It took me one year to come up with this, so be nice :)

[Alis]

Click image to see full size: 1,100px × 459px

[PopsPhotos]

That one makes it worth the wait.

Pops

[David]

Ali - Great shot - the sheen on the water is astonishing, with the reflections of the tiny street lights amplified and of the (church?) tower leading the eye back to the foreground. I appreciate, too, the layer structure of the image: foliage, water, far shore, sky, each with its own characteristics (rough and tumble of the greenery, smoothness of the water, dark mystery of the shore, and pastel colouring of the sky), yet still indicating depth and distance.

Great!

Cheers

David

[Colin Southern]

Hi Ali,

Great capture ... but there's still more to be wrung out of the post-processing!

[Klickit]

What a beautiful scene - so tranquil. I think David sums it up beautifully.

[arith]

I like the shot; it is a for real place, it looks like a cool evening after a long hot day.

[Dave Humphries]

It took me one year to come up with this

Why? Did you plant the greenery?

It is a nice image Ali, well done.

It deserves to be seen full size though, hence my adding the "hint text" as to its true size.

I don't doubt Colin can make it more colourful, etc., which may make it better, but it doesn't look 'wrong' now. Am I making sense?

Cheers,

[Alis]

Thanks, Pops!

I posted an image here from the same lake (which is by the way in the middle of the city of Boston) last year. The main feedback was that it needs a foreground (which makes me laugh now, since I should have known this better, being a big fan of the director, Spielberg and his masterpiece "Jaws" => http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WyYYZ2QxvLg [go to 3:24 min ]).

Anyway, I said took me one year not that I have been trying for a full year, just took me a full year or so to go back to the same place and this time include a foreground in the same scene Pretty slow I suppose....

Alis

[Alis]

Ali - Great shot - the sheen on the water is astonishing, with the reflections of the tiny street lights amplified and of the (church?) tower leading the eye back to the foreground. I appreciate, too, the layer structure of the image: foliage, water, far shore, sky, each with its own characteristics (rough and tumble of the greenery, smoothness of the water, dark mystery of the shore, and pastel colouring of the sky), yet still indicating depth and distance.

Great!

Cheers

David

Thanks a lot, David! That is very nice of you.

[Alis]

Hi Ali,

Great capture ... but there's still more to be wrung out of the post-processing!

Come on, be a little bit more specific, I was kidding about being nice

But seriously, one thing is that the foreground now is too bright I guess, does not match the late evening darkness of the rest of the picture. This is actually three bracketted exposures and I blended them in PS manually.

Also, it is a foreground now, but it has nothing pretty in it I guess. I have to tell you, it is very difficult to get closer to the water, I was afraid I may fall into the lake, which is pretty deep from the beginning

[Alis]

Why? Did you plant the greenery?

It is a nice image Ali, well done.

It deserves to be seen full size though, hence my adding the "hint text" as to its true size.

I don't doubt Colin can make it more colourful, etc., which may make it better, but it doesn't look 'wrong' now. Am I making sense?

Cheers,

I agree, Dave and thanks for adding the note. I am very curious to see how he will make it better, so that when I take a really nice one later, I have those things in mind during the capture and in when processing it.

[arith]

You can ignore me if you like, I think the forground is a bit bright and would maybe be better a lot darker. But I think it should be bright. Maybe. confusing

[arith]

Ignore that rubbish statement I made. It is good everywhere except at the front. But with tweaking will be marvellous. It is a lovely image and one I would like to keep.

[Alis]

Ignore that rubbish statement I made. It is good everywhere except at the front. But with tweaking will be marvellous. It is a lovely image and one I would like to keep.

Thanks, Steve. by no means I meant to ignore your comment. Just missed that one, lost track. I agree with you. though that the foreground is unusually bright. I masked the bottom part of the shorter exposures but I think overdone that part.

The whole process of playing with the exposure and layers and the fact that, unlike photographing people, I could sit there for a long time in total darkness and take a picture that looked like bright daylight was very exciting. Too bad I am not brave enough to do this outside the city, at the sea coast or in a mountain at that time of the day I need a buddy and that is what I do not have I guess

[Colin Southern]

Come on, be a little bit more specific, I was kidding about being nice

Hi Ali,

When I first saw it I thought that the actual capture was great ... but looking at the post-processing I thought ...

- A bit more vibrance would bring out some of the colour in the sky and water

- A bit of clarity would bring more definition to the clouds in the sky

- Some of the foliage might look better cropped away

- The foliage in the foreground was a bit bright and was competing against the rest of the image

- A little vignette would help draw the eye into the scene

So here's what I came up with in one of my notorious Photoshop 30-Second Makeovers (TM!) ...



* Now with "korrect schpellin"

[Alis]

Hi Ali,

When I first saw it I thought that the actual capture was great ... but looking at the post-processing I thought ...

- A bit more vibrance would bring out some of the colour in the sky and water

- A bit of clarity would bring more definition to the clouds in the sky

- Some of the foliage might look better cropped away

- The foliage in the foreground was a bit bright and was competing against the rest of the image

- A little vignette would help draw the eye into the scene

So here's what I came up with in one of my notorious Photoshop 30-Second Makeovers (TM!) ...



* Now with "korrect schpellin"

Thanks a lot, Colin! It looks exactly what I it should look like now.

About clarity, I know you used the Jpeg to do this but when working with RAW, is there anywhere in PS to adjust clarity or you have to do it in ACR and before importing into PS?

Thanks again,

Ali

[Colin Southern]

Thanks a lot, Colin! It looks exactly what I it should look like now.

About clarity, I know you used the Jpeg to do this but when working with RAW, is there anywhere in PS to adjust clarity or you have to do it in ACR and before importing into PS?

Thanks again,

Ali

No worries Ali,

Re: Clarity - I think you could probably accomplish the same thing with a USM - the clarity slider just makes it easier though.

[arith]

Thanks, Steve. by no means I meant to ignore your comment. Just missed that one, lost track. I agree with you. though that the foreground is unusually bright. I masked the bottom part of the shorter exposures but I think overdone that part.

The whole process of playing with the exposure and layers and the fact that, unlike photographing people, I could sit there for a long time in total darkness and take a picture that looked like bright daylight was very exciting. Too bad I am not brave enough to do this outside the city, at the sea coast or in a mountain at that time of the day I need a buddy and that is what I do not have I guess

I'll be your buddy I'm just to far away.