Point Sur Lighthouse

View of Light House Rock from Highway 1-Southbound

Photo #133 (Below)

Meta Data: Photo Taken 11 June 2011 ~ 3:57pm

1/160 sec at f/22, ISO 200, 55 mm (55.0-200.0 mm f/4.0-5.6)

Photo #137 (Below)

Meta Data: Photo Taken 11 June 2011 ~ 3:59pm

1/80 sec at f/29, ISO 200, 150 mm (55.0-200.0 mm f/4.0-5.6)

 Before or After?

Close up of Facilities - surprised and proud I was actually able to get this in focus!  Using the car door as a tripod helped in Photo #152 (Below)

Meta Data: Photo Taken 11 June 2011 ~ 4:05pm

1/100 sec at f/29, ISO 200, 200 mm (55.0-200.0 mm f/4.0-5.6)

This is about the time when I realized I had a polarizing lens in my bag!  I should have been using this all day to give the sky or sea more color on such a grey day.  You can tell I used the filter because the sky in Photo #157 (Below) is so much  more blue than any other image

Meta Data: Photo Taken 11 June 2011 ~ 4:07pm

1/100 sec at f/29, ISO 200, 200 mm (55.0-200.0 mm f/4.0-5.6)

This concludes the photos I will post from our "Photo Adventure" Tour of Big Sur!

Pacific Coast "Leading Line"

Photo 13 vs 23 vs 30 - Debate:

I like how your eyes will hop from the large rock in the foreground and follow the rocks up the coastline.

"Leading Lines" is the photography term for that... takes you deeper into the photo.

Meta Data: Photo 13 (below) Taken: 11 June 2011 ~ 1:58 pm
ISO 200, f/18, 1/200 sec 122 mm (55.0-200.0 mm f/4.0-5.6)

Which copy of above is "doctored"? Which do you like best?  Should the others be "doctored' as well?

Meta Data: 

Photo 30 (below) Taken: 11 June 2011 ~ 2:04 pm
ISO 200, f/18, 1/100 sec 66 mm (55.0-200.0 mm f/4.0-5.6)

I like how you get to see the end of the coastline here... Like the foreground a bit better than #13

Meta Data: 

Photo 23 (below) Taken: 11 June 2011 ~ 2:02 pm
ISO 200, f/20, 1/100 sec 68 mm (55.0-200.0 mm f/4.0-5.6)

I like the color of the beach on this one...combination of these three would probably make THE shot.

I found that I really don't know what I have "in the tin" until I see them on my monitor.  The view screen on the back of my camera is just too small and hard to see in sunlight.  Maybe I need to buy and iPad (Jason... hint-hint) then I can upload and view the images as I take them with an opportunity to re-shoot before leaving the scene.

Exposures

A "Photo Adventure" tour of Big Sur this weekend has got me thinking about the sheer number of exposures I'm taking... 160 exposures taken over the period of a 3-hour drive.  And including seven or so different landscapes.  But that's about  22 exposures of the same shot.  Sure the angle might change a bit and the zoom brings the viewer closer to the scene but it's really 22 shots of the same landscape.  I find it hard to differentiate between so many multiple versions of the same scene.

Which is the best and why?

Another hard question is what and/or how could all the software like PhotoShop or Lightroom (which I use) do to improve this shot?  ... the color, toning, and details effects.  All with a variation of options that could change an image.  Some options completely alters the picture and could so in sometimes drastic ways.  But it takes forever to configure for each image.

"Doctored" photos may have more art appeal.  With these coastline photos a dream-like quality can be applied towards the photo to soften the landscape.  Persuade the viewer that they are looking into a dream-scape.

An original image or "doctored" photography?

Granted the original image was WAY underexposed, (Meta Data: Photo Taken: 11 June 2011 ~ 2:35 pm ISO 200, f/16, 1/1000 sec 72 mm (55.0-200.0 mm f/4.0-5.6) which offered greater flexibility with Lightroom software.  Turning otherwise a wasted exposure into a useful subject.  But the effects I used were just guesses at making the shot look good without ever really getting a good look at it.

I imagine this shot stretched out on canvas...maybe 3 feet tall and 2.5 wide.  Small details blown up that large can completely ruin an image that looks decent on my laptop computer screen.  I've never actually seen my photographs on canvas either.

All but 10 of my 160 exposures were good making the selection of finding the best of the bunch much harder.
And with Lightroom I can add a personal effect to each of these un-doctored images, once I choose THE image.

Full Landscape #1: (Photo Taken: 11 June 2011 ~11:46 am ISO 200, f/16, 1/60 sec 55 mm (55.0-200.0 mm f/4.0-5.6) FYI - a shot taken at 50mm = what the human eye would see in person.  This shot was taken at 55mm so it's pretty darn close to what you would've seen as if you were in the car that day with me & Jason.

 Photo #2 is a vertical of the same coastline.

Photo Taken: 6 June 2011 ~ 11:46am ISO 200, f/16, 1/60 sec 86 mm (55.0-200.0 mm f/4.0-5.6) 

Photo #162 - used the TRIM feature in my camera menu to get a closer look at the coast rocks.

Photo Taken: 6 June 2011 ~ 11:46am ISO 200, f/16, 1/60 sec 55 mm (55.0-200.0 mm f/4.0-5.6)

Photo #3 - Changing the ISO from 200 to 400 really white-washed the image.

Photo Taken: 6 June 2011 ~ 11:47am ISO 400, f/16, 1/60 sec 100 mm (55.0-200.0 mm f/4.0-5.6)

 Photo #4 - Zoomed into the rock - if there were large enough waves crashing upon this rock this photo could be more interesting.  Bland on it's own.

Photo Taken: 6 June 2011 ~ 11:47am ISO 400, f/16, 1/60 sec 160 mm (55.0-200.0 mm f/4.0-5.6)

 Photo #161 - use the QUICK FIX feature in my camera menu to restore some of the haze caused from the days cloud cover and low visibility.  Even though viewing #1 & 161 next to each other I can't notice any difference between the fixed version and the original.

Photo Taken: 6 June 2011 ~ 11:46am ISO 200, f/16, 1/60 sec 55 mm (55.0-200.0 mm f/4.0-5.6)

Photo #162 and 163 are using the FILTER EFFECTS in my camera menu to adjust the 

BLUE and GREEN