Transition

[colinmlegg (Colin)]

Thought this one might be interesting as a study of star reflections in still vs moving water. The water is less than 1 cm deep, so a reasonable breeze is needed to form ripples and chop up the surface. You don't often see such a sharp transition.

Lake Ballard, 07-Mar-2013.

[iceman (Mike)]

Such a beautiful image.

[Antu]

what a wonderful image ! The transition between the two zones is pretty spectacular indeed, I've never seen anything like that before.

[Larryp (Laurie)]

Beautiful!

[multiweb (Marc)]

Uber cool Colin. What's really amazing in all those shots it how sharp the reflection in the water is.

PS: I can do the same transition in PS tough.

[Paul Haese]

Cracker shot Colin. I have been aiming for something like this with my sugars beach shots, but falling well short. Nicely processed.

[colinmlegg (Colin)]

Thanks guys.

Originally Posted by multiweb

Uber cool Colin. What's really amazing in all those shots it how sharp the reflection in the water is.

PS: I can do the same transition in PS tough.

... that was my other motivation for posting. I've seen a few 'photoshopped' MW reflections lately and they always get it wrong wrt. to the stars. Unless the water is perfectly still (very rare), the stars get stretched, enlarged and brightened to varying degrees. Simple warps/blurs in PS are dead giveaways

[Octane (Humayun)]

Beautiful.

H

[multiweb (Marc)]

Originally Posted by colinmlegg

... that was my other motivation for posting. I've seen a few 'photoshopped' MW reflections lately and they always get it wrong wrt. to the stars. Unless the water is perfectly still (very rare), the stars get stretched, enlarged and brightened to varying degrees. Simple warps/blurs in PS are dead giveaways

Really?... gee I wouldn't have thought some people would fake their reflections with PS after shooting them. Defeats the purpose of being eaten alive by mozzies in the first place.

[Joshua Bunn (Joshua)]

Fantastic colors at the horizon there Colin.

[Octane (Humayun)]

It's OK if the photographer (not digital artist) provides the truth in the description accompanying the image. Then, it can be taken for what it is -- a work of photomanipulated art (photographs are works of art in their own right) -- but it lets the viewer know where reality ends and fantasy begins.

I've seen a lot of it on Facebook/online, where the Milky Way, for example, has been exaggerated and transformed and rotated to suit the composition and the author hasn't stated as such. It is great for what it is and is a representation of the artist's creative abilities as well as vision. But, amongst the viewers are people who are interested in photography and want to try their own hand at capturing the night sky. Seeing grandiose images like that does nothing but deflate their enthusiasm when they try it for themselves.

Then again, all you need to do is pump the saturation to 100 and beyond, to the point where posterisation (blocking) occurs, and you'll have an instant winner.

H

[colinmlegg (Colin)]

Originally Posted by multiweb

Really?... gee I wouldn't have thought some people would fake their reflections with PS after shooting them. Defeats the purpose of being eaten alive by mozzies in the first place.

Probably just me, but I prefer the bites and wading through mud vs pushing PS sliders

Originally Posted by Joshua Bunn

Fantastic colors at the horizon there Colin.

Thanks Josh.

Originally Posted by Octane

It's OK if the photographer (not digital artist) provides the truth in the description accompanying the image. Then, it can be taken for what it is -- a work of photomanipulated art (photographs are works of art in their own right) -- but it lets the viewer know where reality ends and fantasy begins.

I've seen a lot of it on Facebook/online, where the Milky Way, for example, has been exaggerated and transformed and rotated to suit the composition and the author hasn't stated as such. It is great for what it is and is a representation of the artist's creative abilities as well as vision. But, amongst the viewers are people who are interested in photography and want to try their own hand at capturing the night sky. Seeing grandiose images like that does nothing but deflate their enthusiasm when they try it for themselves.

Then again, all you need to do is pump the saturation to 100 and beyond, to the point where posterisation (blocking) occurs, and you'll have an instant winner.

H

100% agree mate. If it's presented as photography and manipulated and not declared up front, it's a deception in my book, as many people think real scene unless told otherwise.

Not a big fan of oversaturation/processing.... just my opinion

[rogerg (Roger)]

Neat shot Colin, great colours. The problem I more often have is no reflections to speak of at all, mostly due to light fog/mist over the water body but sometimes from slight breeze.

Agree with H. regarding saturation and roll my eyes as well.

[Ross G]

A beautiful photo Colin.

Simple composition, beautiful colours...and the most amazing reflections!

I love it!

Ross.