Mini 3 Sieged and Slighted Castle Pano

[Flashheart]

During the English Civil War, this castle was twice besieged by Parliamentarian forces. The first siege, in 1643, was unsuccessful, but by 1645 Corfe Castle was one of the last remaining royalist strongholds and fell to a siege ending in an all out assault. In March that year, Corfe Castle was slighted on Parliament's orders.

This is a forum freindly low resolution version. The IQ and resolution of the original file is far higher quality. 40x 12mp images were taken in portrait mode to make this image. Stitched using PTGui Pro with a 60% overlap. The fnal image was processed with Photoshop, Lightroom Classic and DxO PhotoLab 5.

 

[Lastrexking]

Great photo

 

[Dale D]

View attachment 154192

During the English Civil War, this castle was twice besieged by Parliamentarian forces. The first siege, in 1643, was unsuccessful, but by 1645 Corfe Castle was one of the last remaining royalist strongholds and fell to a siege ending in an all out assault. In March that year, Corfe Castle was slighted on Parliament's orders.

This is a forum freindly low resolution version. The IQ and resolution of the original file is far higher quality. 40x 12mp images were taken in portrait mode to make this image. Stitched using PTGui Pro with a 60% overlap. The fnal image was processed with Photoshop, Lightroom Classic and DxO PhotoLab 5.

I am sorry to say that although the photo is "great" it is underexposed. Since this is a low resolution image, I would hesitate to work on it. You really need to increase the shadow details, and accentuate the clouds...all easily done with the masking tool of Adobe Photoshop or Lightroom.

 

[rhberg]

This is a beautiful and darkly moody image-great job on framing with that sky.

 

[Dale D]

This is a beautiful and darkly moody image-great job on framing with that sky.

At the risk of being attacked for this, I am submitting an edited image showing some modifications of the sky and foreground. I think the mood is unchanged by these modifications but the sky can be made more dramatic and the foreground shadows can be opened up a little. All edits were made using Adobe masking tool. The original image is on top and the edited image on the bottom. Click on image to enlarge.

 

[Robert Prior]

At the risk of being attacked for this, I am submitting an edited image showing some modifications of the sky and foreground. I think the mood is unchanged by these modifications but the sky can be made more dramatic and the foreground shadows can be opened up a little. All edits were made using Adobe masking tool. The original image is on top and the edited image on the bottom. Click on image to enlarge. View attachment 154243View attachment 154244

Actually, I like the original image better.

 

[Dale D]

Actually, I like the original image better.

Totally fine with me

 

[Flashheart]

I always welcome constructive criticism. That photo was taken at about 20:10, 20 minutes after GMT sunset. I know that because I drove like a bat out of hell to get thereafter being sat in traffic trying to reach it before sunset. There wasn't as much light as your version depicts. In hindsight, I now think my version is slightly over-exposed.
I'm constantly working to the accuracy of the light levels and details seen when taking the actual photograph and processing it in post.
In your version, the fact that the sky appears darker than the land should have had alarm bells ringing. Your version has too much contrast and banding and artifacts are present. The foreground light doesn't match the background light and the sky is too busy and distracts the eye from the subject. The increased foreground light places too much emphasis on the surrounding details further distracting the eye from the subject, this also encourages my eyes to wander to the bottom left of the image.
Thank you for your constructive criticism.

 

[Dale D]

I always welcome constructive criticism. That photo was taken at about 20:10, 20 minutes after GMT sunset. I know that because I drove like a bat out of hell to get thereafter being sat in traffic trying to reach it before sunset. There wasn't as much light as your version depicts. In hindsight, I now think my version is slightly over-exposed.
I'm constantly working to the accuracy of the light levels and details seen when taking the actual photograph and processing it in post.
In your version, the fact that the sky appears brighter than the land should have had alarm bells ringing. Your version has too much contrast and banding and artifacts are present. The foreground light doesn't match the background light and the sky is too busy and distracts the eye from the subject. The increased foreground light places too much emphasis on the surrounding details further distracting the eye from the subject, this also encourages my eyes to wander to the bottom left of the image.
Thank you for your constructive criticism.

My wife always tells me to slow down! No point in driving like a bat out of hell for a photo. I usually ignore her because I want to have the right light! She would laugh like hell if I got a ticket.

All of your points are all well taken. My edit was a fast edit reply- I am having trouble with banding . You are making the point that realism or realty (your lighting) outweighs artistic license . As in all things creative, it is the individual's taste. Or, as they say in France, "chacun a son gout,." I would like to give a little boost to the sky with some increased contrast, clarity, and open the shadows a bit. We are talking preferences, here, not actual realism. Neither of us are completely right. Your image is beautiful in any case.

Dale

 

[Flashheart]

My wife always tells me to slow down! No point in driving like a bat out of hell for a photo. I usually ignore her because I want to have the right light! She would laugh like hell if I got a ticket.

All of your points are all well taken. My edit was a fast edit reply- I am having trouble with banding . You are making the point that realism or realty (your lighting) outweighs artistic license . As in all things creative, it is the individual's taste. Or, as they say in France, "chacun a son gout,." I would like to give a little boost to the sky with some increased contrast, clarity, and open the shadows a bit. We are talking preferences, here, not actual realism. Neither of us are completely right. Your image is beautiful in any case.

Dale

I'm all for artistic interpretation. I tend to use my memory to guide me on the lighting conditions, I try to combine accuracy with a feel of the atmosphere I experienced while on location. This castle has a dark and incredibly violent history. It was slighted so hard that even the very foundations it lies upon fractured. I think the mood of this photo reflects its history.