[Moriarty]

Hi here's another for critique
Wendy

[Rolf]

Hmmm... if it was raining... I recall the skies were pretty grey when it rained...

Have you considered bracketing your shots at say 1/3 EV? or taking the shot and checking the histogram? I think you could stand a little compensation as this too seems a little dark... again just a few similar adjustments... is that the Lloyds building on the far left of your image? Brings back some good memories

So, again, see what you make of my interpretation?

Kind regards

Rolf

   

[Moriarty]

Hmmm... if it was raining... I recall the skies were pretty grey when it rained...

Have you considered bracketing your shots at say 1/3 EV? or taking the shot and checking the histogram? I think you could stand a little compensation as this too seems a little dark... again just a few similar adjustments... is that the Lloyds building on the far left of your image? Brings back some good memories

So, again, see what you make of my interpretation?

Kind regards

Rolf

Hi Rolf
Thank you again for your time & comments. It was raining but in my head I remember the colours as more vivid, I will keep trying & enjoying myself in the process. I have so much to learn
Regards
Wendy

[Rolf]

Ok then see if this works...

I just find the image you had started with was a little dark and lacked some of the detail lost in shadows... and some of the detail in the lights... they were a little blown out... that is just my opinion though and it is yours that counts - these reworks are just different ideas for you to contemplate... I would like to see if Ed has another slant...

   

Kind regards

Rolf

[EdMak]

By One, Get One Free. Ed.

[EnglishBob]

Rolf has already covered any thoughts I have on exposure and color. My additional comment is on composition, the little sliver of dock(?) in teh bottom left is bothersome to me. I would prefer to see more of it, so it looks deliberate, or none of it at all.

Nice image all the same

[Moriarty]

[quote='Rolf' pid='100118' dateline='1425244256']
Ok then see if this works...

I just find the image you had started with was a little dark and lacked some of the detail lost in shadows... and some of the detail in the lights... they were a little blown out... that is just my opinion though and it is yours that counts - these reworks are just different ideas for you to contemplate... I would like to see if Ed has another slant...



Kind regards

Rolf


Rolf
thats more how i remember it, thank you for that it looks much better, I love what you guys do with these pictures
Regards
Wendy

[Moriarty]

Ok then see if this works...

I just find the image you had started with was a little dark and lacked some of the detail lost in shadows... and some of the detail in the lights... they were a little blown out... that is just my opinion though and it is yours that counts - these reworks are just different ideas for you to contemplate... I would like to see if Ed has another slant...



Kind regards

Rolf

Rolf thats great more how i remember it in my head
Regards
Wendy

[Moriarty]

By One, Get One Free. Ed.

Hi Ed
I love both especially the black & white, I have lots to learn i only started playing around with PSE 11 a couple of weeks ago and am enjoying myself, Perhaps i should be concentrating on getting the picture right in camera first before all this editing,
Thank you for your time
Regards
Wendy

[Moriarty]

Rolf has already covered any thoughts I have on exposure and color. My additional comment is on composition, the little sliver of dock(?) in teh bottom left is bothersome to me. I would prefer to see more of it, so it looks deliberate, or none of it at all.

Nice image all the same

Hi Craig
Thank you fot taking the time to look and comment
Regards
Wendy

[MrB]

Wendy, the feature of this image that spoils it for me is the odd distortion of the wonderful reflections of the lights in the water. I would expect them to be vertical. ( See https://www.flickr.com/search/?q=night+reflections )

E.g. -
   

Cheers.
Philip

[Moriarty]

Wendy, the feature of this image that spoils it for me is the odd distortion of the wonderful reflections of the lights in the water. I would expect them to be vertical. ( See https://www.flickr.com/search/?q=night+reflections )

E.g. -


Cheers.
Philip

Hi Philip
Firatly thank you for taking the time to view my picture. I am really new to all this photo editing, without looking at the original image, could it be that i took the picture on an angle and then if memory serves me right i may have straightened it using the straighten tool. Could this be why the reflections are wrong?
Regards
Wendy

[EdMak]

Perhaps the 15 sec. exposure may have affected this?? Just a guess.. Ed.

[MrB]

Hi Philip
Firatly thank you for taking the time to view my picture. I am really new to all this photo editing, without looking at the original image, could it be that i took the picture on an angle and then if memory serves me right i may have straightened it using the straighten tool. Could this be why the reflections are wrong?
Regards
Wendy

Wendy, I really don't know the cause. It is an odd effect that looks to me like perspective distortion, because the angles of the reflections' tilt increase across the image. However, the perspective adjustment needed for the buildings does not correct the angles for the reflections, so I don't understand what has happened. (In the editing, two copies of the image were used. The perspective was adjusted to correct the buildings in one and the reflections in the other. The corrected parts were then blended together for the final image.)

Cheers.
Philip

[EdMak]

A look at the original would help? Ed.

[Moriarty]

Wendy, the feature of this image that spoils it for me is the odd distortion of the wonderful reflections of the lights in the water. I would expect them to be vertical. ( See https://www.flickr.com/search/?q=night+reflections )

E.g. -


Cheers.
Philip

Hi Philip
I have been back and looked at the original picture and its the same the reflections are the same so had a look at some of the other pictures I took the same evening and they are all the same. The only thing I could think of was it started to rain and there were some rain drops on the lens, could this have distorted the reflections? I've just gone back & looked at pictures from earlier in the evening before it started raining and they are the same. A mystery! Once again thank you for your comments
Regards
Wendy
Firatly thank you for taking the time to view my picture. I am really new to all this photo editing, without looking at the original image, could it be that i took the picture on an angle and then if memory serves me right i may have straightened it using the straighten tool. Could this be why the reflections are wrong?
Regards
Wendy

[Rolf]

Hmmm... I thought the angles were right... given that the shooting position was from the opposite bank, probably from in front of the Colliers Building on what I think was Marsh street, with the row of businesses on the quay on a diverging angle of some 40ish degrees to the lens away from the shooter, I would expect to see the same angle reflected by the colours in the water. For the reflections to be straight... the shooting position would have to be at 90 degrees to the quay? The principle of the sun dial could be an example...
Anyway, it looked right to me... I used to know that area as I had a berth there... the old Bathurst Basin in front of Canon Rd?

Kind regards

Rolf

[MrB]

Rolf, assuming that there is no lens distortion, and that the camera is not being tilted in any direction, the horizontal surface of the water would be expected to give vertical reflections, as they generally are in Wendy's other photo ( http://www.shuttertalk.com/forums/Thread...#pid100101 ), which was shot from a similar angle but towards the right. (See also the Flickr examples linked in Post #11 here.)

Cheers.
Philip

[Rolf]

The law of reflection does not mean that light always bounces back from where it came. Instead, if the light strikes at a steep angle, for example, it will be reflected at the same steep angle, but in the opposite direction. this can seen from the angle at which the image of a cloud or a mountain is reflected in a calm lake, or in the way a mirror at the correct angle can allow you to see around a corner. There is a relationship between the subject, lens point of view and the reflected angle... and there is the lens distortion that also may occur thrown into the mix!
The closer the angle is to directly in front of the point of view, the less the reflected angle appears to deviate...

This pic below would look very odd if you were to straighten the white light reflections on the left of the image... it is how it would appear from that viewpoint taking into consideration the physics...

   

the image is from an internet image and has not been altered at all.

It's really interesting to get your take on many issues, and I respect your comments enormously, But, I think the delving into this depth may detract from the purpose of this Forum and may not be helpful to most who just want to make a pleasing image and not worry too much about the technicalities? Some, may want everything perpendicular irrespective of reality... others... well, they just want to remember it how it was...

As always, a pleasure Philip

Kind regards

Rolf

[MrB]

.....It's really interesting to get your take on many issues, and I respect your comments enormously, But, I think the delving into this depth may detract from the purpose of this Forum and may not be helpful to most who just want to make a pleasing image and not worry too much about the technicalities? Some, may want everything perpendicular irrespective of reality... others... well, they just want to remember it how it was.....

Rolf, this almost appears to present me with a double-edged sword. Wendy asked for critique and I gave my opinion - that the distorted reflections of the lights do not look right to me.

That opinion was based on my experience of such scenes, and backed up by the evidence of the vast majority of Flickr photos showing similar light reflections. Wendy also indirectly asked me for an explanation, and I candidly admitted that I did not have one. I suggested some kind of photographic distortion, but again admitted that I didn't understand it.

My critique and suggestions were empirically based - i.e. based on observation and experience rather than theory. In answering the point you made in Post #17, I gave a simple description of how I think the reflections should look, which was again empirically based.

It seems to me that your explanations (which I believe to be incorrect in describing what is seen in this photo), involving angles and laws of reflection, are more indicative of "delving into this depth" than are mine. However, I see nothing wrong with presenting technicalities on the forum - people will take it or leave it as they wish, and some might gain, or develop their own, insight.

Upon further reflection (pardon the pun), here is another suggestion: The explanation for the few images showing the reflections of lights to be unusually distorted away from vertical, might lie in the factor that is producing the reflections - the small ripples on the otherwise horizontal water surface.

Without the ripples, the reflection of each light would be a mirror image of the light, i.e. usually a small bright image in the water, vertically below the real light. It is the ripples that cause the spot of light to be diffused into a large area of reflection. Perhaps the size and direction of those ripples is affecting the appearance of the diffused reflections in some images.

Whatever the explanation, I still think that Wendy's image looks more natural - the reality I would expect to see - when the reflections are vertical, and I would edit accordingly. That is my opinion and my choice, of course - "To each his own!" (EdMak)

Cheers.
Philip

[Moriarty]

.....It's really interesting to get your take on many issues, and I respect your comments enormously, But, I think the delving into this depth may detract from the purpose of this Forum and may not be helpful to most who just want to make a pleasing image and not worry too much about the technicalities? Some, may want everything perpendicular irrespective of reality... others... well, they just want to remember it how it was.....

Rolf, this almost appears to present me with a double-edged sword. Wendy asked for critique and I gave my opinion - that the distorted reflections of the lights do not look right to me.

That opinion was based on my experience of such scenes, and backed up by the evidence of the vast majority of Flickr photos showing similar light reflections. Wendy also indirectly asked me for an explanation, and I candidly admitted that I did not have one. I suggested some kind of photographic distortion, but again admitted that I didn't understand it.

My critique and suggestions were empirically based - i.e. based on observation and experience rather than theory. In answering the point you made in Post #17, I gave a simple description of how I think the reflections should look, which was again empirically based.

It seems to me that your explanations (which I believe to be incorrect in describing what is seen in this photo), involving angles and laws of reflection, are more indicative of "delving into this depth" than are mine. However, I see nothing wrong with presenting technicalities on the forum - people will take it or leave it as they wish, and some might gain, or develop their own, insight.

Upon further reflection (pardon the pun), here is another suggestion: The explanation for the few images showing the reflections of lights to be unusually distorted away from vertical, might lie in the factor that is producing the reflections - the small ripples on the otherwise horizontal water surface.

Without the ripples, the reflection of each light would be a mirror image of the light, i.e. usually a small bright image in the water, vertically below the real light. It is the ripples that cause the spot of light to be diffused into a large area of reflection. Perhaps the size and direction of those ripples is affecting the appearance of the diffused reflections in some images.

Whatever the explanation, I still think that Wendy's image looks more natural - the reality I would expect to see - when the reflections are vertical, and I would edit accordingly. That is my opinion and my choice, of course - "To each his own!" (EdMak)

Cheers.
Philip

Thank you to everyone who commented and the discussion thereafter, All are very welcome and its really good that you all take the time to comment & discuss. I find it all really interesting reading all the comments. I cant wait to go back and take some more pictures from the same place and see how they come out.
Kind Regards
Wendy

[EdMak]

Stull reckon that the 15 second exposure, coupled with moving water, would be a probability. Ed.

[MrB]

That's exactly what came to mind at first, Ed. However, thinking about it, although moving water shouldn't move the reflection during the exposure, new patterns of ripples might add to it and create the distorted effect.

Cheers.
Philip

[EdMak]

Wind. Ed.

[Rolf]

Hello Philip... I fear I may be in danger of hijacking Wendy's post so I will keep this short. My point... looking at reflection in the first pic I used as an example, the white light reflections from the shooters position... appear from that location (as the light is omnidirectional) as a line directly below the light... and directly below from that perspective is seen to be at an angle from the quay... ergo it looks bent. The law of reflection (Normal line, Reflected line and Line of Incidence are still obeyed, only changing if the Object cannot be seen from which the light reflected is travelling) If the shooter were to go to the bank opposite the source... that same light would still be directly below the source but because the shooter has moved relative to the quay, it would now appear to be straight to him... I have many shots of night reflections that do the same... If I didn't like them - I would reshoot from another perspective... If that didn't get the scope I wanted and I changed to a wider angle lens... well now I have lens distortion to consider... now it's PP or a T&S lens... we are essentially arguing the same point... the difference is I am happy to accept the reality. As always... thank you for taking time to engage with me.


Anyway, Wendy... your images are good subjects that as you may have gathered, need just a little correction as a consequence of, in my opinion, the settings that were applied at the time of shooting... In my day... that would have been a disaster... wasted time, film and processing costs and no recourse to reshoot.... today we can rescue an image in previously unimaginable ways that may sometimes border on deception... (have you ever wondered why the image of the meal on the menu doesn't come close to the meal you see served? ). but as Ed says... to each his own!
Kind regards

Rolf