Editing Software Lightroom / Photomatix Pro / Photoshop CS
File Format RAW
Notes
10 Comments
30 May 10:39
franklamica
Taken from the river show Tampa
30 May 11:12
digicam
Like the Painterly Effect Frank. Buildings are Sharp as a Tack. Sky not so much .....Whites are Blown Out in some areas.
30 May 11:16
franklamica
Thanks Ed!
30 May 13:03
franklamica
I want to add this, Ed and I couldn't disagree more as to what constitutes a good HDR photo when it comes colorization and look. I don't want my photos to look like a regular photograph because I find that boring. However, when Ed points out overblown clouds, sensor spots etc., that does help me to become a better photographer. Thank you Ed!
30 May 14:47
anonymous
Well, I'll take a risk and wade in here, if I may. Frank, I'm one who prefers that a photograph be undeniably a photograph; when I first happened upon the HDR images filling the internet (back in 2007 or 2008) I was awed by them; that term "pop" is way overused, BUT, man those photographs just POPPED all over the place!! The process itself was just overwhelming; as I continued to view wide varieties of photographic styles (which employed many different post processing techniques), I began to understand that (for me) the extent of post-processing often overwhelmed the photograph itself.... i.e. the subject of the photograph was lost in (or at least overshadowed by) the processing, and I began to tire of what I called "overcooked" photographs (and I overcooked a bunch of my photos, and stood back and thought it a good thing); now I judge a photo by how "interesting" it is, that is, as I page through photos, do I go back to review a particular one, and if so, how long does it hold my attention; and "interesting-ness" for me is a wildly moving target... I still like lots of overcooked photos, but I also like sparse, drab, faded, framed/unframed, all kinds of pics.... I try to be consistent in the way I judge a photo, but that consistency may not be apparent t many folks. An astounding photo of a vintage car will likely be far more interesting to me than an equally astounding photo of a flower (but not every time)...same for architecture, city-scapes, night-shots, interiors, even some portraiture; Ed's technical prowess is superb and he has such an "alert" eye, to be able to spot even the smallest discrepancy or omission. I like reading what both of you write, and I'm appreciative of your observations and comments, whether favorable or less than favorable... as long as they are always courteous and well-meaning, isn I expect they always will be. .. .... @franklamica
30 May 14:51
anonymous
Uh.... Frank, with all that said, I like this photograph a lot, but for me the sky is unremarkable (not a bad thing, you know) but the foliage is oversaturated and wispy/shimmery; looks like what I get from Photomatix Pro, which I have largely set aside. However, the city buildings back there are really eye-catching (remember, I told you I LOVE city-scapes and architecture). Still friends?? ?
30 May 14:59
jonnywalk21
Very nicely scene and perspective Frank...! Bravo : )
30 May 18:53
franklamica
Thanks and no problems Guy. I love painting my photos and frames and boarders and all of that. I still post a lot of the same photos I post here but with frames on them on Flicker and SmugMug. I totally agree with you that it's the composition that pulls me in.
30 May 18:56
eduardo_kiehl
little overdone, specifically in the vegetation, buildings are marvelous
30 May 20:25
franklamica
I know what you're saying but I believe that the vegetation is what sets the whole thing off. I see that as the thing that pulls you into the picture because the buildings are pretty non-descript. I do agree that the sky could have been changed out but at the same time it fits well with the non-descript buildings and the lack of coloration of the water. In my mind and eye, the vegetation is what sets the whole picture up. I guess you can see how my mind works or doesn't work...lol Thanks for taking the time to comment...
Taken from the river show Tampa
Like the Painterly Effect Frank. Buildings are Sharp as a Tack. Sky not so much .....Whites are Blown Out in some areas.
Thanks Ed!
I want to add this, Ed and I couldn't disagree more as to what constitutes a good HDR photo when it comes colorization and look. I don't want my photos to look like a regular photograph because I find that boring. However, when Ed points out overblown clouds, sensor spots etc., that does help me to become a better photographer. Thank you Ed!
Well, I'll take a risk and wade in here, if I may. Frank, I'm one who prefers that a photograph be undeniably a photograph; when I first happened upon the HDR images filling the internet (back in 2007 or 2008) I was awed by them; that term "pop" is way overused, BUT, man those photographs just POPPED all over the place!! The process itself was just overwhelming; as I continued to view wide varieties of photographic styles (which employed many different post processing techniques), I began to understand that (for me) the extent of post-processing often overwhelmed the photograph itself.... i.e. the subject of the photograph was lost in (or at least overshadowed by) the processing, and I began to tire of what I called "overcooked" photographs (and I overcooked a bunch of my photos, and stood back and thought it a good thing); now I judge a photo by how "interesting" it is, that is, as I page through photos, do I go back to review a particular one, and if so, how long does it hold my attention; and "interesting-ness" for me is a wildly moving target... I still like lots of overcooked photos, but I also like sparse, drab, faded, framed/unframed, all kinds of pics.... I try to be consistent in the way I judge a photo, but that consistency may not be apparent t many folks. An astounding photo of a vintage car will likely be far more interesting to me than an equally astounding photo of a flower (but not every time)...same for architecture, city-scapes, night-shots, interiors, even some portraiture; Ed's technical prowess is superb and he has such an "alert" eye, to be able to spot even the smallest discrepancy or omission. I like reading what both of you write, and I'm appreciative of your observations and comments, whether favorable or less than favorable... as long as they are always courteous and well-meaning, isn I expect they always will be. .. .... @franklamica
Uh.... Frank, with all that said, I like this photograph a lot, but for me the sky is unremarkable (not a bad thing, you know) but the foliage is oversaturated and wispy/shimmery; looks like what I get from Photomatix Pro, which I have largely set aside. However, the city buildings back there are really eye-catching (remember, I told you I LOVE city-scapes and architecture). Still friends?? ?
Very nicely scene and perspective Frank...! Bravo : )
Thanks and no problems Guy. I love painting my photos and frames and boarders and all of that. I still post a lot of the same photos I post here but with frames on them on Flicker and SmugMug. I totally agree with you that it's the composition that pulls me in.
little overdone, specifically in the vegetation, buildings are marvelous
I know what you're saying but I believe that the vegetation is what sets the whole thing off. I see that as the thing that pulls you into the picture because the buildings are pretty non-descript. I do agree that the sky could have been changed out but at the same time it fits well with the non-descript buildings and the lack of coloration of the water. In my mind and eye, the vegetation is what sets the whole picture up. I guess you can see how my mind works or doesn't work...lol Thanks for taking the time to comment...