|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 74 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
Thank you, Don, for your comments and edit. Appreciate it.
I missed you in this group. |
Nov 14th |
| 74 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
Thank you for your comments, Stacy. |
Nov 14th |
| 74 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
Thank you, Ed for your comments. You found another theme, which is very helpful for me. |
Nov 14th |
| 74 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
Thank you for your kind words. Appreciate it.
|
Nov 14th |
| 74 |
Nov 23 |
Comment |
How nice, Melissa!
Your creativity wins here. Few can image that this is cactus.
This is an art truely. There is no right or wrong in the art.
I appreciate as it is...
Good luck in the competition. |
Nov 10th |
| 74 |
Nov 23 |
Comment |
Hi Trevor,
Thank you for sharing.
Yes, the leading lines caused by the bolders and the shoreline works for me. It looks very nice place - clam and peace.
I am not sure that you used PL filter or not. I can see the reflection barely in the original. I would try to eliminate reflection as much as possible. There are lots of fallen leaves in the water and those become conflicts. And the fallen leaves add the story well in my view.
Also I would try not to blown out the main subject as much as possible. My eyes want to see the details very carefully.
If you can go back later in the fall, I would guess a lots of fallen leaves pile up on the rocks. That might be interesting to see and shoot. |
Nov 10th |
| 74 |
Nov 23 |
Comment |
Hi Stacey,
Thank you for sharing.
First of all, I like BW version better. By taking out the color, my eyes now can focus to appreciate "Light & Shadow" magic very much. At first glance, it looks like a creature, i.e. octopus reaching out the legs. And the shadows in the ground helps to make the effect stronger. Normally in this type of image, my eyes would not stay long in the image after the strong first impression, but this case my eyes still wants to see the details throughout the image. Maybe it is because you opened the shadows of tree/branches trying to showing the details in BW conversion. I noticed you included the window of the building between the branch (near the center) - now sure that you did it on purpose or not - but it looks like an eye of the "creature", which adds another story for me.
Your pano cropping strategy works as well. It keeps enough space to appreal the story holizontally. Overall it is exceptionally well done in BW conversion.
One thing;(this is my personal opinion though)
I am not a big fan of having patches of sky in the image. In this case, too, it distract my eyes and reduce the impact. Some people clone out in PS.
Another solusion could be I might crop out 1/4 of the top (which helps to eliminate the most of the patches of sky) but include more of the ground (I would do it from original). In that case, the story would become a bit different.
|
Nov 10th |
| 74 |
Nov 23 |
Comment |
Hi Ed,
Thank you for sharing.
A great story telling image. It is nice!
I was wondering If you could anyhow make the mantle outstanding.
In the color version, since the back ground is red, the mantle is outstanding. In BW, the mantle is a bit migrated in the background.
Other than that, great!
|
Nov 8th |
| 74 |
Nov 23 |
Comment |
Hi Ed, thank you for sharing the great image.
You were there at the right timing at the right spot, it seems. I guess you are exited to see the scene. How lucky you are!
I like your structure of making it pano style. It gives layers mountains properly. The buildings add the sense of scale, which I like also.
A couple of things;
1. If I see the original, it looks clear that the mountains (the green on right and the dark one on left) frame the view and the mountain with snow become the star of the image. That's my take. On the other hand, BW version looks confusing a bit.
The mountain on right lost the color and it is bright. It is not dark enough to set the frame. So my eye does not guided well to the center of attention but ping pong between the mountains.
2. With your BW version, the dead center area becomes empty without the details to see. It is more obvious in BW. You might try to bring out the texture of clouds a bit more. Or I might try shooting from a bit right to reduce the space (if you could go back there) I am saying without knowing the condition at the spot, I am afraid.
3. Sharping - for me it does not look too-sharpened. The halo on the right edge does not look halo created by post processing in my eye. I encountered many times but it happens when the fog/light hit at the back.
Anyway, I think it has potentials to become better than color version. Currently I like the color version. It is a well-structured pano with good color palette.
|
Nov 7th |
5 comments - 4 replies for Group 74
|
| 96 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
Hi Robert,
Sorry to be late for replying. My apology.
Yes, it solved the visual balance pointed out.
However, the foreground becomes dominant in the frame and the beautiful mountains and sun rays become background, not main subject.
Now I was wonder if this yellow followers are strong enough. What was your story originally? I would ask this question. |
Nov 25th |
| 96 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
Thank you, Robert for your comments and suggestions here. It helps a lot. Your comments reveals the issues of the image. Yes, it looks mess in left side as you pointed out. Your version looks closer to what I wanted to present. I will play around more based on your input. Thank you again. |
Nov 13th |
| 96 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
Hi Gloria,
Thank you for your comments. I understand your points. It was one of my concern, i.e. lacking drama. |
Nov 13th |
| 96 |
Nov 23 |
Comment |
Hi Bob,
Thank you for sharing.
I like your attempt here. The bridge is well described in the composition. Also the color balance is excellent, warm color vs cool colors. It is nice. The color of the clouds gives a hint of the time taken as well. It is well done.
If the US flag is flying in the wind, it would add another story in the image I guess.
Let me throw a curve ball. This would deliver a entirely differnt story though. |
Nov 13th |
 |
| 96 |
Nov 23 |
Comment |
Hi Gloria,
Thank you for sharing.
I have having difficulties finding a tree outstanding like this. You found a good one.
Composition is fine. The tree at the center. It is simple but powerful. But what makes the image strong is the light. Nice lighting. It makes the tree really outstanding.
On the other hand, it is too yellow casted in the image. The greens do not look "green". If you just adjust the temperature in Photoshop, you can correct easily.
This is just my personal preference but I would crop the bottom just a bit. The tree looks too centered for me.
Finally, I would burn the edges i.e. maybe by a radiation filter in Photoshop. it would help to make the tree more outstaning. |
Nov 13th |
| 96 |
Nov 23 |
Comment |
Hi Robert,
Thank you for sharing.
It is my challenging as well to stop shooting the magnificent scene and just appreciate myself being at the moment. I cannot help rushing to capture the scene.
For me "Wow" factor of this image comes from light rays in the mountain. Also, I really like the mountain ridge layers slightly poking in the haze. They are delicately presented here. The layers of foreground/midground, shows triangle line and add depth - which also is the strength of the image.
On the other hand, I feel that the image is right heavy in the balance. There is less to see in left half. Especially the mid left part is empty space for me.
Plese see my attached attempt;
1. Cropped left from the original. I reserve the rock pointing to the peak in lower left and leading line of rock ridge in lower right.
2. I really like a flower facing to the camera (it is a strong eye catcher for me as foreground). It is pity that there is no other flowers between the flowers grown in colonies. I need a bit of space in the bottom from "the flower" though.
3. I lighten up the rocks guiding to the main subject and darken down the rest.
I realized that there are minuses;
1. landscape vs portrait - I prefer landscape in this type of scene. I need horizontal space to present scale.
2. I had to crop out the mountains (which beautifully captured) in upper left. I wish I wanted to keep that.
3. It became too foreground heavy, which is not good. This is because I wanted to include "the flower". I need a bit more space in the sky.
Now, I found myself that your version looks better at the end.
Sorry, I might confuse you.
|
Nov 13th |
 |
3 comments - 3 replies for Group 96
|
8 comments - 7 replies Total
|
