From the "I Wish These Came Out Better" Department

[bikehikeskifish]

(w7xman has gently encouraged me to post some shots, and so I will do so over the next few days. I posted them as thumbnail links to webshots -- click to get the medium resolution, and from webshots you can get the full-size. You may also note that I made an album for C & C and will add to it over time. In this thread, please limit discussion to the two photos below.)

I have a few shots from outside a gift shop. While Mrs. BikeHikeSkiFish was shopping, I walked up and down this road, and took a lot of pictures. I was there to take pictures, as opposed to documenting a peakbagging trip, or at least that was my mind set. These two are my favorite, from a subject-matter perspective. I wish they came out better. Keep in mind I am still at the "fully automatic mode" (but will experiment more in the future). Compositional C&C will be more beneficial to me at this time, but technical advice is more than welcome.

Having read this forum pretty thoroughly, I feel I am a victim of the "too much sky", and would try to limit the sky in a future attempt to the top 1/3 or less of the frame. I struggled with not getting the road I was standing on (shooting too low) and not getting some of the power lines along the road (too high), not trespassing too badly, etc., while still focusing on "the view" that the owner of the house has.

The second also exemplifies a chronic problem -- when on full zoom, the target is often devoid of any details, just a semi-uniform charcoal color and outline.

Here are the two shots:

File Name                       : 157_5741.jpg
Camera Model Name               : Canon PowerShot A70
Date/Time Original              : 2006:08:13 12:47:31
Shooting Mode                   : Full auto
Shutter Speed                   : 1/1000
Aperture                        : 3.2
Metering Mode                   : Evaluative
Exposure Compensation           : 0
ISO                             : 50
Lens                            : 5.4 - 16.2mm
Focal Length                    : 5.4mm
Image Size                      : 2048x1536
Quality                         : Superfine
Flash                           : Off
White Balance                   : Auto
Focus Mode                      : Single
Contrast                        : Normal
Sharpness                       : Normal
Saturation                      : Normal

File Name                       : 157_5750.jpg
Camera Model Name               : Canon PowerShot A70
Date/Time Original              : 2006:08:13 12:50:52
Shooting Mode                   : Full auto
Shutter Speed                   : 1/1000
Aperture                        : 4.5
Metering Mode                   : Evaluative
Exposure Compensation           : 0
ISO                             : 50
Lens                            : 5.4 - 16.2mm
Focal Length                    : 9.4mm
Image Size                      : 2048x1536
Quality                         : Superfine
Flash                           : Off
White Balance                   : Auto
Focus Mode                      : Single
Contrast                        : Normal
Sharpness                       : Normal

Thanks,
Tim

 

[BorealChickadee]

In the first shot ther's an awful lot of grass and sky. Now the sky is pretty interesting, so that' s not really bad, but grass is boring. As I look at it I'm wondering if you had moved more to the left, and shot more to the right would you have picked up the rock closer to the left foreground, that should put those great flowering trees leading off from foreground left to midground center and kept the more interesting sky with the darker background and light clouds.

Of course, maybe there was a junker car just out of view that would have prevented all that! It's amazing soemtimes how the photographer can totally change the memory by what is NOT photographed.

 

[Mark Schaefer]

You have a lot of potential with these scenes. They are nice locations that you will want to visit and photograph again.

BorealChickadee has identified the major problem when she said the grass was boring. And she suggested potential subjects that could be found. Pictures like these are called empty stages. They are beautiful locations, but we need a strong element placed in the foreground, on the stage to hold our interest. You have nice backgrounds and potential subjects in the middle ground of the photos: flowering trees, the barn and farm equipment. But as presented here, they are too distant, too dark, and not that interesting. Other potential subjects might be wild flowers, bales of hay, farm animals, people, old farm equipment, etc.

The other problem is that the cloudy skies, dark field, and dark barn are not in a good tonal balance to be recorded together. A blue sky and sun drenched landscape are often in balance. But white and gray skies will be much brighter than a dark landscape which is not illuminated well by sunlight. These are scenes where you need a graduated neutral density filter to tone down the sky, so that it will be in balance with your landscape. That will brighten the field and anything on it.

 

[bikehikeskifish]

There were definitely undesirable elements nearby which I wanted to avoid (power lines, telephone poles.) And, I didn't feel 'right' walking well onto their property in order to eliminate some of the grass in the foreground. They had recently hayed, but no bales were hanging around.

What causes the zoomed photo to lose all detail of the mountains?

Tim

 

[Mark Schaefer]

There were definitely undesirable elements nearby which I wanted to avoid (power lines, telephone poles.) And, I didn't feel 'right' walking well onto their property in order to eliminate some of the grass in the foreground. They had recently hayed, but no bales were hanging around.

What causes the zoomed photo to lose all detail of the mountains?

Yes, I appreciate that you eliminated many distractions in these photos. You did a good job of that.

The loss of detail in the zoomed second photo is atmospheric haze which becomes more noticeable in the magnified telephoto shot. A polarizer filter will cut a little of that, but most will still remain. Polarizers reduce reflections and glare on reflective surfaces. There are microscopic water particles in the atmosphere. Although you cannot see the individual drops, each is reflecting some light from the sun and bright sky. The polarizer filter when rotated to the proper position will eliminate or reduce those microscopic reflections. You will be able to see a bit more detail in the distance, but the polarizer cannot remove the water particles. That water content (along with other airborne particles) will still obscure the distant mountains. The best answer if you want to see optimal detail in the distance is to photograph on a day with lower humidity.

 

[bikehikeskifish]

I guess I am surprised that the relatively little amount of zoom has that much of an impact. Or do I simply remember it as being better then it actually is? I do know that of the 7 4K trips, most of the days were pretty hazy, except for (thank goodness) the Three Bonds In a Day, which was really nearly crystal clear.

Maybe I ought to take the laptop with me, so I can compare, full-screen, next to the actual view.

This location, by the way, is on the back roads way from Canon to my mother-in-law's in Bath, so there is a reasonable chance I will get back there again some time.

It was right in front of the Sugar Hill Sampler - http://www.sugarhillsampler.com/.

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=...239&spn=0.011304,0.035706&t=h&om=1&iwloc=addr

Here is an admittedly crude panorama of the Presidential, Twin, and Franconia Ranges from this location: (which includes some of the distracting elements like junk cars in the yard )



Thank you all for the feedback...
Tim

 

[Mark Schaefer]

Thanks for the location information. I have heard of Sugar Hill. It has been on my "must visit" list for several years now. I have seen many pictures posted on VFTT from that location of the lupine in bloom. Tall flowers like lupine, or even the tall hay before it is cut are very good elements to hide those distractions. If you talk to the owner of the field, perhaps you can find out when he is going to be cutting and baling the hay. Action shots of the cutter and baler in the field can be an interesting subject.

It never ceases to amaze me how we as people can trash such scenes with junked cars and trash. Rusted or vintage junks can be a good subjects, but most often it is just some mundane wreck.

I guess I am surprised that the relatively little amount of zoom has that much of an impact. Or do I simply remember it as being better then it actually is? I do know that of the 7 4K trips, most of the days were pretty hazy, except for (thank goodness) the Three Bonds In a Day, which was really nearly crystal clear.

Maybe I ought to take the laptop with me, so I can compare, full-screen, next to the actual view.

The haze was no doubt visible when you were there. It is very easy to get enthralled by the great scenery, and not realize how thick the haze will appear in a photo. The more you work on your photography, the more you will be able to previsualize how a scene is going to appear on your laptop and in a print.

 

[bikehikeskifish]

Just for the record, I was being entirely sarcastic about the rusty / junk cars. They are, of course, part of the New Hampshire landscape, especially in the more rural areas, and I am sure they are the subject of many a photograph.

The electrical wires and poles were a large distraction, and I bent over backwards to find vantage points where they were invisible, while trying to stay on the road.

If I return there again, I may go ask the landowner for permission to shoot from the hay fields. I'm guessing I won't get shooed away...

There is plenty of lupine there -- see the Sugar Hill Sampler link above for a small photo of some.

(On a side note, if you go to Sugar Hill, you must have breakfast at Polly's Pancake Parlor )

Tim