[Kombisaurus]

Seeing as G and Irma and going around trying to cheer everyone up with spring colours and lovely flowers and so on, I thought I should post something to bring the mood back down a notch. hehe
Actually, it probably does provide a nice contrast between the different seasons in the northern and southern hemispheres, as these are quite autumn/winter looking shots as opposed to the spring shots others are posting at the moment.

There was a really interesting sunset this evening. There was low-level cloud and quite a lot of haze and smoke in the air, so it got quite dark quite early and the sun's rays looked great going through all of this.
I had the perfect location and shot all lined up in my head which I had been saving for a sky like this... but unfortunately I was stuck in peak hour traffic and by the time I got to the location (near home), the sky had changed too much and I had missed the effect I was after.

But, all was not lost. It was the first time I'd been up and close at this location (I'd passed it from a distance heaps of times), so I had a look around as it was getting dark.
Although I gave up on the shot I had in my head (which I'll keep for another time), I singled out a few dead trees and managed to get the remains of the dramatic sky into this shot:



Then, upon closer inspection I found a turtle skeleton and shell about 8 or 9 inches long lying near the foot of the tree in the first image. The turtle was lying on its back and had small bones arranged in and around it in such a way that it looks like it has been pretty-much undisturbed since the turtle died (a fair while ago by the complete lack of any flesh).
This photo shows the turtle undisturbed, as I found it.

[guerito]

You're right, Adrian, they go in another direction entirely from happy spring shots.

I like them nonetheless. I favor the first one, actually, I love the sky, the silhouette and the slightest indication of landscape underneath.

The turtle skeleton is great too, although I would have removed the distracting twigs in the foreground, well, if I had thought of it.

This is something that happens to me quite often: I take a shot of something interesting and when I'm back home I find that I could have removed a distracting element and could have got a much better picture. Usually, by then it's too late to go back and take the shot again.

[Kombisaurus]

Thanks G... I'm a bit concerned that I take too many tree-silhoetted-against-sunset photos... but sunset is actually the perfect time of the day for me to take photos as it is almost always a time of day when I don't have anything important I have to do (and obviously is good for lighting).... and with locations like this so close to home, the two things just naturally go together.
That photo of the trees and sky over the lake was a tough balancing act though, to try to enhance the drama in the sky (which still isn't as spectacular as it was 15 minutes earlier) without losing the lake and especially those little posts poking out of the water which I think make a big difference to that image.
I think I might go back to it and use the dual-layer technique you used in your wind-power photos a few days ago (ie combining two images exposed differently from the same RAW). I like subtlety in the water, but it is just a bit too flat and monotone. If I can tweak the sky and landscape independently then I should have more success in getting the image I want.

And I'm glad I'm not the only one who suffers from selective vision when I'm taking a shot. Sometimes I really don't see things that are right in front of me! I'm so busy looking at the lighting, the focus, the edges and so on I don't even notice something smack in the middle until I bring it up on the PC.
Other times I see it but I feel as if there's nothing I can do about it.. I see it as if the image in the viewfinder is a photo that is already taken - I forget I can just reach out and move the twig and it will be gone.

[Petographer]

The tree shot is incredible. I really like it. I'm not even a big fan of black and white. It's got to be a photo like this to make me really appreciate it. If I may suggest though, The small dark spotted clouds on the right are distracting and caught my eye right away. I'd be inclined to clone them out. The dark bottom of the photo really causes me to look closely to see whats there. At first I thought a little lighter might be warranted but the more I look at it I think I like the exposure the way it is.
Good Job Adrian.

[Toad]

I really like your second shot. I would not have known it was a plastron if you had not said so though!

(note clever use of techincal term "plastron")

[shuttertalk]

I agree with T about the turtle shell - couldn't have made it out unless you told me what it was. It makes a nice abstract though.

The tree shot is sensational though! I love how the stark branches stand out against the light background. Looks like a lot of thought went into it. Well done!

[taurus10]

Wow; love the first one .
Frank

[Kombisaurus]

Thanks guys,

And thanks for the "Plastron" term Toad.. I'm hopeless when it comes to knowing anything about wildlife, which is why I have so many photos labelled simply "bird".. hehe. At least I can identify Pelican's and Seagulls! Maybe I'll remember this, or at least remember where to look up the term next time

I went back to the RAW for the tree shot, and used the dual-layer technique that was recently discussed with regard to G's photo of the wind turbines (taking two different "exposures" of the same RAW and then masking and combining them in photoshop).

Here's the result. I managed to put a lot more detail into the water and even managed to kind of capture the reflection of the sky.
But I'm not sure if this photo works any better. The water definately looks better, but the whole shot seems to lose some of its simplicity now there is another element asking for attention, and it has lost some of its subtlety.
But.. I love those little posts sticking out of the water, and this shot draws more attention down there.
What do you think?



ps: I forgot to straighten the horizon in both images! grrr..
pps: I left the little dark clouds in the right deliberately... Sorry Colin, I like them!

[Toad]

I think your new treatment of the tree shot greatly improves it! Well done!

[Petographer]

I change my mind. I do like the newer version better.

[shuttertalk]

Nice Kombi! 2nd version is definitely better. I like how you've brought out the brighness in the water too... looks like it's glowing! And the sihlouettes stand out better because of that.

10 ST points!

[guerito]

Me too, I like the new version better. The visibilty is more balanced, and you can see the beauty of the picture without squinting.

[Peted]

New one is lots better, very good.

[Toad]

Thanks guys, And thanks for the "Plastron" term Toad..

I only know the term because I used to be an enthusiastic fencer and the "plastron" was the extra padding that covered the right side of the Torso (if you were right handed). I wonderd about the term and looked it up in the dictionary and found out that it was the underside of a turtle shell. It's not often I get to trot that term out (outside of fencing circles) so I couldn't resist when I saw one in your photo.

[Kombisaurus]

hehe Toad, when you mentioned Plastron I actually thought you recognised the species of turtle and that was its name... but now you've cleared it up. underside padding - gotcha!

Well I was bored today and decided to go back and grab a better shot of the Plastron of the turtle - one without the grass in the way. The location is only about 1km from my house, so it isn't much of an expedition.

As usual, the couple of shots I took of the turtle weren't really any better than Friday, but the unplanned shots I took turned out the best. Incidently, I found two other turtle skeletons nearby the one I found on Friday, so I'm a bit curious about what happened.

Anyway, these are my favourite four shots of the day. The first one I think really compliments the sunset shot from Friday, and came out of the camera almost as it appears here (just a tweak of white balance and exposure in DPP).
The others also came out of the camera pretty much as they appear here, but these are not really consistent with Friday's theme of "death" like the first one is.
Incidently, although I took similar numbers of shots with all three of my lenses (18-55, 70-200, 50 prime), it turns out that all of these shots were taken with the 50mm f/1.8 prime. Interesting...








(That's foam on the water's edge.. not snow!)

What's even more interesting is that the couple of times I've returned to a location to re-take some shots, I've been much happier with my shots the 2nd time around. I think going away and thinking about the location and then returning really helps.

[Petographer]

Another batch of stunning images with vivid colour. Well done Adrian.

[Kombisaurus]

Thanks Colin, but do you think I overdo it a bit with the colour (and dark shadows)?
I rarely push the saturation of an image beyond 100%, but I often underexpose the image in post which has the effect of increasing saturation in the darker areas. Of course, it is often the colour of the scene that invites me to take the photo in the first place as well.

I think many of my photos end up looking quite stylised. While generally I do this intentionally to add to the atmosphere I'm trying to portray in the image, I'm getting a bit concerned the effect might start to get repetitive or try to sucker people into the image by simply being "slick". Sometimes I look at my photos and think they are advertising images just looking for a product to advertise... and I mean that in a bad way. I have no problems if I were taking these photos for advertising purposes, and there are many fine photographs used in advertising, but these shots are all being taken for personal reasons and so I want that "personal-ness" to come through in them.

Some people might say that having a recognisable style is a good thing that sets your work apart from others, but other people might call the same style a formula for churning out images which end up looking the same, and saying that sticking to a style shows a lack of imagination.

I'd be interested in hearing someone else's opinion here (and don't worry about offending me if you think my shots are already repetitive or lack imagination).

[Toad]

#1 and #3 in particular are stunning!

I don't think you overdo the dark shadows at all - and as for being stylized: that is a major place where the artistic content comes into photography. I strive for a recognizable style as well, and yes - that does mean that your photos can get a "sameness" in their look and feel. But that's just fine. It is how it is done in almost all other artistic fields.

Nothing wrong with being slick either.