|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 66 |
Feb 19 |
Reply |
Thanks Judy. A confession: The pastel effect only appeared when I pushed vibrancy and saturation beyond what any reasonable person should do. Luck? |
Feb 18th |
| 66 |
Feb 19 |
Reply |
Thank you Melanie for the kind words. I am glad you noted the softening of the shadows. I wanted the image to be less dynamic. I am influenced by paintings and worry that originality and the medium of photography is taking a backseat. |
Feb 18th |
| 66 |
Feb 19 |
Comment |
Hi Gary, I like your image better with the bike rack included . . . just kidding. Thanks for testing our suggestion. That empty space between the foreground and the building is now more dramatic. |
Feb 13th |
| 66 |
Feb 19 |
Comment |
Thank you Ernie for the background information on processing. I will have to get more familiar with programs like Nik Silver Efx. I also wonder if I should continue to use an old DX camera with only 16 megabytes of resolution. |
Feb 13th |
| 66 |
Feb 19 |
Comment |
Thank you Jack, Palli and Gary for the warm welcome. I live in a remote area of Western New York. There are limited opportunities here to discuss photography; so, I appreciate your comments and feedback very much. Of course, the first image I submitted, I feel, is one of my better ones. I have plenty of other "experiments" that should benefit a lot from your mentoring. I am already looking forward to our discussions in March. |
Feb 13th |
| 66 |
Feb 19 |
Comment |
Photographers often use a stream as a leading line into a vertical image. I like the way you had the stream cross the bottom of the image and how you softened the stream using a slow shutter speed. For me, forests are very difficult to photograph. The image that one has in mind is rarely realized because of the complexity of forests. However, you avoided this challenge of composition by featuring the rocks and the mountain laurels. |
Feb 3rd |
| 66 |
Feb 19 |
Comment |
I agree with Jack, keeping the trees allows for some interesting effects of IR, else it could be just another visual spectrum image. Also removing distracting elements and adding a sepia effect makes it feel ancient. |
Feb 3rd |
| 66 |
Feb 19 |
Comment |
This image tells a story. The distance from the anchor to the lighthouse adds to the story. I like how IR handles bright sunny days. The f11 aperture gave you useful depth of field. For me, the one thing I'd change is to remove the bicycle rack. |
Feb 1st |
| 66 |
Feb 19 |
Comment |
I like the way the trees are back-lighted and how they contrast to the sky. It appears you warmed-up the foreground and the clouds in the sky, which brings out the trees even more. You did not crop the image. The tree in the foreground is strong and adds depth. |
Feb 1st |
| 66 |
Feb 19 |
Comment |
The texture and details are amazing. The darkness of the image makes it mysterious. You say "various shutter speeds were used" Was this intentional? Four processing programs were used. Was this the only way to produce such a powerful image? Why was it, for example, necessary to use Nik Silver Efx Pro? |
Feb 1st |
| 66 |
Feb 19 |
Comment |
I have wondered about how to take IR photographs of white subjects like snow or waterfalls. I like the way you kept the leaves of the trees & bushes white and converted the waterfall to white without changing its texture. Can some of these effects also be rendered in Photoshop CC 2019? |
Feb 1st |
9 comments - 2 replies for Group 66
|
9 comments - 2 replies Total
|