: May 08, 2013, 10:59:32 AM »
Anyone could have taken those photographs as there is nothing special about them.

Really constructive criticism(!)

If you want to make your photos stand out, there needs to be something special about them, be it style, composition, post, etc.

I suppose dawn/dusk/night photos that are long exposure is a phase that photographers go through.

So my advice is go take a bunch more long exposure night time photos and get it out of your system.

Perhaps true, but then civility is a phase most adult humans eventually grow into. Stay on the path, and eventually you get there.

Thank you for your comment. Now would you like to add to the discussion about the photo?

canon rumors FORUM

Re: San Francisco Long Exposure Cityscapes!
« Reply #21 on: May 08, 2013, 10:59:32 AM »

paul13walnut5

  • Guest
Re: San Francisco Long Exposure Cityscapes!
« Reply #22 on: May 08, 2013, 11:02:08 AM »
I think dilbert is close to saying the right thing, but saying it in the wrong way.

These are technically accomplished, but creatively sparse, you've nailed the magic hour technique, but with such an iconic landmark you really need a new angle to stand out.  We've seen these before & we'll see them again.

I live on the west coast of Scotland and I am spoiled by some of the most beautiful coastal and mountain scenery in the world, and most of it fairly accessable.  Which means that you'll have seen most of the landmarks, in HDR with ND110's at dusk, at dawn, with snow, etc time and time again.

There's nothing worse than seeing 1000x Colin Prior or Joe Cornish clones.  Colin & Joe are masters.  I'm not at their level, and neither are the dullards in scottish camera clubs who would be as well as working a photocopier than working a camera.  I'll never attempt Black Rock for this reason.  Folk have done it before, folk have done it better, folk more creative than me, or more willing to get the ropes out will get better angles than me.

Please don't be disheartened.  They are nice images, striking colours, decent composition, capbale depth of field control, they display the ingredients you'll need to create striking brilliant images that folk will want to come back to again and again, just I don't think you've done that here. 

You could submit these to a library and they would probably sell pretty well, if thats any consolation.

I sincerely look forward to seeing what else you come up with in the future, I and hope you take my comments in the spirit intended. 

To those dilbert bashing, the place for sychophancy is flickr

dilbert

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 2370
    • View Profile
Re: San Francisco Long Exposure Cityscapes!
« Reply #23 on: May 08, 2013, 11:04:07 AM »

Anyone could have taken those photographs as there is nothing special about them.


I just looked up your profile for more inspirational photos and found this one

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=5334.msg103060#msg103060

I guess difficult for anyone to take this?


Wow, that is a penguin? It took me some time to understand, modernistic rendition of a penguin. Probably taking lots of penguin photos in low light will let that get out of the system too.


From time to time I go back to see if I can get a better one. It really is quite difficult because (a) they only come out on to the rocks after dark (b) you cannot use flashes so (c) you're left with very low powered artificial light and not to forget that (d) they're animals and thus almost constantly move usually requiring (e) a shutter speed of 1/100 (or more) so that you don't have blurry flippers. Maybe a 1DX would do the trick with clean ISO12800 - or rather an ISO12800 that works as smoothly as the 5D2 at ISO3200.

MARKOE PHOTOE

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 161
  • A better box of crayons makes the job easier...
    • View Profile
    • http://www.markoe.smugmug.com
Re: San Francisco Long Exposure Cityscapes!
« Reply #24 on: May 08, 2013, 11:38:14 AM »
I personally like your style of portraits as seen on your Flickr pages.  As we both live in the SF Bay Area I know these places well and sometimes its just not that easy to get there and be there at the right moment. But still, well done. 

Like all else mentioned, ignore the penguin.

Keep posting your work.  Maybe you should go to SF Zoo and share your image of what a real penguin through your lens might look like. HA!
A few cameras and lenses and a lot of creative energy and imagination.

rpt

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 2092
  • Could not wait for 7D2 so I got the 5D3
    • View Profile
Re: San Francisco Long Exposure Cityscapes!
« Reply #25 on: May 08, 2013, 12:00:56 PM »

The second shot is awesome in terms of the reflections but I feel there's something ever so slightly awkward about the crop. I cant quite put my finger on it.
I like the second one because it makes the bridge look very dainty and elegant. I think it is the contrast of light and darkness that attracts me to the picture. Do you feel about the crop because it breaks the rule of thirds? I like it because it breaks that rule. I think the other thing is that a catenary is indeed a thing of beauty and this picture highlights that.


Looking again I think it might be that there's too much sky above the bridge for my taste and that has the effect of reducing the impact of the bridge and reflection... Perhaps its the small size of the picture. It might look awesome as a 40 inch print....
Yes I think it would. Like I said it broke the rule of the thirds. May be it needed to be taken with a shallower angle to the water to get some more reflection and then cut off some of the sky... Another thought came to me - the lighting is how we would have seen it so that may add to our liking it...

sleepnever

  • Rebel SL1
  • ***
  • Posts: 94
    • View Profile
Re: San Francisco Long Exposure Cityscapes!
« Reply #26 on: May 08, 2013, 12:07:59 PM »
Beautiful shots OP. Very nicely done.
Canon 5D3 | 50mm f1.8 II | 24-70 f2.8L | 100 f2.8L IS Macro | 430EX II
Flickr

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • *******
  • Posts: 12777
    • View Profile
Re: San Francisco Long Exposure Cityscapes!
« Reply #27 on: May 08, 2013, 01:39:25 PM »
I wondered how this thread ran up a high post count so fast - I was hoping for lots of images, instead it's just dilbert being a rude ass and the fallout from that.  How disappointing.  Dilbert, are you sure you know a good picture from a bad one?  It's a bit more subjective than knowing the difference between a camera and a lens, and since you have trouble comprehending the latter, I question your ability to judge the former.

But back to the topic at hand (sort of, not a full cityscape but at least a long exposure in SF)...


EOS 1D X, TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II, 13 s, f/8, ISO 100
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

canon rumors FORUM

Re: San Francisco Long Exposure Cityscapes!
« Reply #27 on: May 08, 2013, 01:39:25 PM »

distant.star

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1342
    • View Profile
    • Tracy's Shooting Gallery
Re: San Francisco Long Exposure Cityscapes!
« Reply #28 on: May 08, 2013, 02:17:04 PM »
I wondered how this thread ran up a high post count so fast - I was hoping for lots of images, instead it's just dilbert being a rude ass and the fallout from that.  How disappointing.  Dilbert, are you sure you know a good picture from a bad one?  It's a bit more subjective than knowing the difference between a camera and a lens, and since you have trouble comprehending the latter, I question your ability to judge the former.

But back to the topic at hand (sort of, not a full cityscape but at least a long exposure in SF)...

Well, you've succeeded in demonstrating what a good picture looks like. That's a great shot!!
Walter: Were you listening to The Dude's story? Donny: I was bowling. Walter: So you have no frame of reference here, Donny. You're like a child who wanders into the middle of a movie and wants to know...

paul13walnut5

  • Guest
Re: San Francisco Long Exposure Cityscapes!
« Reply #29 on: May 08, 2013, 03:35:39 PM »
I would have taken it in the magic hour as the sky is just dead, and the light still looks a bit sodium to me - it's the predominant source, I know it's tricky to balance, but thats where PS adjustment layers and composite modes can help out.  Even the 'replace colour' tool would have helped to cool down the other lights for a correctly balanced main structure. I also think the impact of the structure, the vertical repitition of the corinthian pillars is compromised by the bushes at the edge of shot.  The reflections bother me too, that they are off at an angle, maybe a lower camera position with more shift, to me the amount of foreground suggest the camera was pretty much level with no shift dialled in, it's almost a wasted opportunity as half the frame is doing nothing, there's no interesting detail, no lead in.  Compositionally the 'horizon' is pretty much dead centre.  This is exactly the kind of shot where time of day and correct application of the kit can make an exceptional image, and that simply hasn't been achieved.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: San Francisco Long Exposure Cityscapes!
« Reply #29 on: May 08, 2013, 03:35:39 PM »