|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 96 |
Nov 21 |
Comment |
Hey Bob, your photos astonished me by the way you see. What you photograph are scenes and things that I often pass by without a glance.
With your image here, I'm impressed with the visual insight you display and your ability to translate that into an interesting capture.
This is a very challenging shot to take, and there are lots of words written above about the highlights and saturation that I don't think I can add to. To me, what's important is what you see.
One of the trends in photography today is simplification. Generally, I agree with this trend, However, I admire how you have taken this scene and photographed it as it is. The image is quite busy, but here, I feel, that is appropriate. I don't think you should make something out of what's not there. Simplifying it might destroy the dynamic structure of what's there. I hope this makes sense.
Taking close-up shots of the glass and exploring shapes with light would have been fun, but only as an addition to your main shot.
You have an interesting shot here. With some work on the highlights and saturation, I think you'll make people stop and look at this photograph. |
Nov 20th |
| 96 |
Nov 21 |
Comment |
Hey there Emily, you handled the bright, mid-day light nicely. I'm a bit of a blue-sky, mid-day snob and hardly ever photograph during that time but you have made me rethink this attitude.
Your framing works nicely in portraying a peaceful setting. I would never know there's a road nearby. It looks as if you simply paddled up to this scene, admired its beauty and took a shot in order to hold on to that feeling a little longer.
Your greens balance well with the blue sky background.
This image feels a little oversharpened to me which may be due to the increase in Clarity. Other than that, I have no criticisms. It's a nice moment in time, which I think you are very talented with capturing.
|
Nov 20th |
| 96 |
Nov 21 |
Reply |
Hi Haru; yes, I think this works very well. The rocks are not overexposed and the blue tint gives your image a peaceful feel. Nice going. |
Nov 20th |
| 96 |
Nov 21 |
Comment |
Hi Haru. What I like in your image is the diagonal line of the river that flows from the lower Left corner. Then it becomes more of an implied line as it fades away before it reaches the top right. The boat - which I saw before reading your description - holds my eye for a moment. Them I'm pulled over to the colored tree. I appreciate your experimentation with everything being B&W except the tree, but as Cheryl suggests, I feel it needs muting. As we know, warm colors and brighter areas of an image attract our attention. So, what I'm seeing is competition for my eye's attention between the tree and the bright area on the rocks. This makes for a visually busy image. Unfortunately, I have little to offer that would help improve your photo other that going back to your RAW image and work with toning down those highlights.
On the positive side, the boat is a nice touch. It's subtle which allows your viewer the pleasure of discovery. Seeing the people in the boat places the viewer in the scene. Your image has great potential and you have an eye for seeing unique scenes. Please show us what you finally make of this. |
Nov 15th |
| 96 |
Nov 21 |
Comment |
Hey there Robert. I very much enjoy your slot canyon photos and definitely look forward in seeing more. I would say, however, that this is not among my favorites. Your concept of viewing the heart and then deeper into the ventricles is interesting to me - sort of like an endoscopy. But, to me it feels too busy. Cheryl improves the image quality by giving it some mood with it's overall darkening.
Though not over sharpened, there is a lot of detail where my eyes feel overloaded. Can your image be simplified with deep shadows so the eye is drawn in without distraction?
I fear I have viewed your image with a strong critical eye without offering much in the form of any positive comments. If you're like me, it sometimes takes a few days for me to fully appreciate a negative critique. Then, after thinking about it, I realized I subconsciously had the same thoughts as the critiquer expressed. In other words, I hope this helps. |
Nov 13th |
| 96 |
Nov 21 |
Comment |
Hey there Cheryl, I like your re-edit. It's a pleasing photograph.
It's difficult for me to see the detail of your image on such a low resolution site. I don't see the focus issue that was mentioned. But one thing I would ask is, what exactly do they mean by, "blobby"? Like Robert, I am not an astro photographer, but it's not hard to recognize what's good.
As said above, I like your re-edit better. The grain elevator is brighter - which I think was needed, but it feels a little over saturated. The lit-up tree, to my eyes provides compositional balance by use of light. I think I would work with the sky color, though. Perhaps dial in a smidge of magenta to pull the color away from the green tint that I see.
While viewing your photo up close, it seems like it's well focused.
With regard to noise reduction, I am not a fan of Topaz DeNoise. Perhaps try a couple passes of NIK's DeFine. For me, Topaz seems to create pixelation at high contrast borders. Also, be careful with Clarity. It makes too much edge enhancements. These two things might be the effect that was referred to as, "Blobby" (?)
Despite all this over-analyzing, I say it's a striking photograph that I would be very proud of. A little tweaking, and it will be as near to perfect as can be.
|
Nov 6th |
5 comments - 1 reply for Group 96
|
5 comments - 1 reply Total
|
