[dcstep]

Zing, I like the door shot. The vignetting is perfect and the composition leaves me wondering, which, I think, is the point.

[dcstep]

One of my bands played a concert in the park this weekend. Right as the last note sounded, it began to rain lightly, as the sun was low in the sky and we witnessed a strong double-rainbow. Doubles are actually quite common in this part of Colorado, but this about as strong as I've ever seen:

Double Rainbow by David Stephens, on Flickr

[M_Six]

Great shot, DC. xkcd had some interesting background info on double rainbows.

http://what-if.xkcd.com/150/

[Zing]

Originally Posted by dcstep

Zing, the asphalt does. In your example, the trees and sky are not particularly interesting, but they're not "negative space" in the classic composition sense. They compete with your main subject.

You've put a relatively large subject in a very large space. Since there's no action from the subject or the space around it, it's conflicting. This composition says to me, "Here's a beautiful scene and my car is in it." Unfortunately, the scene is nothing special, so we're wondering, is this a car picture or a landscape picture.

If I wanted to use negative space in this nice light, I'd either use or longer focal length or get nearer to the car, have the car fill half the frame and the asphalt the rest (to the side and/or in front) and deemphasize the BG.

I looks like you shot this standing up. I think it'd be more effective if you were down on a knee. The shadows lack detail and I'd raise them a bit, if I were going to try to salvage this.

Great looking car. Do they still call that color Silverstone II? I've got a 2009 E92 in S-II. Love that color.

That was pretty much my intent. I wanted the car to be a very small portion of the image but, because there is nothing of interest in the background, the car would indirectly stand out. Sure, I could edit the background thus emphasizing the car and force it to stand out more but, as is, I didn't think the background would necessarily compete with the subject. Was basically experimenting with unconventional composition.

For 2016 anyway, it's simply called Silverstone Metallic. It has at least 4 different hues depending on light source and cloud cover.

[Zing]

Originally Posted by dcstep

Zing, I like the door shot. The vignetting is perfect and the composition leaves me wondering, which, I think, is the point.

Thank you. And yes, that was precisely my intent.

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by Zing

For 2016 anyway, it's simply called Silverstone Metallic. It has at least 4 different hues depending on light source and cloud cover.

I still get comments about that, particularly when it's near a plain ole "silver" car.

Dave

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by M_Six

Great shot, DC. xkcd had some interesting background info on double rainbows.

http://what-if.xkcd.com/150/

Thanks Mark. I never knew that I might see a rainbow in the direction of the sun. I'll start looking for those.

Dave

[Itsed65]

On vacation this week. Shot from the back deck of our rented beach house:

Moon and Planet by lennycarl08, on Flickr

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by Itsed65

On vacation this week. Shot from the back deck of our rented beach house:

Nice.

[M_Six]

Originally Posted by dcstep

Nice.

Nicely done, Ed.

[jmg]

Originally Posted by Zing

That was pretty much my intent. I wanted the car to be a very small portion of the image but, because there is nothing of interest in the background, the car would indirectly stand out. Sure, I could edit the background thus emphasizing the car and force it to stand out more but, as is, I didn't think the background would necessarily compete with the subject. Was basically experimenting with unconventional composition.

For 2016 anyway, it's simply called Silverstone Metallic. It has at least 4 different hues depending on light source and cloud cover.

I love silverstone! That was my first choice, but I had to settle for AW.

Anyhow, here is one of my attempts at negative space, although I had a much different intent than you:

Porsche 911 - 20160120 - 6th St Bridge - v2 by JMG, on Flickr

[Zing]

^Are there layers in that photo?

[jmg]

Originally Posted by Zing

^Are there layers in that photo?

Layers? You mean multiple exposures stitched together in photoshop? No. This is a single photo, but I did some color and exposure adjustments in Lightroom.

[jmg]

Finally got a 10 stop ND filter and gave it a quick go:

San Clemente State Beach by JMG, on Flickr

It's my first attempt at a daylight LE, and I know the subjectmatter is kind of pedestrian, but I had my whole family with me and I had to keep one eye on the kids swimming so I couldn't wander down to the pier or rocks for anything more interesting.

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by jmg

Finally got a 10 stop ND filter and gave it a quick go:


It's my first attempt at a daylight LE, and I know the subjectmatter is kind of pedestrian, but I had my whole family with me and I had to keep one eye on the kids swimming so I couldn't wander down to the pier or rocks for anything more interesting.

I love the pastels, greens, browns and greys. The softness of the long exposure is appropriate here, although I feel that it is much overused by many. You may have the vignette just right, but I'd play with it and maybe just put it around the top and have a more natural sand color at the lower left. The only thing I'd do different is get beyond those shark turds. They're calling too much attention to themselves and making me wonder what they are. I think this is best as an interpretation of colors and textures and unidentified objects in the FG detract, at least for me.

Dave

[jmg]

Originally Posted by dcstep

I love the pastels, greens, browns and greys. The softness of the long exposure is appropriate here, although I feel that it is much overused by many. You may have the vignette just right, but I'd play with it and maybe just put it around the top and have a more natural sand color at the lower left. The only thing I'd do different is get beyond those shark turds. They're calling too much attention to themselves and making me wonder what they are. I think this is best as an interpretation of colors and textures and unidentified objects in the FG detract, at least for me.

Dave

Thanks for the insight! I only exposed for 10 seconds, as my longer exposures just came out way too soft. I liked the subtle details I could still see with the 10 sec exposure especially the textures in the water closer to the horizon.

LOL on the shark turds. I was thinking I should paint those out, but I do like the lone rock. I have some shots with the rock much much closer, but even for 5-6 sec exposures, my tripod would sink into the sand as the water washed past and I couldn't get a sharp photo.

You are right though, the only reason I uploaded this photo is because I liked the color representation and mood. There is not much else to look at otherwise.

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by jmg

You are right though, the only reason I uploaded this photo is because I liked the color representation and mood. There is not much else to look at otherwise.

Some people make a living with that!

[M_Six]

Originally Posted by dcstep

Some people make a living with that!

Agreed. One of the highest priced photos every sold was just a road, grass, and a river. And quite frankly, jmg's image is waaaay better. I still don't get why this image went for so much.

[M_Six]

Loving the new 100-400 MkII and 7D MkII combo.


Pics from the Quad by Mark Johnson, on Flickr

[Itsed65]

Just got back from a week at the beach

Seal With an Itch by lennycarl08, on Flickr

[Itsed65]

Coyote Pup at the Beach by lennycarl08, on Flickr

[dcstep]

Mark, nice dragonfly in flight shot.

Ed, that's a sad looking young coyote.