|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 32 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
The problem is that if I produce just a spiral effect , which is easy enough with all sorts of starting points, the end result is not enough by itself. It makes a good pattern but judges require more than pure patterns. II feel that something of the original structure must remain to give a point of understanding. That's why I used the two different effects on top of the original. |
Apr 30th |
| 32 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
Come on Tom. They wouldn't take much time or effort and i agree that the old time version would be much better without them. |
Apr 14th |
| 32 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
I like this diagonal look- a completely different aspect as you see more varied detail in the figures whereas the original illustrates the size of the area and the number of structures. |
Apr 14th |
| 32 |
Apr 21 |
Comment |
It looks as if you will get 2 pictures out of one! Some want to crop the bottom so you are left with the top, and some do the opposite so you are left with the bottom. A two-for-one offer! |
Apr 14th |
| 32 |
Apr 21 |
Comment |
I agree that it is very good in mono. We went there on one of our first trips to the States -when we did 12 national parks in 3 weeks! We went on a guided tour of the Antelope canyon and I took photos but I was using negative and slide film at the time and couldn't see whether I was getting anything. I also had borrowed a tripod from the travel firm and my camera constantly fell off it. I now have one of my photos, which I scanned from a slide, printed at A3+ size and it hangs in our living room. It is in colour though.
I don't know whey this is called the Bear because I can't see a bear, but it is beautiful. I love pictures with curves and lines. I think you have the contrast well handled. Should the sandy floor be darker so the viewer looks more at the textures of the waterworn rocks rather than the more boring floor? |
Apr 14th |
| 32 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
OK, I will think about what I could do-maybe more clouds like on the left top corner? |
Apr 6th |
| 32 |
Apr 21 |
Comment |
I am amazed that you got such a good result from an original negative. I often find I have to make a creative image when I use an old film pictures because the grain or the dust spots are too noticeable.
The clock tower is weird as the ornamentation at the top gives an apparent wobble to the sides.
I am presuming you took this in daylight and have just produced the dark sky in the processing. You should know that I would go even further and darken it more, bit I would also reduce the glare on the front of the tower at the bottom. I would try bringing out the shadow detail on the shay side of the top of the tower. |
Apr 6th |
| 32 |
Apr 21 |
Comment |
This is good. I like the fact you managed to get another head shot as frequently people do turn their heads away and it is much better with the face showing. I have a similar photo taken on a PSA conference trip which was set up for us all. The only problem was it chucked it down with rain shortly after the first shots were taken so we only got one go at it. I've used mine but only in colour. I shall have to see if I can convert, but I might try a more contrasty one. |
Apr 6th |
| 32 |
Apr 21 |
Comment |
Yes, Ata has made a big difference. The image does convey the size of the 'shed' in which you view the warriors and gives a sense of the sheer immensity of the original constructions. Definitely a photo one has to take and probably better in mono. |
Apr 6th |
| 32 |
Apr 21 |
Comment |
I found this landscape a little bitty. My eye kept wandering from the rocks in the foreground to the two people and then to the trees behind. It is almost as if you couldn't decide what was the important part of the image so the tones are all very similar. I also wanted to 'see' what the men were taking a picture of. Could you change the tones across the picture so one part becomes the focal point? I tried cropping about half the rocks off so the figures were on the bottom third line rather than in the middle. |
Apr 6th |
| 32 |
Apr 21 |
Comment |
I like both and can't decide which is better. I hadn't noticed the ghosting on the colour one but peering hard, I found just a bit on the stem. I tried light painting the other day and found it quite hard to do. Did you use different coloured gels for the colours or just a white light. Giving the camera settings was helpful. |
Apr 6th |
| 32 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
Basically, it was done because I was doing the step and repeat technique with a spiral finish, and was looking for a subject other than a flower which seems to be what everyone starts with. They were boring. So I looked for something which had a 'long' feel to it so there was an anchor point for the rotation. The 'nautilus' effect can be quite dramatic depending on the amount of rotation and the number of times it is done, but then all the pictures end up looking very similar. I wanted something which would make a pictorial image in the end, so I did the straight perspective changes as well and matched the two techniques up. I thought going mono emphasised the patterns rather than the subject.
I have a lot of boring spirals and some interesting images now from a variety of subjects. Some will make birthday cards, some are just technical exercises and some are surprisingly good! |
Apr 6th |
7 comments - 5 replies for Group 32
|
7 comments - 5 replies Total
|
