2019 Project 52 by David ("Rufus")

[Rufus]

Okay, so, I am going to take the plunge and start a Project 52 for 2019

All being well such a public commitment will motivate me to go out and take more, many more, photographs. In doing so I hope to get far more familiar with my camera and increase my understanding along the way.

Of course, this is fine as an aspiration but the first problem was that I could not come up with a topic that might last a year, so I decided to break the project up into 4 quarters with a new thread for each quarter.

I tend to keep my 24-105mm f/4 lens on my camera and it has rapidly become by default lens. For my project I shall ditch that for the first half of the year. So, in Q1 I shall use my 35mm f/2 lens and in Q2 I shall use my 135mm f/2 lens. I shall not limit all my photography to a single lens, but I shall definitely concentrate my efforts for the first half of 2019 on the "lens of the quarter" and only post those images here.

The 35mm is not especially wide and the 135mm lens is a short telephoto, but they suit my tastes as I prefer landscapes and buildings that are not taken with very wide angle lenses and I do not attempt wildlife shots that would require a much longer lens.

By the way, I shall not tempt fate by deciding on the common themes for Q3 and Q4.

As part of my project I shall revisit the CiC tutorials on lenses and make some notes (as I learn best that way) and I shall be able to enhance them with insight gained from the generosity of fellow members on CiC.

Having chosen a lens as a common theme for Q1 it leaves me with the widest selection of subject matter – there is method in my madness!

Although my project is not about post processing, all comments are welcome whatever aspect they address.

Week 1 will appear shortly, and I will add a link in my signature box to this 2019 P52 thread and the guidance information about the Project 52 which has been published in the past.

Good luck to everyone participating in their own 2019 Project 52 and thank you to everyone who supports us. Happy 2019!

[Rufus]

As you know from post #1 , Quarter 1 will comprise images taken with my 35mm lens.

Image #1 is a landscape with a stream trickling down a hillside in Cornwall. The valley has fallen tree trunks/logs and a number of Gunnera plants which have died back for the winter. In the spring huge rhubarb-like leaves will appear from the crowns to replace the dead brown leaves from last year. In more formal gardens the leaves would be bent over the crowns to protect them from frost. Left as they are the plants look like aliens or huge spiders! Without that the image would be very mundane.

Taken at 1/45 sec, f/5.6, ISO 250. In theory, the shutter speed should be easily fast enough to avoid camera shake, as the lens is said to offer up to 4 stops of image stabilisation. I may have been pushing my luck with the depth of field having used f5.6. My rationale was that I did not want the increase the ISO or risk a slower shutter speed, and the far distance was not as important as the foreground and middleground. I was spot metering so I expect the actual focus point was in the centre of the image.

The image has been cropped a little, mainly to exclude as much as possible of the bland sky.

I am a little disappointed that the hillside facing the camera (ie from top to bottom of the photograph) does not look as steep as I remember it. I thought the wide angle lens would give more of a sense of that steepness.

C&C always very welcome.


Image #1:

[Shadowman]

Was the lack of steepness comment based on the physical aspects of the hill or the final capture with camera? I ask because you could probably create the effect by shooting from lower angle and in portrait mode.

[Rufus]

Was the lack of steepness comment based on the physical aspects of the hill or the final capture with camera? I ask because you could probably create the effect by shooting from lower angle and in portrait mode.

Thank you for looking and commenting, John. The hill was physically steeper than it appears in the photograph. In the photograph the land on either side of the stream looks steeper than the water course when in fact it was the other way round .

A lower camera position might have been preferable, but fencing would have prevented that on this occasion. Nevertheless, you have got me thinking about whether a lower position might have increased the perception of steepness. I should go to another hill during the project and work the scene from different positions while trying both landscape and portrait orientations.

I imagine it can be difficult to get a sense of depth into a landscape when the far distance within the image is not in fact very distant at all.

[billtils]

David

I was delighted to read your P52 goals and see that you wanted to leave the zoom and see what can be done with the primes. Your first post is an excellent start. I find that shooting with a prime makes you think more about composition and looking around to pick your spot, using the "foot zoom" to fill the frame with what you want (including things like your angle of view, as has already been pointed out).

Looking forward to seeing more of your journey.

[Rufus]

David

I was delighted to read your P52 goals and see that you wanted to leave the zoom and see what can be done with the primes. Your first post is an excellent start. I find that shooting with a prime makes you think more about composition and looking around to pick your spot, using the "foot zoom" to fill the frame with what you want (including things like your angle of view, as has already been pointed out).

Looking forward to seeing more of your journey.

Thank you for your encouraging remarks, Bill. I am looking forward to using my legs more.

Part of what I hope to achieve is a more intuitive feel for the what will be framed with a given focal length. I guess that comes down partly to knowing instinctively what the angle of view is. My research tells me that for my 35mm lens the AOV should be 63 degrees horizontally and 38 degrees vertically (in landscape orientation). That is a big difference, but fortunately I have already found my school protractor.

As you say, the point of view or positioning of the camera is also important, and the CiC tutorial suggests that what is framed within the image can vary significantly with a small shift of location or direction particularly when close up. I am fairly sure it will not be quite so apparent with a 35mm compared to say a 17mm lens, but it is another area for me to cover during the project.

[FootLoose]

Disregarding the problem of the fence, I think you might have achieved a better sense of the steepness by getting closer to that first object in the foreground - and shooting from a lower position.

Additionally, the lighting seems to pretty much the same throughout. You could address this in post by making the foreground lighter and background darker - or vice versa depending on what you want to achieve.

[Rufus]

Additionally, the lighting seems to pretty much the same throughout. You could address this in post by making the foreground lighter and background darker - or vice versa depending on what you want to achieve.

I agree, Greg, the lighting is too uniform. I have now added a graduated filter in LR to darken the upper part of the image a little (1 stop) and I think that does improve it:

Image #1a

[Rufus]

Time and weather were not in my favour in week 2 so I was already behind schedule when I went out yesterday which officially should have been the start of week 3. But it is too early to throw in the towel!

So yesterday I set off with my 35mm lens into the New Forest in search of...well, anything really!

A lot of the early shots taken in fully manual mode came out overexposed, despite the meter implying correct exposure. So I changed to auto ISO and that seemed to help. I wanted good DOF so generally selected f/8-f16. With the auto ISO setting I tended to keep to the 1/180 sec as that should readily avoid camera shake and the subjects were pretty still.

The New Forest is famous for its ponies, donkeys and other animals that roam free on roads, village verges and the open countryside. I came across quite few yesterday and offer 2 here plus 1 that is purely landscape.

Week 2, Image# 2 - Portrait of a Pony


1/180 sec at f/9.5 ISO 500.

Okay so, I have broken the "rules" and used a wide angle lens for a "head and shoulders portrait". Admittedly this has been cropped.

Week 2, Image#3 - White Pony

1/180sec at f/11 ISO 500

A full length shot with limited context from the background.

Week 2, Image #4 - Bridge Over a Stream

1/180sec at f9.5 ISO 640

No ponies in this one. I am not entirely happy with the wooden bridge as I think it needs darkening a little more while retaining the grain and it desperately calls for a person to be approaching or crossing it.

[Rufus]

This is another image taken in woods in the New Forest yesterday. I just liked the texture of the moss and the roots' shape.

Even in winter, the light in the woods is not optimal. Taken (yet again!) at 1/180 sec resulted in a high ISO. I clearly was not thinking. With IS on I should have been able to hand hold at 1/45 sec and reduced the ISO to 1600. Does it seem grainy or have I got away with it?

Week 2 Image #5 - Putting Down Roots

1/180 sec at f/8 ISO 6400.

[Geoff F]

The bridge looks fine for me, David. With that dark sky you really need a bit of lightness in the foreground to prevent the whole scene from looking overly gloomy. The bridge is a fairly complex part of the scene so I am happy for it to be a 'plain bridge' without any nearby people which might distract attention from the bridge. You have two distant figures anyway and they look OK where they are.

I never like going above Iso 800 but those tree roots dson't have any dark shadows so you seem to have managed all right. With Iso 1600 I would have preferred to use a tripod for anything slower than 1/60 even with IS.

[Rufus]

The bridge looks fine for me, David. With that dark sky you really need a bit of lightness in the foreground to prevent the whole scene from looking overly gloomy. The bridge is a fairly complex part of the scene so I am happy for it to be a 'plain bridge' without any nearby people which might distract attention from the bridge. You have two distant figures anyway and they look OK where they are.

I never like going above Iso 800 but those tree roots dson't have any dark shadows so you seem to have managed all right. With Iso 1600 I would have preferred to use a tripod for anything slower than 1/60 even with IS.

When I printed the Bridge picture, the contrast beween the pale bridge and dark clouds seems even stronger and I actually liked it!

I also would not normally risk a speed slower than 1/60 sec; I don't have any reason for this other than prudence.

One day I may buy a lightweight tripod that straps onto me or my bag. Sadly, my ancient aluminium one is fine if I am taking it to a particular destination but it is not so suitable for walking around for hours on end with under my arm.

[Geoff F]

For occasional use, David, I have a lightweight 4 section tripod which folds up small enough to fit inside a camera backpack. It is a Velbon Luxi L but that was a few years ago so I don't know what is available now. It has twist lock legs which I don't really like, but that does save a bit of stowage space.

[Rufus]

For occasional use, David, I have a lightweight 4 section tripod which folds up small enough to fit inside a camera backpack. It is a Velbon Luxi L but that was a few years ago so I don't know what is available now. It has twist lock legs which I don't really like, but that does save a bit of stowage space.

Mine is a Velbon too - but a 2-section one from the 1970s!

Like everything else these days, the options are so varied; and the advantages of various combinations of tripod, heads and quick release plates are rather like the exposure triangle: they all have different roles and importance depending on the situation! It is something to research when I feel the need is greater.

[Rufus]

It was another cold, blue sky day with few clouds when I went out this week.
Week 3, Image #6 - Beaulieu Chapel
This is a private chapel on Lord Montague’s estate. This was the best viewpoint I could achieve so I went for a shot that shows the context.


1/250 sec at f9.5 ISO 125

Week 3 Image #7 - Mill Race House.
The village sits at the head of a tidal river. From hear it is tidal downstream. When the tide comes up it the water coming down upstream floods the area which is in the right of the picture.
I have applied the curves adjustment layer method of dodge and burn as described by Manfred, to darken the stonework on the front of the house and some of the timbers as they were in bright light.
The 35mm lens has distorted the proportions a little, as might be expected. It was not so obvious with the ponies last week because they were mostly side on.
Now I look at this image I can see I should have reduced the brightness of the side gable window which is reflecting the clear sky.


1/250 sec at f9.5 ISO 125

Week 3, Image #8 - Workshop
This is a workshop at Bucklers Hard, a small hamlet. Boatbuilding has taken place here for centuries due to the proximity of woo from the New Forest. Over 50 wooden ships were built for the Royal Navy, including the vessels Agamemnon, Euryalus and Swiftsure, all of which fought as art of Nelson’s fleet at the Battle of Trafalgar in 1805. Nowadays it is a yacht haven.
I have practiced the same curves adjustment technique to lighten the front of the workshop and the shadows to the left of it.


1/180 sec at f/11 ISO 100

All C&C welcome

[Geoff F]

These work OK. There might be some argument for reducing the right side of #1.

You could try darkening that window in #2 but it might end up looking unnatural; in which case I would leave it as the current sky reflection

Tricky exposure for #3 but this has worked out fine.

[Rufus]

I have re-numbered the images so they are sequential throughout the thread rather than starting at #1 each week. Apologies if that confuses later readers of preceding posts in this thread. At least it only affects 3 weeks at this early stage of the year.

[Shadowman]

Nicely exposed, the first not that interesting as it looks like the back of the structure, but if these were taken just to test the camera and lens then no problem. Second image nicely composed but could've included more of the brick wall.

[Rufus]

Second image nicely composed but could've included more of the brick wall.

Thank you for commenting, John. Here is the SOOC image. I cropped out some of the wall because I wanted to remove the uninteresting road in the deep foreground shadow. I tried other viewpoints but this one seemed best to avoid the convergence that comes with wide angled lenses. I tried several crops attempting to keep more of the full height of the low wall, and ended up with the one in post #15.

Image #7 - Unprocessed:

[Geoff F]

It should be possible to crop a little from the bottom and show the wall base then clone over that remaining bit of dark road shadow. But I don't really have any serious problems with your original edited version which shows all the main elements of that scene.