The Forth Bridge

[Donald]

I'm not sure how many countries around the world use the expression, "It's like painting the Forth Bridge" when referring to a task that is never-ending; i.e. you start at one end and by the time you finish, you've have to go back and start at the beginning again.

Well, here is that very bridge.

I was out early this morning (5:15am) for another specific shot that features the bridge, but more of that later. Once I got the one I was after, I just had a look around, as it is a location about 30 minutes from my home that I haven't explored in detail. It was a beautiful day so far as my photography interests are concerned. It was dull, grey and wet (the storm jacket over the camera and the lenses got well tested) - my sort of day.

The road bridge, across which I had driven to get to this location, can be seen in the background.

This was taken at 6:51am.


40D, 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM @ 26mm. ISO400. 1/8@f16

[Sahil]

Beautiful shot, Donald. It justifies the title very well.
And no, I had not heard this phrase before. Thanks

[Wirefox]

Donald

A fine shot of one of the finest pieces of engineering. I love the water and I love that murkiness. The composition is just spot on. I am a little distracted with the grain/noise in the sky though. Have you tried selective greystoration in GIMP? It might do the trick. I have had mixed results in the past.

[Dizzy]

A beautiful image, and the design of that bridge is just spectacular. It looks as if it would last for a
hundred years (if it hasn't already).

In an effort to learn something from it, may I ask why you chose that particular angle/location to
shoot the picture from?

Mike

[Katy Noelle]

This is beautiful, Donald! I wondered where you were, this morning.

I love the light on the water and the slight mistiness or atmosphere.

I'm just looking quickly, though. Catch you all, later!

[Katy Noelle]

This is beautiful, Donald! I wondered where you were, this morning.

I love the light on the water and the slight mistiness or atmosphere.

I'm just looking quickly, though. Catch you all, later!

Oh, now.....what does 'the firth of forth' mean, again? Does it have anything to do with this? can't think of it, now.

[Harpo]

Great image Donald! Its definitely an interesting design to photograph. I wonder what it would also look like in the fog! I see another interesting bridge in the foreground- another opportunity! Looks a bit like the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco. I have to go back just to photograph that bridge! One of my regrets... I lived in California for 10 years... before the serious photo bug bit me!

One question... don't know if its my eyes or what... but does it look like to any of you that there is a very subtle circular pattern of lines (like growth rings on a tree) starting in the top part of the first (what do you call it? main support structure of the bridge?) bridge?

[dje]

Donald we have a similar expression in Australia - "it's like painting the Sydney Harbour bridge". That's a very interesting looking bridge and a very good shot of it. I probably would have cropped most of the sky above the bridge out but that's just a personal taste thing. You were obviously wanting a different effect and I do like it your way as well.

"Dull grey and wet.... my sort of day"

Cheers Dave

[Donald]

Dear All

Thanks for your comments.

In relation to specific comments/questions .......

I am a little distracted with the grain/noise in the sky though.

Steve - Agreed. The Raw is spectacularly flat. That's what I wanted. As I began to process, I pushed the sky a bit. I'm going back tomorrow morning. I want to get it earlier (sunrise is at 6:07am) and go for a longer exposure. But I promise I won't produce fluffy water. Maybe flat water without the need to push the sky so much.

It looks as if it would last for a hundred years (if it hasn't already)

Mike the bridge was begun in 1883 and opened in 1890. I'm no engineer, but an understanding of the cantilever design and how, effectively, it holds itself up, is fascinating.

In an effort to learn something from it, may I ask why you chose that particular angle/location to shoot the picture from?

I wanted a 1:1 (square) ratio. So I could not go too far from the bridge or the angles wouldn't have worked. I'd never been on that side of the bridge on the south side of the river (as this is) before. So I was seeing the bridge from a completely new viewpoint. The angle gave a good view back to the road bridge.

.what does 'the firth of forth' mean

A firth can be thought of as the Scottish equivalent of a Norwegian fjord - an sea inlet. The Forth is the river that flows from inland Scotland into the firth. For all those Braveheart fans, the Forth is the river that flows through Stirling where William Wallace did his thing at the battle of Stirling Bridge. Apparently Mel Gibson was there too!

Looks a bit like the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco

The road bridge was opened in 1964. It's a suspension bridge - exact same design as the Golden Gate. It's falling to bits and there are plans to build a new one further upstream from that existing one. It's a hot political potato, with lobbyists arguing that it should be a tunnel and others saying that we don't need another crossing. But it's interesting that the road bridge was opened in 1964 and needs replaced. The rail bridge opened in 1890 and is still going strong, with about 200 train movements across it each day.

but does it look like to any of you that there is a very subtle circular pattern of lines

That's going to be a monitor calibration & profiling issue. I'm not seeing it. Is anyone else?

Thanks for taking the time to look and comment. Watch this space for tomorrow's version.

[Wirefox]

Steve - Agreed. The Raw is spectacularly flat. That's what I wanted. As I began to process, I pushed the sky a bit. I'm going back tomorrow morning. I want to get it earlier (sunrise is at 6:07am) and go for a longer exposure. But I promise I won't produce fluffy water. Maybe flat water without the need to push the sky so much.

Well apart from the sky I think you will be hard pushed to improve on this it has so much atmosphere. I will look forward to seeing the results. I can fully understand why you wanted the image flat. The PP has really separated that intricate and very beautiful structure from that vast steely sky. Actually, most images of this bridge are shot so that the vastness of the structure dominates the image. Here you have given the subject under half the canvas and it works spectacularly well. As for the square aspect, well you have me totally convinced that I do not want a WA lens. In fact WA British landscapes seem a little cliched to me now. Constricting landscapes in this way concentrates the character of British landcapes superbly. However, it takes a lot more skill than people may realise to get these right.

[Donald]

Have you tried selective greystoration in GIMP?

Steve

What is that and where do you access it? Went looking this morning and couldn't find. What I did do was put a 5-point Gaussian Blur on the sky and got this .........



Better?

[Wirefox]

Donald, it is slightly better but I am still seeing noise. I would not normally comment on noise but this is such a fine image it seems a pity. Is the noise present on the raw image? You really should not be getting noise from a 40D at ISO400 unless the image was very under exposed. Maybe its the PP.

GREYCstoration can be found in Filters/Enhance/GREYCstoration. Be gentle on the sliders though

[Donald]

GREYCstoration can be found in Filters/Enhance/GREYCstoration. Be gentle on the sliders though

I couldn't find this at all. But on the journey,. I discovered that I did have Wavelet Denoise. I knew it was there, but I've never used it. What a lovely wee tool.

So, how's this one? Am I getting closer?

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Donald,

Well the noise is better in the latest version, but like Steve, I don't understand how it came to be visible in what I assume is a significantly downsized image - it is presented here at 1024px on longest edge, that implies about a 4:1 reduction; i.e. original was at least 4,000px on longest side - and I'd have expected that to have removed the noise by averaging.

I am also seeing what seems to be a lack of detail (girders) in some directions and over sharpening of girders in other directions in the image and the water surface still has a "sharpened noisy" look to it.

Something odd seems to have happened, presumably during PP, I'd almost offer to have a go, but I am hesitant as your images are normally so good. Let me know if you'd like me to have a bash with my KISS processing in CS5.

[Donald]

Dave I suspect I over-cooked the use of 'structure' in Silver Efex Pro 2 (my excuse being that I'm still getting used to it) and that likely explains all the faults you're seeing in it.

Quite happy for anyone to have a go with it and can make a large JPEG or the post SEP2 Tiff available (although it is very big). The large JPEG is here.

[Wirefox]

That last one is better. Are you running GIMP 2.6. I am pretty sure GREYCStoration is not a plugin. At least you are going to get a KISS from Dave

[Dave Humphries]

At least you are going to get a KISS from Dave

Ah, but this KISS needs to be in the RAW

But I'd understand if you don't want to make that available widely

[Donald]

Ah, but this KISS needs to be in the RAW

But I'd understand if you don't want to make that available widely

I am delighted. If anyone wants to steal it, then that's their problem. Here it is.

[jiro]

Question, Donald: "Was the uploaded linked jpeg file already runned from SEP 2?" Thanks.

[Donald]

Question, Donald: "Was the uploaded linked jpeg file already runned from SEP 2?" Thanks.

Yes, Willie.

Raw processed in DxO Optics. Conversion in SEP2. Final finishing in the GIMP.