Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Kind of a lousy image.  I was in Guthrie, Oklahoma last week and now the sun is not overhead anymore, but lower in the sky.  I really wanted the architecture of these old buildings, and I wanted the delivery truck.

But this is what I got.  Just about as severe a flare as I've ever seen.  Does it completely ruin this image or does it add interest?  And, if you like it, do you think it would pass QC ? 

 All advice welcome, good or b a d. - Betty

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/gvxc3pyfohob6dp/_ALI2067-flare.jpg?dl=0

Link to post
Share on other sites

Definitely leave it in. Perfect for a positive story about Fedex.

Maybe recover the highlights to get a bit more shape in the flare. Or maybe not. No QC problems i can see as long as it's sharp Sorry, Betty.

BTW I'm envious of the quality of your optics. Even my hat wouldn't have got me that one.

Edit: Oh, is that full size? If so a bit soft, maybe a touch extra sharpening and a downsize.

Edited by spacecadet
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Flares are totally acceptable because they make images made with dslrs look like they're made with a phone.

Let us know if it gets through like this.

Is the cross stitch pattern in that flare across the windshield and above the van normal for the Fuji?

 

wim

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks everyone!  I kind of liked it but I'm just off-beat enough about what I like to not to trust myself on an image like this. Marching to a different drummer, and all that stuff. :D All those "Pauline" cartoons, that'll be me.

 

And I've never seen the cross stitch pattern before.  I don't think I've ever shot directly into a low sun like this.  Well, once, but it was a setting summer sun and I only got a mild but very interesting flare.  Mostly what made that image was the sun's reflection on the water which made a paddle boarder's leg look all wavy. That one was with the 50-140 Fujinon.

I will downsize.  Moire?  Beats me, John!

This image was shot with the Fuji 10-24.  I don't shoot with this lens much, but thought with my subject matter, it was the way to go.  I've shot it downtown Oklahoma City because of the tall buildings, but never into the sun.

Betty 

 

Edit to add:  Guthrie Oklahoma, after the land run and statehood, became the Capital of Oklahoma.  It only lasted 3-4 years when Oklahoma City mucky-mucks decided Oklahoma City should be the capital.  I think it was around 1910 some people sneaked into the Guthrie Capitol building and took the state seal back to Oklahoma City.  There are a lot of old, architecturally interesting buildings in Guthrie, and a section of town called Guthrie Historical District that is registered as historically significant.  Influences in building design are Italianate, late Victorian, Romanesque, Classic Revival and others, and some are mixes of styles.

I need to go back and explore further.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guthrie_Historic_District_(Guthrie,_Oklahoma)

Edited by Betty LaRue
add text
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

As for the flare, I really like it and it adds interest so really a good composition for my taste. 

 

Overall I find the image slightly too noisy and the cross stitch on the windshield is prominent, drawing attention in 100% view. 

(NB: I am a confessed pixel fetishist and overcautious, so take my comment with that grain of salt please)

 

When downsizing the picture to 6Mpix the noise almost disappeared and the cross stitch became a lot less prominent.  

Personally I'd rather upload the downsized that the full size version. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Love lens flare - would never think about removing it. I go look for lens flare compositions with the Canon 16-35mm f/2.8 II as it creates awesome ones with it's circular shaped blades.

Edited by Martin Carlsson
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's a lovely shot Betty. I do have to say, though, that if that was one of mine I would have rejected it for Alamy submission right away as not being sharp enough.

 

Alan

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Inchiquin said:

I think it's a lovely shot Betty. I do have to say, though, that if that was one of mine I would have rejected it for Alamy submission right away as not being sharp enough.

 

Alan

 

 

I think it is very  noisy (luminance noise) which gives the appearance of sharpness but which is ruining the detail. The shadow areas are extremely noisy and there are strange crosshatch patterns in places as Wim says. It looks like it has been very underexposed and then recovered in the raw conversion - I wouldn't submit this for fear of failing because of noise and SoLD, not the flare which looks ok in itself. EDIT - perhaps post the raw as well - it would be interesting to interpret it directly rather than the JPEG.

Edited by MDM
Link to post
Share on other sites

A winning snap that will fly through QC, I think. Two small things: I would crop in a touch, enough to get rid of the crack in the road. And I would darken the blue sky some.

 

Nothing wrong with a crack in the ground, but this one pulls the eye away from the main subject.

 

You seem to have a flair for this kind of shot, Betty. 

 

Edo

Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Ed Rooney said:

A winning snap that will fly through QC, I think. Two small things: I would crop in a touch, enough to get rid of the crack in the road. And I would darken the blue sky some.

 

Nothing wrong with a crack in the ground, but this one pulls the eye away from the main subject.

 

You seem to have a flair for this kind of shot, Betty. 

 

Edo

Kind words, thank you, Edo. I will reprocess the image and see what I get.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ed Rooney said:

A winning snap that will fly through QC, I think.

 

May I respectfully disagree Ed (I absolutely agreed with you in an earlier post so no growling or biting please :)). I would be surprised if this passes QC due to the excessive noise as well as the softness in parts of the image, very evident when downloaded to one's computer and viewed at 100%

 

But there is only one way to find out - submit it on its own and see what QC say.
 

By the way Betty, my comments are intended as purely objective based on your saying "Happy for all advice and criticisms".

Edited by MDM
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.