Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L USM

[R1-7D]

R1-7D I like your shots. Architecture seems a good subject for this lens. While I'm not ashamed of my efforts I see them as a work in progress needing lots of help and encouragement from folks like you. Thanks.

Jack

Thank you, Jack.

Architecture is an interesting subject with this lens, I'm finding -- it makes every room look huge (although, sometimes the room just is big), but it's amazing to be able to fit everything in from the ceiling to the floor.

Honestly, it's a lot of trial and error with this lens. Sometimes shots work, and other times they don't. I through out 90% of my shots from the other day.

 

[R1-7D]

Another question/comment. I'm only using DPP so far and the lighting at Lake Louise was very challenging. I have the DPP highlight max down and the shadows max up. Even then I have those deep shadows and I might even have dropped the contrast one tick. Should I be on tripod and trying HDR? Or would that just look artificial?

Jack

Having never used DPP software, I can't really give advice on how to edit in it. Does DPP have the ability to use graduated and radial filters? I find them to be indispensable with this lens, as it can't take normal polarizers or ND filters. They allow me to make subtle changes to specific areas of an image, such as the sky, or a certain point of interest midframe, for example.

You could also certainly try using a tripod and taking multiple exposures for an HDR image to help with the darkest shadows in the scene. You can usually blend multiple exposures so they don't look "HDR". I find people tend to use an HDR preset in some software suite, and that's why HDR looks dreadful -- colors become way too vivid, and shadow areas are suddenly way overexposed.

 

[PhotoGuy]

Another question/comment. I'm only using DPP so far and the lighting at Lake Louise was very challenging. I have the DPP highlight max down and the shadows max up. Even then I have those deep shadows and I might even have dropped the contrast one tick. Should I be on tripod and trying HDR? Or would that just look artificial?

Jack

I like your shot with the train tracks the most, the sun bursting into the frame from the top is a great idea beautifully executed.

Lowering the Contrast in DPP to -1 gives you more detail in the highlights and hardly affects shadows. To raise the shadows you have to adjust contrast to -2. This will lighten your shadows without really affecting the highlights any further than -1. I wouldnt go further than -2 because it will likely look unnatural/flat. When adjusting highlights and shadows seperately in DPP i try to avoid values that exceed the -2 to +2 range because you will not gain more highlight/shadow detail and mess up your gamma-curve. You can easily observe the effects in the gamma-settings part. Any adjustment that goes beyond straightening the curve usually looks artificial and makes your image weaker.
But I think your problem is not dynamic range.You have chosen to have your sky with a deep and saturated blue, which is achieved by lowering exposure / underexposing. In my opinion it is not very natural to have a deep blue around the sun. The deep / saturated blue sky is mostly seen when looking away from the sun. If you like it that way, thats cool. But why not give it a try and raise your exposure. This will brighten your sky and give you more shadow detail while still looking natural. Try not to blow out your sky and keep some gradation/color information. Enabling auto lighting optimizer will also be a great help in achieving this - if you havent used it already. In your particular shot I would set it to strong without hesitation.
Give it a try and see how you like it.

 

[Jack Douglas]

Photoguy, thanks for the specific feedback.

"Enabling auto lighting optimizer will also be a great help in achieving this - if you havent used it already. In your particular shot I would set it to strong without hesitation."

I haven't used it in this set of shots - forgot about it.

I'd say that it is not possible with the exposure I used in most of these shots to not be pushing the highlight/shadows to their extreme ends but I will gladly try a few things and re-post a sample of the railroad track.

Personally, that shot was an attempt to include the sun burst, although it was very strong and to try to lead the eye via the tracks to the mountains but clearly having the sun at that angle presents problems. A while back I bought and read The Photographer's Eye, which I should re-read and I'm just trying whatever comes to mind but I'm so untrained.

R1-7D, DPP can't do anything that localizes areas other than the stamping tool for dust etc. I haven't moved up due to the time investment required to learn new software and because I believe the bare minimal functions in DPP that are lens specific are actually quite impressive. For example with the 11-22 Peripheral Illumination works well.

I've heard mixed reviews about DPP but for what it is I like it.

I really appreciate anyone chiming in with opinions. Comments will be somewhat subjective/vary from person to person but anyone with experience is going to be miles ahead of me in their evaluation. There is no substitute for ego bursting as far as learning goes even if it doesn't feel good.

Jack

 

[Jack Douglas]

OK, for those interested in this shot's potential/shortcomings I've taken it back to essentially unedited on exposure etc. It is cropped a very little on the right (maybe 5%) to remove nothingness and to go to 16:9.

This was a brief holiday with relatives from NY so I couldn't take time to hike the tracks etc. to get preferred composition such as the curvature of the tracks, time of day and so forth. As it was I'd slid down a pretty steep embankment just to get on the tracks. If you haven't been to Banff and are able some day, DO IT!

6D, 11-24 @11, 1/400, F22 for DOF, ISO 640, EXP +1 2/3 pulled back to - 1/3 but now at 0, shadow +5 now 0, HL -5 now 0, no NR, contrast 0, slight color adj. now removed, Peripheral Illumination - on, default sharpening at 3 but lens specific at 65% ( a default I've used consistently with the 300 2.8 II, no other explanation). As mentioned previously I manually removed some of the chromatic flare, more for the fun of seeing what I could do with just DPP.

When I get a chance later (garden planting and grass cutting pleading with me) I'll try some of the suggested tweaks.

 

[privatebydesign]

Jack as we have talked before and I know you won't take offense here is my edit/suggestion.

I went this route like this, read internal dialogue!

What is the story? To me it is the railroad and the river and their juxtaposition with the mountains. Does the sun or sky add to the image, is it a balancing compositional element? Not really, the extreme brightness on the edge of the frame is more a distraction than a key element to 'the story'. In that case it becomes obvious to lose the sun and sky hence the hard letterbox crop.

Now to tell the story, bring back the blue in the sky, control overall highlights and shadows. Then put a curves layer on and mask it, then paint in the important bits, the railroad and the tree lines, they now give you very strong lead in lines to the heart of the story, the majestic mountains that are not lost because of the size of the sky.

Not sure if you agree, but I think it is a much stronger image now. If you are interested I can give you the breakdown on the adjustments, though apart from the crop I'm not too sure how well they will show up i the browsers.

 

[PhotoGuy]

I haven't used it in this set of shots - forgot about it.

You can enable lighting optimizer afterwards if you shot raw.
Why did you use ISO 640?
If you dont mind you could share the RAW file and see all the various edits and how they affect the message of your image.

We do have a similar style. We both like strong backlight while keeping a natural appearance and shoot with the awesome 6D.

Here is an example of how i like to edit sky and sun in similar conditions. (17mm on Canon 6D)

 

[Eldar]

Jack as we have talked before and I know you won't take offense here is my edit/suggestion.

I went this route like this, read internal dialogue!

What is the story? To me it is the railroad and the river and their juxtaposition with the mountains. Does the sun or sky add to the image, is it a balancing compositional element? Not really, the extreme brightness on the edge of the frame is more a distraction than a key element to 'the story'. In that case it becomes obvious to lose the sun and sky hence the hard letterbox crop.

Now to tell the story, bring back the blue in the sky, control overall highlights and shadows. Then put a curves layer on and mask it, then paint in the important bits, the railroad and the tree lines, they now give you very strong lead in lines to the heart of the story, the majestic mountains that are not lost because of the size of the sky.

Not sure if you agree, but I think it is a much stronger image now. If you are interested I can give you the breakdown on the adjustments, though apart from the crop I'm not too sure how well they will show up i the browsers.

I have not been on this thread for a while, so I´m a bit late to the party. However, I agree with some of the comments above, pointing out the necessity to have something in the foreground to guide the viewer into the picture. I also think the edit Private/Scott did was a good one. Primarily because it tightens up the perspective and gives more energy to the tracks path into the image.

 

[romanr74]

Re: Canon EF 11

Venice as it receives its visitors from the sea, entering the Piazza San Marco through the Colonne di San Marco e San Todaro. Palazzo Ducale to the right, Biblioteca Nazionale Marciana to the left, Torre dell'Orologio in the background with the Basilica di San Marco behind the Palazzo Ducale unfortunately under renovation. Throning above all San Marco's Campanile. Shot at 14 mm...

 

[Jack Douglas]

Just on my quick CR break from the garden. Thanks for all the ideas, folks and of course I can handle the comments even if it's just to hear what I've shot is worthless. I do agree that the tighter crop is better. In other words I didn't need an 11-24, sigh! Don't have an explanation why ISO 640 other than hand held with a little higher shutter speed while higher F stop for DOF. I love being forced to address what I've neglected or didn't understand. I'll have to digest further. Thanks.

Jack

 

[Jack Douglas]

Yes I always shoot RAW but not sure how to get my RAW to someone else's hands.

Jack

 

[Jack Douglas]

privatebydesign, you make it so ridiculously logical. Why can't I think like that?!

Jack

 

[R1-7D]

Yes I always shoot RAW but not sure how to get my RAW to someone else's hands.

Jack

Jack, you can create a DropBox account, put your .CR2 files in a folder within DropBox and then link people directly to them.

 

[R1-7D]

Just on my quick CR break from the garden. Thanks for all the ideas, folks and of course I can handle the comments even if it's just to hear what I've shot is worthless. I do agree that the tighter crop is better. In other words I didn't need an 11-24, sigh!

Jack

Jack,

You may have cropped that image, but you still would not have got that exact perspective/angle had you used narrower focal length.

Think of it this way: the 11-24 is a lot like having an 85 f/1.2 lens. Just because you have an f/1.2 does not mean you always need to shoot at that aperture, but it's great to have when you need/want it. 11mm is amazing, but it's not always appropriate for the scene/subject. When there's a real opportunity...oh boy is it an amazing thing to have, though!

 

[Jack Douglas]

R1-7D, of course but it's easy to get drawn to the extreme, it being such a novelty.

Another question I have regards when it might be advisable or acceptable to have the sunbeams entering the frame. Any really outstanding samples to illustrate? Clearly it can be a distraction.

Jack

 

[privatebydesign]

R1-7D, of course but it's easy to get drawn to the extreme, it being such a novelty.

Another question I have regards when it might be advisable or acceptable to have the sunbeams entering the frame. Any really outstanding samples to illustrate? Clearly it can be a distraction.

Jack

Jack, look back a couple of pages at the second image here http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=24975.msg590831#msg590831 I'm not saying it is a really outstanding example, but put your finger over the sun and the image becomes unbalanced. To make the composition even stronger the flare is pointing directly at the 'subject' too, this leaves your eye/brain in no doubt as to the path I have set up for it to follow.

 

[Jack Douglas]

R1-7D, of course but it's easy to get drawn to the extreme, it being such a novelty.

Another question I have regards when it might be advisable or acceptable to have the sunbeams entering the frame. Any really outstanding samples to illustrate? Clearly it can be a distraction.

Jack

Jack, look back a couple of pages at the second image here http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=24975.msg590831#msg590831 I'm not saying it is a really outstanding example, but put your finger over the sun and the image becomes unbalanced. To make the composition even stronger the flare is pointing directly at the 'subject' too, this leaves your eye/brain in no doubt as to the path I have set up for it to follow.

How about that - you aimed the sun at the boat. I don't think I have those kind of powers!

Jack

 

[privatebydesign]

R1-7D, of course but it's easy to get drawn to the extreme, it being such a novelty.

Another question I have regards when it might be advisable or acceptable to have the sunbeams entering the frame. Any really outstanding samples to illustrate? Clearly it can be a distraction.

Jack

Jack, look back a couple of pages at the second image here http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=24975.msg590831#msg590831 I'm not saying it is a really outstanding example, but put your finger over the sun and the image becomes unbalanced. To make the composition even stronger the flare is pointing directly at the 'subject' too, this leaves your eye/brain in no doubt as to the path I have set up for it to follow.

How about that - you aimed the sun at the boat. I don't think I have those kind of powers!

Jack

Of course you do! I just walked along the beach until I got the perspective I wanted, the point was it was deliberate. I didn't just stand in a single spot and go to 11, I chose to balance the boat and the sun with the large empty sky and 'hide' the second boat behind the bush to keep the subject 'clean' and to 'anchor' it. I was limited by the direction of the wind, the time of day and all sorts of other things, which is why I don't think the image is a standout, but I was deliberate in my perspective and composition.

 

[Jack Douglas]

R1-7D, of course but it's easy to get drawn to the extreme, it being such a novelty.

Another question I have regards when it might be advisable or acceptable to have the sunbeams entering the frame. Any really outstanding samples to illustrate? Clearly it can be a distraction.

Jack

Jack, look back a couple of pages at the second image here http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=24975.msg590831#msg590831 I'm not saying it is a really outstanding example, but put your finger over the sun and the image becomes unbalanced. To make the composition even stronger the flare is pointing directly at the 'subject' too, this leaves your eye/brain in no doubt as to the path I have set up for it to follow.

How about that - you aimed the sun at the boat. I don't think I have those kind of powers!

Jack

Of course you do! I just walked along the beach until I got the perspective I wanted, the point was it was deliberate. I didn't just stand in a single spot and go to 11, I chose to balance the boat and the sun with the large empty sky and 'hide' the second boat behind the bush to keep the subject 'clean' and to 'anchor' it. I was limited by the direction of the wind, the time of day and all sorts of other things, which is why I don't think the image is a standout, but I was deliberate in my perspective and composition.

It was beginning to sink in a year ago and continues now. Tag-alongs who are not interested in photography are not an asset. As well there must be a deliberate focus on acquiring a "great" shot which requires a good "eye". In other words the brain must be awake, which is my biggest problem. Then there must be the necessary investment in time or the ability to recognize the moment when one is in the midst of an opportunity (stay mentally alert).

However, I agree, with exchanges such as this I am slowly seeing more than I used to, so there may still be hope. Thanks for the encouragement!

Jack

 

[R1-7D]

Sorry I've been away from the thread for a few days exploring. I saw one of the four copies of Magna Carta the other day at the Salisbury Cathedral, which was amazing. Also made it up to Stonehenge, but alas, no shots with the 11-24 there.

Here's a few shots from the cathedral.