Glass & Sky

[Artshot]

My apologies to everyone if I'm spamming the forums with too many photos and too many questions. My interests are varied so my posts are all over the place as far as content goes. I'm taking advantage of all the great feedback to test out where my skills may be, and then make a plan to get more focused.

Currently I've got video hardware issues with a 2 year old iMac, and it won't let me work with RAW files. I'm not losing any sleep over this , but I'm not ignoring your good advice to give up my jpeg habit.

These are a few pics I captured downtown in about 2 hours, and have spent about 6 hours making them what they are. As usual, I didn't pick anything simple, and to really test out if I've crossed the line I used a fisheye for 3 of the photos. These are not architecture photos, just images I find interesting.

The first question is to see if I'm the only one who finds these worth looking at.
The second question is about the quality of my PS work.

All photos Nikon D750 f/6.3 ISO 200
#1 24mm 1/400

#2 16mm 1/160

#3 16mm 1/400

#4 16mm 1/250

[Shadowman]

One complaint regarding your presentation is the lack of camera settings. I like the compositions but would like to see some shadow adjustments in the foreground on all, plus each seem to need a bit of noise reduction especially in the skies.

[Stagecoach]

The first question is to see if I'm the only one who finds these worth looking at.

I certainly find them worthwhile looking at Art, you have chosen a good variance of 'views'.

The second question is about the quality of my PS work.

At this posted size it is difficult to fully assess the PP work but what does surprise me is that it would take 6 hours to undertake the PP for these 4 image results. What I see are results that are far too 'blue' that looks unnatural and shadow areas that could have been opened up, whether using a raw or jpeg.

Can you post the originals, to give an idea of what was done?

[Artshot]

I like dark areas of the canvas from which the light ascends, but I'm willing to look on the brighter side of things.

My photoshop skills suck, and use maybe 20% of whats available. I will post the original photos.

Thanks again for the help.

[Artshot]

This photo is where I wasted a lot of time. I have troubles cloning over blue sky gradients. I actually prefer the original minus the building on the left. Removing everything else and brightening the photo was done in response to feedback from previous posts. I am trying to follow good advice, but may not be smart enough to catch on right away.



This original on second thought, is probably preferable to the one I mucked up. My focus was the curving canopy and I thought that the bright buildings to the back and left would be considered distractions.


The other photos had minor changes that involved removing power lines. Just time consuming for me.
On it goes.

[Artshot]

One complaint regarding your presentation is the lack of camera settings. I like the compositions but would like to see some shadow adjustments in the foreground on all, plus each seem to need a bit of noise reduction especially in the skies.

I've added the basic info. Surprised to see f/6.3 on all photos despite the change of lens. My camera is 99% aperture priority due to my non-cpu lens.

[JBW]

Art, my area of photography is not architecture. I will leave the critique to others. But, as to your spamming us? When i first got here I was posting 4 or 5 shots a day. No one thought I was spamming and many people took the time to help me progress. Keep on posting.

[mugge]

Art, I like your compositions but the noise and the very blue colours could be reduced a tad. That is something that can be rectified quite easily.

Spamming, what spamming?
Cheers Ole

[Wavelength]

Your works are nice; please continue to post them