|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 96 |
Oct 21 |
Reply |
Looks wonderful Robert. I bet you it would look great printed on metal, nice and big! |
Oct 29th |
| 96 |
Oct 21 |
Reply |
Thanks Emily
I agree with you. Bob's and Robert's edits have really given me some ideas. Although I think that this kind of edit will be for when I have some time to play around. It is not my first love when it comes to photography. |
Oct 29th |
| 96 |
Oct 21 |
Reply |
Thanks Dan
I love to play around and experiment. I'm not sure I love the result of this one. I think I much prefer a beautiful landscape well edited than the impressionistic approach. Thank you for the feedback. It is always interesting to understand how others view my efforts. |
Oct 29th |
| 96 |
Oct 21 |
Reply |
Thanks Robert
I really like your first version. Thanks so much for the effort to explain what you meant. It is really helpful. I'm not sure I'm in love with my version either. It was really just an experiment. |
Oct 29th |
| 96 |
Oct 21 |
Comment |
Hi Emily
I really like the sky in this image (I am a sky person after all). It might be a bit underexposed to my eye which might be what is causing the odd coloring in the top left corner which appears to be in the original as well. I agree with Dan and that you should give RAW a try. Now that I have tried RAW I will never go back. I like the sky and the silhouette but find the image is missing a foreground. You have the beautiful sunset as the background and the silhouette as the middle ground but no foreground to anchor the image. Dan is the master at finding a nice foreground. I too struggle with foregrounds, and it is something I am trying to remedy and look for in my images. |
Oct 24th |
| 96 |
Oct 21 |
Reply |
Yes I have played around with this a bit but havn't mastered it yet. Will see what I can come up with next.
Thank again
|
Oct 9th |
| 96 |
Oct 21 |
Reply |
Yes I see what you mean Bob. I actually had the tree at the end much brighter before but thought it was too bright. Maybe brightening the entire image would work better. I am also going to play around a bit with Haru's idea of more trees on the left and/or cropping tighter to see which works best for me.
Thank you for the ideas |
Oct 9th |
| 96 |
Oct 21 |
Reply |
Yes I totally see what you mean. I think will go back and modify it a bit.
thanks! |
Oct 9th |
| 96 |
Oct 21 |
Comment |
Hi Bob
I hope feel better soon. I know that constant pain can be very draining on the spirit. Take care of yourself. My thoughts are with you.
I love your crop of this image. It removes the distracting elements. I do think you have gone a bit too dark with the tips of the petals. To me the biggest struggle with any macro is the focus. Only the bottom petals on this flower are sharp. I would have liked the sharpness to extend to the middle of the flower to draw my eye in. Bring on more flowers. I would love to see some with bees! |
Oct 9th |
| 96 |
Oct 21 |
Comment |
Hi Dan
This is a really spectacular image. I agree with everything that Robert has said. You always have great foregrounds. In this it feels slightly heavy in the foreground though (see my crop of the foreground below) and to my eyes (remember I really love to have lots of sky...and it is just my taste) would love to see more sky. I admire your eye when it comes to leaving the shadows sometimes. In this case I think if you were to bring up the shadows around the trees it would take away from the mountain and reflection. The mist on the water is perfect as well. Very beautiful image. |
Oct 9th |
 |
| 96 |
Oct 21 |
Comment |
Hi Robert
Another wonderful image. I love the foreground and the placement of the mesa. I think the composition is just fine. Yes, I would dodge and burn just to make a more 3d look to the foreground (I am definitely not an expert at it though LOL but thanks for the compliment, Bob). I like the blue. I added a bit of contrast to the sunset on the Mesa and I used the gradient tool in Lightroom to increase the blue in the top half of the sky. The sky looked a little grey to me. I added my quick edit for reference. Not really much to improve one here. This is a truly beautiful image. Just the kind I would love to take (I'm a tiny bit jealous I wasn't there to capture it too!) |
Oct 8th |
 |
| 96 |
Oct 21 |
Comment |
Hi Haru
I did not find the sky distracting because it was grey, nevertheless it is a dull color so I tried photoshop sky replacement but there was not enough sky for the program to recognize it. I then tried Lightroom gradient tool and selected the luminance and increased the blue and tried dehaze as well. That didn't work very well either so I was unable to find a way to improve the sky for you. I too found that there was too much distracting the eye away from the waterfall. I have attached my attempt at increasing focus on the the waterfall. I'm not sure if my version solves the problem but does improve it a little. The waterfall itself with the smooth dreamy water is lovely. I'm not sure if you could have tried or can go back to the location again at a better time of day for the sky but that is what I would try if I could. It looks like a wonderful location. |
Oct 8th |
 |
| 96 |
Oct 21 |
Comment |
Hi Bob
Welcome, I am really glad your joining the group! This is a nice image. I quite like the composition of the scout overlooking the city. I like the leading line provided by the rocks around the path so I would not crop the left side off. I do feel it is a little tight above the scouts head and would like more room there. I too would replace the sky. I think this would make a really cool sunrise or sunset photo which would soften the light and you would be less likely to get the harsh shadow at the base of the scout's platform. I'm not sure if this is an area you can get to at those times of day or if it is in a park that closes but I would try if I could. P.S. I love the Sony cameras (have one myself) and it works great! |
Oct 8th |
 |
6 comments - 7 replies for Group 96
|
6 comments - 7 replies Total
|
