Feedback on my post processing...

[b00gym4n]

Sometimes I feel like I'm overdoing it. I really dislike how my photos come out so dull with my mk ii 24-70. Some feedback on my post processing please. (What to do better/What not to do and etc) Thanks.

Edited in raw than in photoshop cs5. I tried using the 1/3 rule, but I didn't want to crop the sky out too much. Is the 1/3 really that necessary on every picture? I've seen some great pictures that do not follow that rule.

Before:


After:

[b00gym4n]

Btw, I really hate this picture. Most of my landscape pictures somewhat look like this. Boring, flat and missing something.

Any help/feedback will be much appreciated. I take bad feedback very well.

[Letrow]

What kind of lenses do you use Pat? Apart from that the photo's subject is indeed a bit boring. I have the same problem now and then, also because some landscapes are just boring.
I am not sure whether you could improve on this particular landscape, although with a telelens I might have tried to get the mountains closer and would have left out the grass. The sky and the mountains look interesting and with a bit more detail in the mountains it would be a better picture in my view.
You overprocessed a bit too much for my taste and lost most of that nice orange colour in the sky.

[CBImages]

Hi Pat

Nice attempt.
Do you use any filters in your sunrise/sunset images, polarizing, ND Grad's etc?
A polarizer will help to saturate the colours in the sky and reduce reflections from the bright clouds (under most circumstances).
A ND Graduated filter with the graduated line positioned across the horizon will reduce the amount of light falling on the camera sensor and will enhance cloud detail and colours.

Once you have completed your RAW editing try opening your image in Photoshop and applying a graduated filter from the top downwards (you can also do this in Adobe Lightroom), adjust the strength of the filter and position of it until you are happy with the result.
I would also try another Grad Filter positioned at the bottom of the image to lighten the foreground grass.

As for your Landscapes looking boring, flat and missing something - I haven't seen any of your work so I can't really comment but I have a few suggestions to for you to keep in mind.

1) Have a main subject in your landscape, something for the viewers eye to rest on - it can be an object/s or even a pattern of trees, hedges etc.

2) Try to find a composition where objects in the frame lead the viewers eye to the main subject.

3) Foreground interest - most landscapes have something in the foreground which 'harmonises' with the rest of your image. It can be colours, shapes, textures or an object.

Once you find something that will work take a few test images and decided what time of day will provide the best lighting and then go back and try again. Many years ago an old boss of mine said something that has stuck with me - "nobody plans to fail they only fail to plan". This is so true with landscape photography, very rarely will you get a perfect image first time - so the best advice I can give you is to 'plan' your shoots. I have compositions filed away in my mind and researched the time of year when the lighting will be ideal for what I have in mind, all I need to do is wait until the right time, go and take the image!

Look forward to seeing more of your work.

Regards

Chris

[Colin Southern]

[rpcrowe]

Pat wrote: "Most of my landscape pictures somewhat look like this. Boring, flat and missing something."

I hope that you consider this feedback as constructive, it is certainly intended to be that.

I am guessing that this image was shot with a wide angle or UWA lens. Many photographers automatically select a wide or ultra wide lens when shooting landscapes. This often (IMO : USUALLY) results in an image having a vast area of uninteresting foreground and a large amount of sky with a strip of miniscule interest along the horizon.

IMO, landscapes shot with UWA lenses are best accomplished by having a significantly interesting foreground subject which leads the viewer's eye into the image. Another way to shoot a landscape is to use a longer focal length lens and either select an interesting portion of the scene or shoot a pano. Longer focal length lenses will compress distances and increase interest.

We are often impressed with grandure when we view a vast open landscape. Our vision is selective and we hone in on the interesting points of the landscape or are just impressed with the imensity of the scene. But the camera doesn't have that selective vision and the resulting image often is quite boring. I notice this quite often with pictures of the Grand canyon in Arizona. The Grand Canyon is absolutely impressive due to its depth and size. However, slapping on an UWA lens to achieve a wide left to right coversge results in the Canyon being minimized in scale and not at all impressive.

BTW: I think that there are a lot of views of terrain that are inherently boring and which cannot be made into an interesting image no matter what the photographer does. Then there are other areas, such as the Yosemite Valley in California that are so absolutely beautiful that I think you could shoot blindfolded and get reasonably nice imagery.

[b00gym4n]

What kind of lenses do you use Pat? Apart from that the photo's subject is indeed a bit boring. I have the same problem now and then, also because some landscapes are just boring.
I am not sure whether you could improve on this particular landscape, although with a telelens I might have tried to get the mountains closer and would have left out the grass. The sky and the mountains look interesting and with a bit more detail in the mountains it would be a better picture in my view.
You overprocessed a bit too much for my taste and lost most of that nice orange colour in the sky.

I used my Canon 24-70L f/2.8 lens

I believe the picture was taken with f/5.6 @ 100 iso.

The only reason why I kept the grass in was so I can follow the 1/3 rule. Next time I'm going to try and focus more on the interesting parts. Btw, in real life the sky had a purple/pink haze with orange and so I tried to post process it that way. I don't know why it didn't show up on my camera like that though. Thanks for the input Letrow.

[b00gym4n]

Hi Pat

Nice attempt.
Do you use any filters in your sunrise/sunset images, polarizing, ND Grad's etc?
A polarizer will help to saturate the colours in the sky and reduce reflections from the bright clouds (under most circumstances).
A ND Graduated filter with the graduated line positioned across the horizon will reduce the amount of light falling on the camera sensor and will enhance cloud detail and colours.

Once you have completed your RAW editing try opening your image in Photoshop and applying a graduated filter from the top downwards (you can also do this in Adobe Lightroom), adjust the strength of the filter and position of it until you are happy with the result.
I would also try another Grad Filter positioned at the bottom of the image to lighten the foreground grass.

As for your Landscapes looking boring, flat and missing something - I haven't seen any of your work so I can't really comment but I have a few suggestions to for you to keep in mind.

1) Have a main subject in your landscape, something for the viewers eye to rest on - it can be an object/s or even a pattern of trees, hedges etc.

2) Try to find a composition where objects in the frame lead the viewers eye to the main subject.

3) Foreground interest - most landscapes have something in the foreground which 'harmonises' with the rest of your image. It can be colours, shapes, textures or an object.

Once you find something that will work take a few test images and decided what time of day will provide the best lighting and then go back and try again. Many years ago an old boss of mine said something that has stuck with me - "nobody plans to fail they only fail to plan". This is so true with landscape photography, very rarely will you get a perfect image first time - so the best advice I can give you is to 'plan' your shoots. I have compositions filed away in my mind and researched the time of year when the lighting will be ideal for what I have in mind, all I need to do is wait until the right time, go and take the image!

Look forward to seeing more of your work.

Regards

Chris

I used a UV filter, which is pretty much just for lens protection. I completely forgot about polarizers and grad filters. I should really get some to practice with. Yeah I did not plan this photo at all or nor have I really planned out any of my photos. I just walked outside and saw how colorful the sky was and drove to the nearest area that had something other than a bunch of houses. I hope I get better soon, thanks for the tips.

[b00gym4n]

I really like what you did to the sky. Did you apply a grad filter in photoshop that CBImages mentioned earlier? Also the image looks much more sharper and detailed without adding a bunch of noise. If you could help me understand how you accomplished some of those basic things I'm missing that would be much appreciated.

[b00gym4n]

Pat wrote: "Most of my landscape pictures somewhat look like this. Boring, flat and missing something."

I hope that you consider this feedback as constructive, it is certainly intended to be that.

I am guessing that this image was shot with a wide angle or UWA lens. Many photographers automatically select a wide or ultra wide lens when shooting landscapes. This often (IMO : USUALLY) results in an image having a vast area of uninteresting foreground and a large amount of sky with a strip of miniscule interest along the horizon.

IMO, landscapes shot with UWA lenses are best accomplished by having a significantly interesting foreground subject which leads the viewer's eye into the image. Another way to shoot a landscape is to use a longer focal length lens and either select an interesting portion of the scene or shoot a pano. Longer focal length lenses will compress distances and increase interest.

We are often impressed with grandure when we view a vast open landscape. Our vision is selective and we hone in on the interesting points of the landscape or are just impressed with the imensity of the scene. But the camera doesn't have that selective vision and the resulting image often is quite boring. I notice this quite often with pictures of the Grand canyon in Arizona. The Grand Canyon is absolutely impressive due to its depth and size. However, slapping on an UWA lens to achieve a wide left to right coversge results in the Canyon being minimized in scale and not at all impressive.

BTW: I think that there are a lot of views of terrain that are inherently boring and which cannot be made into an interesting image no matter what the photographer does. Then there are other areas, such as the Yosemite Valley in California that are so absolutely beautiful that I think you could shoot blindfolded and get reasonably nice imagery.

I used a Canon 24-70L f/2.8. Would you recommend me trying a different one instead? Thanks for the input. I'll stop taking pictures of boring scenes. I was just amazed at how the sky looked at the time, but it didn't quite turn out the way I visioned. Like you said, it doesn't really work that way.

Thank you all for opening my eyes. I improve much quicker when I get raw feedback. One day I will win a mini-competition...

[Letrow]

I used a Canon 24-70L f/2.8. Would you recommend me trying a different one instead? Thanks for the input. I'll stop taking pictures of boring scenes. I was just amazed at how the sky looked at the time, but it didn't quite turn out the way I visioned. Like you said, it doesn't really work that way.

Thank you all for opening my eyes. I improve much quicker when I get raw feedback. One day I will win a mini-competition...

That lens should be fine for this Pat. Maybe try a little more zoom if the wideangle presents you with too much. As Richard said, if you do use the wideangle it is a good idea to have something interesting (plant, tree, whatevah) in the foreground sometimes. It can make it all more interesting. And just shoot a lot, it is digital anyway, so you can throw away what you don't like.