|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 75 |
Sep 21 |
Reply |
Yes, that's a much better result, less distraction. Thanks for the suggestion. |
Sep 18th |
| 75 |
Sep 21 |
Reply |
Thanks for the feedback. I think maybe better software, like Topaz, would achieve a sharper image, and maybe less noise with such a tight crop. |
Sep 18th |
| 75 |
Sep 21 |
Comment |
The scene has nice colors and composition, but like Pauline, my eye also roamed a bit, unsure of the subject (not that landscapes need one) but that bird is too small to be the subject, yet too visible not to distract (as do the houses a bit). The wooden pilings are asking to be the subject, but the bird won't let them. A nit-pic, but I'd make the waterline perfectly horizontal. On the technique side (and I ask only to learn, not suggesting this would improve anything) the D750 is reputed to have good DR, just wondering if you compared HDR (stacking these 3 handheld images with relatively slow shutter speeds) against processing a single file?
|
Sep 18th |
| 75 |
Sep 21 |
Comment |
Australia has some harsh landscapes, as this pic demonstrates. I'd agree the original has more detail and more natural looking colors. A very slow shutter speed, and some clipped highlights on the tree in the original suggests too slow? Also (I'm assuming) handheld, which might have induced some of the blur. I'm not sure if you intentionally added blur the foreground in post, but the rock detail in the original is interesting. |
Sep 18th |
| 75 |
Sep 21 |
Comment |
Nice texture and color, as noted. Original available? I might have raised the shadows and increased contrast. A shot without the bush hiding its 2 legs would add to an otherwise fine specimen. |
Sep 16th |
3 comments - 2 replies for Group 75
|
3 comments - 2 replies Total
|
