Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

The heart of the matter.


  • Please log in to reply
33 replies to this topic

#21 tdpriest

tdpriest

    Sperm Whale

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2148 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Solihull, UK
  • Interests:Diving medicine, warm water, scenery...

Posted 10 June 2011 - 11:39 AM

Would there have been any chance to get down (and dirty) and shoot up?

Tim

:)

#22 AndyC

AndyC

    Wolf Eel

  • Team Wetpixel
  • 123 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Yorkshire, England

Posted 10 June 2011 - 10:54 PM

Would there have been any chance to get down (and dirty) and shoot up?

Tim

:)


Yeah! I suppose that would have improved it to a degree, but it just looks flat and two dimensional.
By the way don't you mean "snoot up" :)

#23 Balrog

Balrog

    Eagle Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 346 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Poole UK

Posted 10 June 2011 - 10:55 PM

Most of the recognised books make the point that much of what we see underwater cannot be successfully photographed and this may be a case in point.

That's not to say that the shot shouldn't be taken, just that it will never make a great image. I personally enjoyed looking at the detail of the subject for a couple of minutes so something may have has been achieved.

As said, the lighting is a little flat, maybe the 'Edge' inward lighting may have improved it if you couldn't wait for the subjects to re-position themselves. As it is a healthy dose of vignette might bring the subject more to the fore.

#24 AndyC

AndyC

    Wolf Eel

  • Team Wetpixel
  • 123 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Yorkshire, England

Posted 11 June 2011 - 12:00 AM

Most of the recognised books make the point that much of what we see underwater cannot be successfully photographed and this may be a case in point.

That's not to say that the shot shouldn't be taken, just that it will never make a great image. I personally enjoyed looking at the detail of the subject for a couple of minutes so something may have has been achieved.

As said, the lighting is a little flat, maybe the 'Edge' inward lighting may have improved it if you couldn't wait for the subjects to re-position themselves. As it is a healthy dose of vignette might bring the subject more to the fore.

Good points. Thanks for that.

#25 Alex_Mustard

Alex_Mustard

    The Doctor

  • Super Mod
  • 8387 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Peterborough

Posted 11 June 2011 - 01:33 AM

Hi Tim - I feel that the problem with your shot is that the interest in this subject should be that it is a car underwater. However, it is not clear enough in the image (partly due to wreck deterioration) that the lump in the foreground is a car. Therefore there is no payoff to the viewer. Even with very wrecked cars it is important to use the most recognisable "car features" of your subject. Technically the image is fine.

Andy - your octopuses are lost in the background. The easiest way to get separation is with camera angle. Perhaps difficult here, unless they move. Alternatively you can work with selective lighting. One of the simplest and most ignored techniques is to turn off one of your strobes, and then the shadows from the subject (from the single strobe) will help them stand out from the background.

Alex

Alexander Mustard - www.amustard.com - www.magic-filters.com
Nikon D4 (Subal housing). Nikon D7100 (Subal housing). Olympus EPL-5 (Nauticam housing).


#26 straz

straz

    Starfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 5 posts

Posted 30 June 2011 - 12:47 AM

hi i am an newbie and i learned may things from this post ....
thanks to everyone

#27 rnuijen

rnuijen

    Sea Nettle

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 13 posts

Posted 25 August 2011 - 01:38 PM

In this case I'd say it's mainly composition/angle/lens choice and to a lesser extent a lack of dramatic lighting that makes these images good but not great. It's just hard to get those great shots. I've got a lightroom catalog with 60000 UW images but less than 20 of them are what I would call great.

Just keep shooting :B):

#28 tdpriest

tdpriest

    Sperm Whale

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2148 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Solihull, UK
  • Interests:Diving medicine, warm water, scenery...

Posted 25 August 2011 - 02:58 PM

Another "not quite there" image for consideration:

Shetland_2011_74_1419_Bressay_Orkneyman_s_cave.jpg

Comments?

Tim

:B):


PS: Let's try a new trick - the price for making a comment is to post an image that doesn't satisfy your own standards...

#29 tdpriest

tdpriest

    Sperm Whale

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2148 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Solihull, UK
  • Interests:Diving medicine, warm water, scenery...

Posted 10 March 2012 - 05:57 AM

Another "iffy" image:


Indonesia_2011_0862_Sumbawa_Cuttlefish_Sepia_bandensis.jpg

Any thoughts?


Tim

:)

#30 Aquapaul

Aquapaul

    Sting Ray

  • Team Wetpixel
  • 225 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Michigan
  • Interests:Photography above and below the waves.

Posted 10 March 2012 - 07:02 AM

On a recent trip to Mexico, I stumbled across these two Frog Fish. I had never found any on my own any could just about Sh*t purple twinkles. It was the last dive of the trip, a shore dive all by my self in 15 feet or less of water. I used a 105mm macro, the sun was real bright and and a lot of dead white reflective coral around. I have dual 110a strobes. I couldn't get the light right. I chalked it up in the end that because my working distance was was too far away to have enough light left to over power the bright conditions.

I noticed that when I moved in and just got a face shot of the frog fish everything was fine.

Is this just a case of the wrong lens for the job or could I have done something different and it might not have been so flat lighted?



20120220_PC1_9820.jpg
Paul Chase

----}<))))"> ----------}<))))'>
-----------}<)))))))))*>

#31 tdpriest

tdpriest

    Sperm Whale

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2148 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Solihull, UK
  • Interests:Diving medicine, warm water, scenery...

Posted 11 March 2012 - 05:13 AM

Is this just a case of the wrong lens for the job or could I have done something different and it might not have been so flat lighted?


It might have been worth bringing the strobe over to the left: partway to preferentially light the froggies' face, or right over to create a backlit effect. The fish fills about 30% of the frame, so the lens wasn't too bad for the shot.


Here's a similar image, lit from the face:

Indonesia_2011_0532_Rinca_Painted_frogfish.jpg

By using an Inon 45-degree viewfinder I also managed to get down to eye level. If I were to improve the image further, I'd have tried to get closer because I think that cropping helps the composition:

Indonesia_2011_0532_Rinca_Painted_frogfish.jpg


Tim

:drink:

#32 Ricardo V.

Ricardo V.

    Sea Nettle

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 14 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bonita Springs, FL

Posted 29 August 2012 - 07:15 PM

This is probably one of the most interesting posts I have seen here. There is so much to learn from constructive feedback that I´ll gladly jump in with a photo, offer my 2 cents on previously posted images and await suggestions from the group on what can be done with this picture.

The vehicle wreck: Its not easy for me to distinguish that there is a truck in the photo, so not seeing anything in the foreground, the focus goes to the model, but the model is kind of far, in an awkward position. What I would suggest would be to reposition and shoot closer to the model, just a bit lower- shooting up some more and perhaps at an angle so the steering wheel can be more noticeable, particularly if the model is to be suggesting that he or she is driving the vehicle... and if other parts of the truck are evident, including them in the shot can help identify the subject.

The one eel: What I think is happening there is that it looks like the main subject is starting to swim away and flee. While you can see an eye, it appears as if just a fraction of time sooner would have done it. Friends are also starting to leave the scene and it appears timing is what it is.

OK, with that said, here is a photo that I would welcome your constructive feedback on.

Thank you,


Ricardo

Attached Images

  • photo copy.JPG


#33 tdpriest

tdpriest

    Sperm Whale

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2148 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Solihull, UK
  • Interests:Diving medicine, warm water, scenery...

Posted 30 September 2012 - 09:06 PM


I would welcome your constructive feedback...


Such a dark fish is always going to be a challenge.

I would have tried (given enough time with the fish) to increase the contrast by trying to light the eyes with a small strobe, but the background with another.

My mental image is of a stark composition with a black body and, especially, tail, but definition around the eyes and mouth, against a white negative space.

I think it would be pretty hard to do...

#34 Ricardo V.

Ricardo V.

    Sea Nettle

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 14 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bonita Springs, FL

Posted 16 October 2012 - 06:43 PM

Hello Tim,
Great suggestion. If I'm getting your feedback right, your thinking of approaching this with a snoot type effect so to speak, by concentrating light on the eyes and toning down the background luminance levels, rather than just lighting the hole scene up.
Will keep this in mind. I know where this little brotula lives and maybe we can revisit and try again soon.
Thank you,
Ricardo