Challenge: Shadows.

[Asher Kelman]

The challenge is to find a subject where the shadows themselves are the dominent forms of interest, mystery and or strength.

Color or B & W

Describe what interested you about the scene and how you approached the shot and the processing.


Asher

[Asher Kelman]

Who are the shadow lovers. Who's intrigued by shadows themselves?

Asher

[Dierk Haasis]

http://Foto.Write4U.de/Forum/OPF/Scherenschnitt.jpg
Lonesome

http://Foto.Write4U.de/Forum/OPF/Kreuz.jpg
A-cross

http://Foto.Write4U.de/Forum/OPF/Volkspark.jpg
Altar

[Mary Bull]

No words will be adequate.

I love the shadow images of Dierk, beyond measure and beyond my capacity to express.

Mary

[Nill Toulme]

No mystery here... I'm just the sports guy.

http://www.toulme.net/sports/woodward/soccer/vboys2004/051104_druidhills/1d2-04850_std.jpg


http://www.toulme.net/sports/woodward/soccer/vgirls2005/032305_salem/1d2-46609_std.jpg

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

[Carl Harsch]

The shadows are what prompted this shot

http://www.ohenry.smugmug.com/photos/98818170-O.jpg

[Roger Lambert]

Here is one from several years ago when I was just getting into photography, and using my little Fuji 2800z.

I took this in an apple orchard under blazing skies, and processed it to look something like nighttime. :)

Eldritch Path
http://www.pbase.com/gingerbaker/image/24193987.jpg

[Cem_Usakligil]

Here comes something spooky ;-)

http://www.usakligil.com/opf/spooky.jpg

[Nill Toulme]

Cem I agree the dreaded red X is indeed very scary — and you're right, the drop shadow effect fits right into the theme. ;-)

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

[Cem_Usakligil]

Cem I agree the dreaded red X is indeed very scary — and you're right, the drop shadow effect fits right into the theme. ;-)..
Nill,

I'm afraid you've lost me there. The "red X", "drop shadow"??? Could it be that you can't see the image? I have just checked it on an independent PC and it shows just fine??

Cem (confused)

[Jack_Flesher]

Not sure if these count, but shadow as background...

http://jack.cameraphile.org/albums/Web-Images/Ghost_Bottle_web.jpg

http://jack.cameraphile.org/albums/Web-Images/Drink_Coke_web.jpg

Cheers,

[Andrew Stannard]

Hi,

My offering to this.....

Was looking for unusual angles for pictures of my local windmill. The low sun was producing dramatic shadows of the blades and also revealing the texture in the paintwork. A square crop seemed to work well and produced the abstract image style that I was looking for.

http://www.astannard.com/opf/windmill_shadow.jpg



P.S Can see Cem's image fine

Cheers,

[Nill Toulme]

Cem, yes I'm getting a broken link here. Can anybody else see Cem's image? Is it just me?

Here's what I get if I enter the URL directly:

Forbidden
You don't have permission to access /opf/spooky.jpg on this server.

Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache/1.3.37 Server at www.usakligil.com Port 80

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

[KrisCarnmarker]

I can't see Cem's image either. Cem image of his cat Jinx in the thread "Urgent advice sought for a new DSLR and lenses (http://openphotographyforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1237)" turned up blank for me as well.

Cem, are you linking to a site that dissallows hot-linking perhaps?

BTW, I don't even get an "X"

[Carl Harsch]

For the record, I can see Cem's image without issues.

[Cem_Usakligil]

Nill,

It is correct that you cannot see the image if you type in the url directly or click on the link shown in your e-mail notification, since the web site is protected against hot linking. I have created an exception for the openphotographyforums.com domain which allows the photos to be shown as in-line images in threads.

Considering Kris mentioning problems as well, I have just switched off the hot linking. Now you should be fine. But, I am not happy with this and consider it as a temporary solution. Any suggestions as to how best to deal with this?

Cheers,

Cem

[Jack_Flesher]

I can see Cem's house, no problem -- IE 6.0

[KrisCarnmarker]

I can see it now. I only tried with FF before. Could be FF does not provide the referer URL?

[KrisCarnmarker]

Nope, FF provides the referer. BUT, I enter the OPF by typing "http://openphotographyforums.com/..." not "http://www.openphotographyforums.com", and this is reflected in the referer URL. So, Cem, are you allowing the literal www.openphotographyforums.com only?

[Cem_Usakligil]

Nope, FF provides the referer. BUT, I enter the OPF by typing "http://openphotographyforums.com/..." not "http://www.openphotographyforums.com", and this is reflected in the referer URL. So, Cem, are you allowing the literal www.openphotographyforums.com only?
Bingo! Off to change it pronto :-)
Thanks for the tip.

(I have changed the .htaccess to accept *.openphotographyforums.com)

[KrisCarnmarker]

And I can still see the image :) Thanks for making the change!

[Cem_Usakligil]

I have hesitated when I posted the original image since it did not contain any "traditional" shadows. But it did have lots of shadows in the windows, door, cracks of the house and it certainly looked mysterious to me, and that is what Asher asked us to post to start with. So please excuse me if you think that the image is not a 100% fit for this thread.

The original image was taken using Fuji Provia in the "twilight zone" and came directly from the scanner without adjustments (just a simple crop). I then had a go at it in PS to tweak the lighting which was rather flat. The "improved" version looks like this:

http://www.usakligil.com/opf/spooky2.jpg

What do you think? Worth further tweaking?

[Sean DeMerchant]

http://www.envisagement.com/galleries/Hymenoptera/Wasps/SPE19701_RSE_01.jpg (http://www.envisagement.com/galleries/Hymenoptera/Wasps/slides/SPE19701_RSE_01.html)


The shadow here is not truly dominant, but I do find it greatly value added.


enjoy,

Sean

[Jack_Flesher]

Sean:

IMO the wasp's shadow is what makes this image... On a whim, I took the liberty of copying your image and converting it to B&W to see if that helped. IMO the B&W conversion makes a stronger image as it draws your attention immediately to the shadow instead of the wasp itself -- offered FWIW only...

Cheers,

[Asher Kelman]

Well Jack?

Where is it?

Sean can he?

Asher

[Charles L Webster]

The first thing I saw when shooting this session were the shadows on the sand.

Shot w/ an 1953 Argus C-3 w/ 50mm Cintar lens on Tri-X processed in HC-110.

I'm not totally happy with the contrast here, but wanted to keep some of the sand texture.

http://gallery.photo.net/photo/4865525-md.jpg

[Sean DeMerchant]

IMO the wasp's shadow is what makes this image... On a whim, I took the liberty of copying your image and converting it to B&W to see if that helped. IMO the B&W conversion makes a stronger image as it draws your attention immediately to the shadow instead of the wasp itself -- offered FWIW only...


Jack,

Please feel free to post your interpretation. I would like to see it. Please just ensure the IPTC metadata remains in the file. I am just peculiar about the metadata. I regularly post images large enough to print low quality 4x6s and I find that a picture is often worth 350 more words of explanation (or thousands if you include artistic vision).

thanks,

Sean

[Jack_Flesher]

Sean:

The Metadata did not stick when I copied the image so I don't have any of it(?) I did add your name as author, but will pull this image down after a few days -- or as soon as you tell me to.

If it were my image, I would crop a bit more off the left side, but I did not want to eliminate your signature logo...

http://jack.cameraphile.org/albums/album08/seandemerchantwasp.jpg

[Sean DeMerchant]

Sean:

The Metadata did not stick when I copied the image so I don't have any of it(?) I did add your name as author, but will pull this image down after a few days -- or as soon as you tell me to.

If it were my image, I would crop a bit more off the left side, but I did not want to eliminate your signature logo...



Hi Jack,

Did you use Save For Web? That strips metadata and is hence a bad route to take. Try Save As which is not as slick of a GUI, makes larger files, and produces higher quality output (it hits 1:1 chroma subsampling at a much lower setting which reduces color artifacts if my understanding is correct as I have not run the tests but taken other peoples word on it). Save As retains metadata and is easily scriptable which makes it my choice when mixed with the higher image quality.

Were you thinking along these lines?

http://www.envisagement.com/galleries/Hymenoptera/Wasps/SPE19701_RSE_01_bw.jpg (http://www.envisagement.com/galleries/Hymenoptera/Wasps/slides/SPE19701_RSE_01_bw.html)

B&W Conversion and Crop

thanks,

Sean

[Jack_Flesher]

Hi Sean:

I *never* use save for web and I did use "save as". The issue was the metadata was *not* in the file when I copied it originally!

I do prefer the slight crop in your version. The main difference between the rest of what you did and mine is I also burned the edges a bit to better accentuate the shadow and soften the distractive hot spot on the far right. Let me know when you've compared it to mine and I will pull mine down.

Cheers,

[Will Thompson]

Well mostly.

http://idisk.mac.com/med007/Public/Wills/Shadows/WillThompson_800x500_Beach_0DCT8356_RJPSA_2.jpg

Hard to put my finger on why I like this one.

[Asher Kelman]

Shadows?

asher

[Nicolas Claris]

Shadows?

asher
Shadows… in the shade… border is sometimes hard to define…
With shade, you're inclined to be in. With shadow(s) you're out… I mean the photog point of view ;;-))

[Asher Kelman]

As a reminder. The challenge is for images in which the shadow is the dominant, significant or key element that gives the picture meaning and strength.

A slihouette is not a shadow. Likewise, an area in shade is not a shadow. However, we are getting the right kind of pictures and that's wonderul. The wasp shadow surpised me!

Andrew and Charles' contibutions are excellent.

Jack breaks the rules but his pictures are enviously good! His shadows are shading that give his pictures dimensionality!

Not to leave anyone out but I really like all the effort that has been taken. We are still open to more images!

Asher

[Mary Bull]

As a reminder. The challenge is for images in which the shadow is the dominant, significant or key element that gives the picture meaning and strength. ...

The wasp shadow surpised me! ...

It both surprised and delighted me!
.. We are still open to more images!

It's not so sharp as Sean's wasp, nor so dramatic in impact, but I do have this foreshadowing of what's ahead for the vine-leaves still green on my back fence.

http://static.flickr.com/120/277179615_062c5eedce.jpg

Critique welcome.

Mary

[Asher Kelman]

I love the picture Mary!

Two shadows. A very nice close crop. A sign of an artist!

Did you have pics in which the serrated hole in the leaf was shown in the shadow?

One last question, the edge of the red in the upper leaf, is it hard in reality? You certainly kept the shadows soft below.

asher

[Mary Bull]

I love the picture Mary!

Two shadows. A very nice close crop. A sign of an artist!
I've been learning from you, and from Dierk, and from all the other artists here at OPF. Thanks for the praise, Asher.
Did you have pics in which the serrated hole in the leaf was shown in the shadow?
Yes, I shot about a dozen from various heights and angles.

One last question, the edge of the red in the upper leaf, is it hard in reality? You certainly kept the shadows soft below.
Yes, it is hard in reality, although not so hard as the green leaves.

I am still having a lot of trouble holding focus on the leaf I want. It seems there is always a breeze blowing just when the light is right.

I did a fairly severe crop to get this image. I had the entire red leaf showing in good rosy light, in the original image, and I wanted to have the sharpest focus on it. However, the wind blew, and the sharp focus is on the green vine leaves.

I did quite a bit of noise reduction on this image, also, both before and after doing the crop.

Mary

[Joe Russo]

While the shadow in this image is not the dominant subject, I don't think that this photograph would be as complete without it.

http://www.pbase.com/jgrphoto/image/53108851/large.jpg

[Jack_Flesher]

Okay, how about this one? Soft shadows are there, so it should qualify. But IMO in this image it is really shadow (and to a lesser degree, light) that is adding dimension, shape and form to the image... I'm curious what others think:

http://jack.cameraphile.org/albums/album19/3colorssoftBWweb.jpg

(4x5 w/Betterlight using portrait lens. Single hard light left, dark reflector on right, converted to B&W in Photoshop.)

[Mary Bull]

I think it is lovely.

It feels like a well-done charcoal drawing, to me.

Beautiful accent, with the highlight on the back pear.

But the tall pear in shade is what draws the eye in, with the long, soft shadow of the plate in one's peripheral vision. And then the curl of the stem makes everything complete.

Mary

[Asher Kelman]

Okay, how about this one? Soft shadows are there, so it should qualify. But IMO in this image it is really shadow (and to a lesser degree, light) that is adding dimension, shape and form to the image... I'm curious what others think

(4x5 w/Betterlight using portrait lens. Single hard light left, dark reflector on right.)

The shadows here, because they are beautiful, are no less valid!

The challenge is to find a subject where the shadows themselves are the dominent forms of interest, mystery and or "strength".

The pears have potential throught the composition, As Mary aptly pointed out. This is brought to importance by the shadows. It is these that which give the reality to the pears and the sense of a time of day that we are not sure of.

So I think this qualifies, although I never thought of this previously.

Asher

[Asher Kelman]

Joe,

I like your sunset image. Have you tried increasing the contrast. Thay moight make the shadoes a little more dominant as the details of the gazebo diminish. I'm not saying you should do it, but you might like the result.

asher

[Joe Russo]

Asher -
Thanks for the suggestion. I'll give it a try and if I think it helps I'll post that version.

[JimCollum]

http://www.jcollum.com/fm/2006_10_10_Alcatraz_004.jpg


Alcatraz, Sunset

this was taken with the Betterlight scan back and pano adapter, and is in IR/Color mode (captured both IR and visible light).

[Asher Kelman]

Jim,

That's wonderful. I took the liberty of putting it on my desktop to see the full splendor (then deleted it!)

This must have a zillion way of preparing it for printing. This has to be a very unique pano.

Asher

[Cem_Usakligil]

Hi All,

After going through my files, I have found this holiday snapshot I took some 16 years ago (using my trusty old Nikon SLR on Kodak Gold film). It is nothing special, but since it falls nicely into this category I thought I might as well share ;-). I coudn't get hold of the negative, so I had to scan it from a 6x4 lab print. That should explain the image quality issues, in case you were wondering.

My wife and I were in a horse drawn carriage, travelling along the countryside during dusk. When I saw our reflection on this nice wall, I instantly grabbed the camera and took the picture. You can see me doing it actually.

http://www.usakligil.com/opf/shadow_carriage.jpg

[Asher Kelman]

Wonderful Cem,

You treat your wife well!

Asher

[Dierk Haasis]

Alcatraz, Sunset

2 things:

- Isn't there an 800 px limit to the biggest side of a posted image?
- Haven't I seen the exact same photo (in colour) done by Uwe Steinmüller? could be purely coincidental, I guess the motive lends itself to photographers (better yet: it forces otself upon).

[Don Lashier]

2 things:

- Isn't there an 800 px limit to the biggest side of a posted image?

Yes, but I think an exception for panoramas is reasonable - I took similar liberty with my motocross panorama. Fortunately this board is smart enough to not stretch out the entire thread when a wide photo is posted.

- DL

[JimCollum]

2 things:
- Haven't I seen the exact same photo (in colour) done by Uwe Steinmüller? could be purely coincidental, I guess the motive lends itself to photographers (better yet: it forces otself upon).
Not a coincedence. There were 40 photographers there that evening, i'm sure others besides myself and uwe capture the image.(although i can say i was the first into the room with a tripod set up and shooting... even with a 4x5, betterlight and a pano adapter :)

as far as the same? nah.. don't think they are

and as far as 800 pixels.. i don't like posting images on the web to begin with.. most of my images are about detail, and at 500 (uwe's site), to 800 (here), you really can't get a feel for the actual image as presented. when i do post an image from my blog, it's typcially 1024 at the minimum.. but often 2048 pixels across)..

as you can see from the changed image above.. at 800 pixels, it looses a lot.

[Cem_Usakligil]

My vote goes to the larger image. The 800 px convention should not apply to panoramas of this quality with such details IMHO. Thanks for sharing Jim, I have enjoyed the picture very much.

Cheers,

Cem

[Asher Kelman]

Yes, Dierk,

800 pixels is the limit, except where the image cannot otherwise be reasonably shown and in this case, Jim has already checked with me about his panos months ago.

It is 1200 pixels limit for posting a TIFF for retouching if that is needed.

Anyway, people are doing a great job at self discipline and the forum is not being abused. It is a good point to note that rarely is more than 800 or even 600 pixels one side needed.

asher

[Dierk Haasis]

800 pixels is the limit, except where the image cannot otherwise be reasonably shown

Good to know, since I have always constricted myself with my panos [not just here, even on my own site]; just look at the vulture I once put up or the deer. Truth be told, most of my panos are very wide and need a lot of space and room, to shine. They are definitely not Web-ready, last month's Picture of the Month, the Alster with Blue Goals, a prime example. Hard to sell panos over the Web.

[KrisCarnmarker]

Here's my contribution to the thread.

http://kris.carnmarker.com/forumimages/opf/20050725_1130-w.jpg

[Asher Kelman]

Kris, that is powerful!

A great compositon. Nice pinks in the stone. You might consider sharpening the front stone.

Asher

[KrisCarnmarker]

Thanks Asher!

Funny, the front stone is very sharp in the original and I rezised using Bicubic Sharpen. I didn't look very closely at the result. I think I will redo it.

[Asher Kelman]

Kris,

How are you sharpening? Also maybe add an S curve in the luminous blending mode first.


Asher

[KrisCarnmarker]

OK, that should be better.

Asher, I normaly use either PhotoKit Sharpener or FocalBlade for my sharpening. I think I was tired last night and just forgot.

I took your suggestion and added more contrast as well. What do you think? Better?

[Ray West]

Seeing Jim's photo of alcatraz, reminded me of this, the 'sky walk' on 'Ocean Princess', iirc. taken with canon s70, P&S, handheld, not much processing, except straightnening (1.3%) and a bit of whitebalance - it was in fact more blue - tinted glass and bright sun. I particularly like the moire fringing of the walkway surface ;-)


http://www.yertiz.com/images/CRW_0283.jpg


Best wishes,

Ray to get shadows, you gotta get light.

[Jack_Flesher]

I was out shooting last weekend and thought of this thread as I grabbed this image. I was shooting landscapes and came across some skaters in an abandoned motel pool. Since I was just looking I only had my 'manual focus' 45 TSE with me -- good to know I still have the knack to manually focus action ;)

Anyway, more images from this series can be seen on my blog, but give it a sec to load as there are some larger images in the recent entires. Scroll down to "Skaters": www.jack.omniblog.com


Shadow:

http://jack.cameraphile.org/albums/Web-Images/skater_shadowBW.jpg

[Tom Ringold]

Some times shadows define the moment

http://www.dphoto.us/forumphotos/data/500/medium/Columbia-Gorge-Squall.jpg

http://www.dphoto.us/forumphotos/data/500/medium/Seattle-Skyline-11-20-06.jpg

[Nicolas Claris]

Shadow:
http://jack.cameraphile.org/albums/Web-Images/skater_shadowBW.jpg

Hi Jack
your picture is not showing, maybe something wrong with the URL or a permission problem with your host server... can you check?

[Asher Kelman]

The Pears,Nicolas?

I see them perfectly! Beautiful lighting! Its shading here, not shadows. Shading is a diffuse decrease in incident light, in fact, a shadow.

Asher

[Cem_Usakligil]

Hi Asher,

I don't see them either ??

Cheers,

Cem