|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 30 |
Jul 17 |
Reply |
The statement that the sky and the foreground are treated independently answers my basic question. I don't need to see the original images. |
Jul 11th |
| 30 |
Jul 17 |
Reply |
Oh, and I forgot to add that Judy's border idea seems to help. I tried a white one at twice her width. |
Jul 11th |
| 30 |
Jul 17 |
Comment |
Extra pairs of eyes really help. Thank you.
The image seems a little flat with the background completely blacked out. How is this, with the background less bright and slightly shifted to the yellow? |
Jul 11th |
 |
| 30 |
Jul 17 |
Comment |
For me, either cropping helps, but I prefer Dorinda's. The white bar is distracting, but the green area doesn't bother me. I'd like to see less glare off the forehead and nose, and perhaps this can be done in editing. I don't have much experience with this kind of photograph, but I suspect that it was an on camera flash that was used, and the head-on illumination may not be the best for this kind of shot. Possibly this could have been taken with bounced light or light from a nearby window? If you are not adverse to it, you might reduce that glare, slightly whiten the two front teeth, and slightly enlarge the white spot of reflected light in the eyes. I love freckles, so you might even want to enhance them a bit. |
Jul 11th |
| 30 |
Jul 17 |
Comment |
I really like Judy's crop of your "sky only". It seems more natural to me. In the "original", the two parts of the image seem not to be sharing the same light source. Here is a version that feels better to me. It was made by passing the foreground part of the image through an orange filter. Now the reflections seem to match the Milky Way, and the somewhat unnatural brightness of the meadow is diminished.
My question above does not concern star trails, which should be minimal if the exposure is less than 20 or 30 seconds. Over the five to ten minutes required to collect the star images, stars will shift in position. If the images are then aligned via the stars, the foreground will be shifted in position from one image to the next. I can see some evidence for this in your picture. If what I'm curious about is still not clear, either imagine or try spacing out your shots over a one hour period instead of five minutes. Something has to give, either the sky or the foreground. |
Jul 7th |
 |
| 30 |
Jul 17 |
Comment |
"Hot Seat"? |
Jul 5th |
 |
| 30 |
Jul 17 |
Comment |
Really a fun image, but I'd title it "Bell Map" because the first thing I thought of when I saw it was a map of Europe. |
Jul 5th |
| 30 |
Jul 17 |
Comment |
The Milky Way is great, as always, but the fact that the reflections in the water do not look like the sky above, gives me pause. I think Judy at first felt the same. Sometimes I'm a little disquieted in 180 degree panoramas by straight objects like roads, fences, rivers, that in reality were alongside the photographer, but appear disjointed in the left and right extremes of the panorama or which, as in this case, appear to make a U-turn in the middle of the panorama. In this scene, the river, which, most likely is straight, appears to make such a U-turn. Finally, I am still curious about why the composite does not show evidence of the motion of the stars due to the earth's rotation over the interval required to collect all the stellar images. If the images were merely pieced together making use of overlapping regions, some stars would end up down in the trees and in another part of the image, there would be a band of sky just above the tree tops that would be devoid of stars. Could you please take a close look at the original images and at the composite to figure out what is going on (and then let us know). To me, suppressing the fainter stars reduces the naturalness of the image. |
Jul 5th |
| 30 |
Jul 17 |
Comment |
Maybe it is not quite abstract enough for me. There is some artistic tension created because it looks like the subject is unbalanced and falling over. Here is a version that I like better because it feels a little more balanced and is a little brighter. Sorry if this is not at all what you were striving for. |
Jul 3rd |
 |
| 30 |
Jul 17 |
Comment |
How nice to see a shot of Chesky Krumlov different from the usual one taken from the top of the steep hill to the right. The fog makes it hard to display the special character of Chesky-Krumlov, the sea of red roofs and the beautiful curve of the river, but this shot gives a nice hint. Perhaps this shot could tolerate cropping the top 1/5. |
Jul 3rd |
8 comments - 2 replies for Group 30
|
8 comments - 2 replies Total
|
