Vic's Random Photography

[Withers]

Since I finally got to do something useful with my camera this past weekend, I figured I might as well make a thread about my photography from here on out. Criticisms and critiques are always encouraged, just keep in mind that I'm only working with a Canon 450D and a 17-40mm F4L lens. I don't have any of that other fancy stuff yet.

 

Anyway, on to the pics.

 

This past weekend I went to NYC for my sister-in-law's wedding, and I got to do a bit of sight seeing on the way. I'll start with the sight seeing pics first.

 

View from our hotel (Hyatt @ Grand Central Station)

1.

 

2.

 

3.

 

4.

 

Bryant Park:

5.

 

6.

 

Chrysler Building:

7.

 

I'll do our boat tour next after I'm done editing those.

[latazyo]

while I like the idea behind number 6 , I think it would have been better slightly offset so as not to appear like the building is coming straight out of the fountain

 

very good shots, though

[lakshwadeep]

I <3 architecture

 

#2 looks like it has a statue with frog's head.

 

I like #1.

[Lalani]

I'm not sure why, but I really love the first one. It just sticks out for me as the most striking shot.

[halfpint]

I've not done a lot of building photos, however I would have gone a little wider on those shots. For #1, I would have done portrait, instead of landscape. IMHO, portrait on buildings accentuates their height. Other than that, they look nice. Keep at it.

 

 

It kinda is true for photography, just like reef tanks. Find a photographer who knows what their doing, and pay close attention to how they compose their photos. Use what you learn to make something all your own.

[Withers]

See I wasn't even going to include #1, but for some reason I like it and can't figure out why. I mean, it's obviously zoomed too far in and not even remotely level, but for some reason it sort of works.

 

The statue that looks like a frog is Grand Central Station, LOL.

8.

[lakshwadeep]

I think #1 is good because it is zoomed in. I think many building pictures lead the eye off the photo's margins because the viewer is following the sides all the way to the top, and there is nothing to draw the eye back in.

 

Yeah, after awhile I realize "frog" head looked like the winged helmet of Hermes/Mercury.

[Withers]

That and I think it reminds me of a shot you might see in a Spiderman movie, haha.

 

After you said it looked like a frog I couldn't even make out what it actually was and I already knew it Hermes. I hadn't even noticed it before you said something about it.

[gena]

nice shots! my favs: 5 and 7. I just love the Chrysler Building...I'm partial to Art Deco

[halfpint]

See I wasn't even going to include #1, but for some reason I like it and can't figure out why. I mean, it's obviously zoomed too far in and not even remotely level, but for some reason it sort of works.

 

The statue that looks like a frog is Grand Central Station, LOL.

That's really cool. I like it.

[jeremai]

Did you shoot those in RAW? I'm asking about 5, 6 and 7 specifically. I think of you took #5, for instance, and processed it to restore the highlights in the Chrysler building and some of the shadows in the tree branches (curves and/or pseudo-HDR processing), then corrected the converging parallels, it would be pure win.

 

Also, lol @ 'only working with a 450D and 17-40'. Have you seen what Lalani and I are working with?

[andykee]

Also, lol @ 'only working with a 450D and 17-40'. Have you seen what Lalani and I are working with?

hey now, i've got the same silver pos too...

[jeremai]

Well, my 350D is black. And it has a grip!

[latazyo]

zing

[Withers]

Did you shoot those in RAW? I'm asking about 5, 6 and 7 specifically. I think of you took #5, for instance, and processed it to restore the highlights in the Chrysler building and some of the shadows in the tree branches (curves and/or pseudo-HDR processing), then corrected the converging parallels, it would be pure win.

 

Right now I'm only processing with iPhoto, so I'm fairly limited to what I can actually correct. I really don't like it's highlight and shadow recovery tools, they make the image look fake if you use it at all. I really need to either purchase Aperture and Photoshop or at the very least learn to use Gimp.

 

Also, lol @ 'only working with a 450D and 17-40'. Have you seen what Lalani and I are working with?

 

Oh I meant for the wedding shots. I don't have a fancy flash so I had to work with whatever natural and artificial light was provided, so a lot of my shots aren't crystal clear or have a bit of noise from using a high ISO. I love my setup for shooting outdoors, though I wish I had a 10-22 UWA sometimes

 

I'll go on and post some of the wedding shots, but I need to correct the horizon on some of them (and a good many of the ones I already posted actually). For some reason I never even noticed that they needed correcting.

9.

 

10.

 

11.

 

12.

 

13.

 

14.

 

15.

 

16.

[wfournier]

Nice shots, especially the wedding stuff. My only critique is to watch your horizons, a number of these are not level, but to me they are not crooked enough to look like it was intentional.

[Withers]

Yeah, that's definitely my #1 problem it seems, almost all of my shots aren't level and I never even realized it till someone pointed it out on another forum

[latazyo]

Vic - I started on iPhoto and its pretty capable for a lot of things

 

free options on mac - Seashore, Gimp - both are pretty much identical in capability to photoshop

 

b/w the two I liked Gimp better

 

Yeah, that's definitely my #1 problem it seems, almost all of my shots aren't level and I never even realized it till someone pointed it out on another forum

 

 

very easy to correct w/ iphoto

[Withers]

I don't know why, but every time I try to do that it seems like I lose a lot of quality. I guess it must just be in my head.

 

So should I not even waste my time with Aperture then? I have Gimp on the computer, I've just never needed to do any serious processing up until now.

[latazyo]

aperture is not the same as gimp/photoshop

 

it is similar to lightroom

 

aperture/lightroom are probably a lot more useful to you than photoshop

[Withers]

I know. I intend to get Photoshop eventually for heavy processing (or just learn to use Gimp), but I assumed that Aperture is similar to iPhoto, only a lot more in depth with workflow management and image editing (better levels adjustments, curves, parallels, white balance adjustments, stuff like that).

[latazyo]

I use lightroom 99%

 

only use PS for some cloning if there are sensor spots and for batch processing to add frames/sig

[Withers]

I can't remember if you use a Mac for photo editing or not, I know you have both. Would you recommend Lightroom over Aperture? I know a lot of it is personal preference, but I have the option of going either way. Cloning is the main reason I want to buy Photoshop as well, mostly because I intend to build a rig for car shots before too long hopefully.

[divecj5]

Just getting around to commenting on the pictures. Great job overall. My favorites are #3 and #7...with the Chrysler Building taking the cake for me.

 

Night shots can be really difficult unless you have a nice steady tripod allowing for longer exposures. Toting a tripod isn't very practical when wandering around a city though.

 

Get ready when you move down to the Charleston area....you'll be wearing the camera out.

[latazyo]

I can't remember if you use a Mac for photo editing or not, I know you have both. Would you recommend Lightroom over Aperture? I know a lot of it is personal preference, but I have the option of going either way. Cloning is the main reason I want to buy Photoshop as well, mostly because I intend to build a rig for car shots before too long hopefully.

 

 

I use an old PC for photo editing, it is only used for photos and nothing else

 

I have PS and LR

 

I have never used aperture

 

both LR and Aperture have free 30 day trials though, so you can give them a try before you decide

 

FWIW, I really love lightroom