|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 4/17/2008
|
Which again goes to my considerations about contrast, or even more dynamics, Andre! I guess that I just level my extreme demands in the sence if just revealing sime details instead of demanding the maximum dynamic range. Thanks a lot!
Nick
|
|
|
|
Andre Denis
{K:66407} 4/16/2008
|
Nick,
Seeing the second version, I think I do like it a little better. It still maintains the darker shadows, but not so much as the original. I think sometimes too much contrast between the shadow areas and bright can upset the balance of the image.
Andre
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 4/15/2008
|
I'll try to keep it up, Hussam! Thanks a lot for yet another so enthousiastic comment!
Cheers!
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 4/15/2008
|
Thanks a lot for the nice comment, Gustavo!
Cheers!
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 4/15/2008
|
Thanks a lot, Claudia!
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 4/15/2008
|
Hi Andre, and thanks a lot agin for the nice detaield comment. I did dodge the bottom a bit and sent an attachment in my answer to Michalis. It reveals some of the details on the bottom and in this discipline it is indeed better.
When I compare both versions now, I have the impression that the tension between light and shadow is better on the original. But this could also be my strong preference for images that do contain both strong shadows and strong lights "against each other". Perhaps I am extreme about that.
Thanks a lot again,
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Hussam AL_ Khoder
{K:79545} 4/14/2008
|
A M A Z I N G !~
.. @@ ..
N!!!Ce .. "
..^.*..
Keep it Up .,
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 4/14/2008
|
Thanks a lot Michali, for the nice detailed comment! The dynamics range here is indeed too big for a single shot, ir even for two. Actually according ti the analysis of density and luminescene alone, at least four interlaced shots should be combined here, for a well balanced image in the sence of general HDR. I don't have any practical way to to do that, for the time being. And I must also say that I am rather inclined towards single shots but with the appropriate film, which I still search for. Any hints about some kind of high dynamics range film?
As a possible work-around in the sense of PS I add also an attachment, where I dodged a bit the bottom - is that better? Translating that to the situation at shooting time and assuming a single shot, it would mean to choose a longer exposure. (We keep aperture coinstant for the DoF.) But that would wash out the sky's colors, I guess?
Cheers!
Nick
|
Dodged a bit the bottom parts after Michalis' ideas |
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 4/14/2008
|
Thanks a lot for the nice comment again, Dave!
Nick
|
|
|
|
Gustavo Scheverin
{K:164501} 4/14/2008
|
Un bello paisaje, el cielo y las montaņas lejanas son muy interesantes.
Felicitaciones!
|
|
|
|
Claudia Perilli
{K:31090} 4/14/2008
|
Nice this cityscape. Great sky.
Claudia
|
|
|
|
|
Andre Denis
{K:66407} 4/14/2008
|
Hi Nick,
At first I was thinking the same way as Michalis about the under esposure on the bottom. But, the more I see this one, the less it matters to me. Maybe a little more brightness could be coaxed out of the buildings. But I wouldn't change it too much. You are considering the "formations" to be the main subject here after-all. Once again, great detail in this image.
Andre
|
|
|
|
Michalis P.S.
{K:10136} 4/13/2008
|
Excellent composition. Sky is a very good background here. However, the bottom quarter (buildings) of the frame appears to be a bit under-exposed. You could solve this by combining two shots, or increase the brightness of the bottom.
Well done,
Michalis
|
|
|
|
Dave Stacey
{K:150877} 4/13/2008
|
Very nicely composed layers of building, background mountains and that great sky, Nick!
Dave.
|
|
0 
