McWay Creek @ Julie Pfeiffer Burns State Park

Photo 49 (below) is my favorite photo of the creek at Pfeiffer State Park - mostly because if you look close enough you can see the word LOVE etched into the wood railing.  There's probably some way I could emphasize that more using Lightroom but I haven't figured it out yet...

Meta Data: Photo Taken: 11 June 2011 ~ 2:24 pm 

ISO 200, f/4.2, 1/2000 sec 26 mm (18.0-55.0 mm f/3.5-5.6)

My real objective was to get the water to appear blurry, as you see sometimes, giving it a smoky look... which apparently is done using a very slow shutter speed... but I could not get my camera settings to work with that kind of shutter speed.  This is one I'm going to have to research and get help on.  I took 13 exposures trying to photograph this creek, the best of which you see here, but none were really what I had in my mind's eye.

I like Photo #47 (Below) because you can actually see one big splash of water captured and in focus!  

Meta Data: Photo Taken: 11 June 2011 ~ 2:35 pm 

ISO 200, f/4.0, 1/2000 sec 55 mm (55.0-200.0 mm f/4.0-5.6)

The next images below are another good example of a f-stop exercise... They look good together, side-by-side.  But I'm unable to pick one above the other.  I like the seeing the leaf and berry with blurry running water in #45, but also like seeing the creek itself in #46 (both below)

Meta Data: Photo Taken: 11 June 2011 ~ 2:22 pm 

ISO 200, f/4.8, 1/2000 sec 122 mm (55.0-200.0 mm f/4.0-5.6)

F-Stop/Depth of Field Exercise

I came upon the below scene during our Photo Adventure driving tour between Carmel & Big Sur...

Meta Data: Photo 32 (Below) Taken: 11 June 2011 ~ 2:04 pm 

ISO 200, f/22, 1/100 sec 60 mm (55.0-200.0 mm f/4.0-5.6)

But when I zoomed in to focus on that bright blue color among the rocks the foreground plants jumped into the shot...

Meta Data: Photo 21 (Below) Taken: 11 June 2011 ~ 2:01 pm 

ISO 200, f/20, 1/100 sec 90 mm (55.0-200.0 mm f/4.0-5.6)

So I thought this would be a great opportunity to exercise increasing/decreasing my Depth of Field - how far I want the camera to focus, which can be decided by changing your F-Stop.  A smaller F-stop number means only the subject closest to the camera will be in focus - like in the below, the foreground flowers are in focus and the rocky background is blurry... notice my F-stop here = f/4.5 (4.5 = low)

Meta Data: Photo 36 (Below) Taken: 11 June 2011 ~ 2:06 pm 

ISO 200, f/4.5, 1/1250 sec 98 mm (55.0-200.0 mm f/4.0-5.6)

To Increase my Depth of Field and make the background rocks in focus instead of the foreground flowers, I can increase my f-stop and get a completely different picture.  Notice my f-stop went from 4.5 to 4.8 increasing my Depth of Field.  I'm surprised that such a small increase actually made a huge difference!

Meta Data: Photo 33 (Below) Taken: 11 June 2011 ~ 2:05 pm 

ISO 200, f/4.8, 1/1250 sec 125 mm (55.0-200.0 mm f/4.0-5.6)

The same image = four completely different photographs!

I personally would vote for #33

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

Snoring Elephant Seals

Meta Data:

Photo Taken: 5 June 2011 ~ 2:32 pm

ISO 400, f/13, 1/400 sec

200 mm (55.0-200.0 mm f/4.0-5.6)

I was actually able to use the "Trim" feature in my camera to get this shot out of a boring larger framed image.

I like the open mounted snore happening at the bottom of the frame.

And the symmetry of the smiling chins below the two yelling at each other.

Elephant Seals @ Ano Nuevo

Meta Data:

Photo Taken: 5 June 2011 ~ 2:17 pm

ISO 400, f/13, 1/400 sec

200 mm (55.0-200.0 mm f/4.0-5.6)

Composition: 

None really, I was concentrating on making sure image would not be blurry at max zoom with no tripod.

Found the "Quick Fix" Feature on my camera to brighten image:

Ano Nuevo State Park

Meta Data:

Photo Taken: 5 June 2011 ~ 2:11 pm

ISO 400, f/13, 1/400 sec

75 mm (55.0-200.0 mm f/4.0-5.6)

Composition: 

"Seal House" - Top/Right 1/3rd

Horizon - Top 1/3rd

Elephant Seals in Surf - Bottom/Left 1/3rd

I had this great composition in mind with the dueling elephant seals in the foreground of the "Seal House", but the dueling seals really just look like a piece of rock jutting out of the surf - yes, those are actually two dueling seals there in the water.  I do like the one on-looker to the duel at the bottom of the frame... at least she's interested.

This "Quick Fix" feature works great on these cloudy day pics