|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 87 |
Dec 19 |
Reply |
Thanks Mike - I appreciate your ideas.
Although I am still inclined to apologize/confess major alterations, I have been reassured by you and others in our Photography Club that unless specifically forbidden (for example photojournalism, documentary, others) - everything is fair game.
Agree 100% with your comment re: saturation/richness of the moon. I went back to the original (and other pictures from that evening) - and although it was a big/bright moon - it was much paler than shown in my image. Unfortunately - I neglected to save the photoshop layers - so making minor adjustments at this point is not easy. Hopefully I have learned a lesson . . . .
|
Dec 6th |
| 87 |
Dec 19 |
Reply |
I appreciate your ideas! The question of clean up distractions vs. not was debated - and most people suggested the cleaner look; but I appreciate your point of view. They do make it more "real" . . .
I compromised by leaving in the wood; which I thought was dark and less distracting, but still interesting.
Regarding moving to different location to change view . . . I wasn't fast enough. The moon rose pretty quickly (and also arced from left to right) . . . by the time I realized what was happening . . . it was too late. Perhaps next time. One rendition that I particularly like is catching the moon directly behind (and shining through) the lighthouse glass - at a time when the red light is off (it slowly flashes). I'll try again - but the sun/moon/weather/etc. need to align . . .
|
Dec 5th |
| 87 |
Dec 19 |
Reply |
Thank you . . . . also appreciate your comments. One of the things I find fascinating is that two people can approach one image very differently. There is no right/wrong . . . it's really helpful to understand and think from the alternate perspective. My first inclination was to get rid of those plants - and yet I see why you included them. As a scientist - I tend to see things B&W and I am accustomed to numerical outcomes that are favorable or unfavorable/positive or negative. Photography will exercise the other side of my brain! |
Dec 5th |
| 87 |
Dec 19 |
Reply |
Yup - I also have the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS Lens (assume that's the same lens Ahmed used). Love the magnification, sharpness and paper thin depth of field! My question is about how the shot was set-up? Was the insect alive? Was there was time to set up the exposure? How did you get it on a black background? Tx! |
Dec 5th |
| 87 |
Dec 19 |
Comment |
Nice shot - further evidence that we should stop carrying our DSLRs - and use our iPhones! Sometime I wonder . . .
One thought - the boat was so dark that I didn't see it at first - wasn't sure if that was a mast? Or some kind of antenna?
I tried to brighten the boat. Not sure if it's better or worse?
|
Dec 5th |
 |
| 87 |
Dec 19 |
Comment |
Great shot - agree monochrome works really well. Also the jet black background.
I like the angle - followed the body from the corners straight to the centered head - which almost looks like a scary dragon. I like the way you used light to focus in the head.
Is the head sharp? Couldn't tell from my image?
How do you get a shot like this? Was the insect alive?
With 100mm lenses (love that lens - amazingly sharp!) you must have been very close to the subject.
|
Dec 5th |
| 87 |
Dec 19 |
Comment |
I like this a lot! Great contrast and use of focus (tack sharp eyes and blurred background with enough detail to get sense of the fence//enclosure). Sharp reddish eyes with good catchlight in right eye.
No question what the focus is! Tried cropping - but thought your image was best. My eyes rose for the bottom, followed the neck and focused on the head/eyes. |
Dec 5th |
| 87 |
Dec 19 |
Comment |
Love the color or the ornaments, bright lights/reflections and smooth water.
One question as I look at this image - where should I be focusing? I find myself wandering around the image . . . many parts are interesting - what do others see as the focal point? And what could be done to lead the viewer there? |
Dec 4th |
| 87 |
Dec 19 |
Comment |
This is a great image! I would have thought is was definitely snow! The photographer is almost a silhouette.
I was thinking that the small plants are a distraction? And it could be cropped to focus on the photographer? And how about B&W - since there really isn't any color in the image? What do you think? Would be good to add some interest to the sky . . . just now sure how . . . |
Dec 4th |
 |
5 comments - 4 replies for Group 87
|
5 comments - 4 replies Total
|
