Sunlit ponies in the New Forest

Taken at Bratley View, in the New Forest.

I'd set up the camera and tripod ready for sundown when these two horses wandered into the frame. Fortunately they decided to hang around for a while and gave me a bit of foreground interest to the shot.

I tried another shot at F22 (thinking the 'starburst' may be better) but there was far too much lens flare.

K5, 17-70 lens, 1/30sec, f9, ISO 100, tripod. Processed in LR5.




C&C gladly welcome

Regards
Nigel

I like - they are totally relaxed and not concerned at your presence .

I think it is a very nice image, good balance between the sky and the foreground and some nice starbursts from the setting sun. The ponies most definitely add to the scene.

Regards
David

Nice shot! and well exposed. Don't forget that this months competition is "Trees" Worth adding it there.

Thanks for the heads-up, Dave !

Regards
Nigel

Nicely tranquil scene, though the problem with including the sun in a picture is that it does then dominate it.

I agree its an atmospheric shot, nicely caught. I'm not convinced about the exposure balance though. I think the ground and trees need bit of 'fill light' or shadow lift to appear more as the eye would perceive.

I'm putting up a shot of my own here - absolutely not wanting to distract from Stridey's (the other Nigel ) beautiful New Forest scene, which has the clear advantage of the well placed ponies. But there are striking similarities in many of the elements I see, and I feel it raises a very debatable point about backlit exposures such as these.

No doubt there will be much varied opinion, but I contend that Stridey's shot (we're going to have to leave out the 'Nigels' here :wink represents more a camera meter's interpretation of the exposure balance, whereas mine represents more the effect of the eye's automatic adjustment and 'compensation' for the widely differing dynamic range.

When I suggested Stridey should rebalance the shadows exposure it was with this effect and realism as the aim. This sort of decision must concern many many types of shots, so I wonder if you all agree with me??


Near Coulsdon Common, southern border of Croydon & Surrey. K7 & Samyang 14mm at f.11

But you would lose the drama of the beautiful back lit rim lighting in the original shot. There's much more to photography than producing a faithful interpretation of what the eye sees. Although I don't see the original as 'unnatural'.

No of course, its not 'unnatural' in a negative sense - no one can say there's any 'right' or wrong about this. But what I do wonder is whether we have become accustomed to the quirks (and failings ) of camera metering, to the extent that the camera's interpretation has become of itself a kind of 'natural', when it is in fact not.

In our examples here it appears to me that the lighting levels on the ground in Strideys image would be as you would see in reality after the sun had dropped below the horizon, and its rays were no longer directly illuminating the ground.

The human eye sees in a kind of HDR manner, and in order to recreate that 'naturalness' in my image I had to compensate technically and blend exposures.

But I'm only interested in discussing these ideas generally and getting views, its not to detract from Strideys very effective image - that was just the springboard!

I have to say that I like the lighting / colours better in the original poster's shot than the example posted by Nigel above. To me, Nigel's doesn't look natural, whereas the first one does! Just my personal opinion of course, others will differ!

Regards
David

I wouldn't bet on it But I am glad to get people thinking about it

In a way, I'm with McG on this one - there is scope for PP, to play with the light in the image and give it even more life and depth. The small Jpeg is not ideal for editing, but perhaps it could develop into something like this -




Philip

Yes, that's more 'as the eye would see it' I think, plus it is starting to reveal the more intricate autumn colours which were shrouded in silhouette. Of course, this 'silhouette' is a perfectly acceptable 'photographic' effect, and the halo's don't need to be lost (as Will was concerned about earlier) - you could boost the halo highlights by isolating the sky by selection first.

I agree the JPEG here is not going to help quality-wise, but we get the idea.

I have been following this dialogue with interest and I have to say that on reflection (sorry - dreadful pun !!!) Mr B's interpretation has more punch to it and is a more accurate likeness of what I was actually seeing when I took the shot.

Regards
Nigel