|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 32 |
Sep 21 |
Reply |
Thanks. I'm a bit like a teenager still-I'm in my black phase! |
Sep 27th |
| 32 |
Sep 21 |
Reply |
OK, so not a lot of colour involved. Would it be better to go for a smaller area and bring out the inherent colours -and I don't usually say this-by increasing the saturation? That would make the mono look different. |
Sep 27th |
| 32 |
Sep 21 |
Reply |
Sometimes what looks like it might work in mono really doesn't! |
Sep 25th |
| 32 |
Sep 21 |
Comment |
I really thinks this works. The tight framing is very good as there would have been distracting elements around the loco otherwise. I thought the contrast was about right, though I wasn't so keen on the noise in the sky. The border works here as well and would probably look good if you printed this. I found my eye drawn along the pipes on the side and then finish on the numbers so this is good composition -leading lines, good detail and a clear pathway through the picture. |
Sep 25th |
| 32 |
Sep 21 |
Comment |
I like the colour version more than the mono! That lovely touch of red against the deep grey and contrasting with the green foliage. I felt the mono didn't stand out as well from the background. The white vertical stripe was too obtrusive on the left though lightening the roof area was the right decision. Jennifer's cover of the top left corner is good- it is small areas like this which can spoil a picture and until someone else sees it you can't work out what is wrong. |
Sep 25th |
| 32 |
Sep 21 |
Comment |
Again some very good points made by the group -we all seem to pick out different aspects to criticise! I wondered whether the pot was just too central. We've just had a talk about the myths of composition and the 'rules' which seem so contradictory. One aspect the speaker highlighted was the use of negative space. Putting the pot offcentre allows the eye to be drawn in to the pot by the patterns, especially those running up the side of the pot. I think you can't crop to get this effect right, so you'll have to take it again. Shiny objects always create hot spots which can be reduced with a diffuse lighting, or being really careful to ensure no clipping. You could try a couple of shots and HDR them to retain the detail. I also agree with Wes-try focus stacking as well. I do like the idea of doing a montage with something interesting in the water of the pot. |
Sep 25th |
| 32 |
Sep 21 |
Comment |
Again, I agree with what has been said. The stem and leaves are well rendered but the flower head appears too complex for the simplicity of the rest. I know it is a cliche but would a more diagonal arrangement of the stem be more pleasing? The production with several layers sounds quite complicated. Can we see the original? |
Sep 25th |
| 32 |
Sep 21 |
Comment |
Actually, I agree that the darker sky does draw the attention away from the landscape so contrary to popular belief, I think you don't darken it this time! The landscape is the featured element here. Are these red rocks? I don't know the area at all. My suggestion is that you need to take it at a different time of day so hopefully get it with side lighting or very low evening light, because you need to bring out the texture of the cliff face. It is a bit too all-over well lit so lacks drama. I did try a crop off the top to get rid of the sky and clouds and that did bring the eye back to the cliffs. At the moment, My eyes wander round from cliff to sky to clouds and then down to the foreground. The only other possibility is spending a lot of time in Ps dodging and burning different sections to focus the attention of part of the cliff and you probably don't have enough time for that! |
Sep 25th |
| 32 |
Sep 21 |
Comment |
I agree with most that the edge needs defining but I thought the top rose was lit OK. However, I wasn't so sure about the actual arrangement of the roses. I felt the top two stems grew out of the bottom rose in two straight lines, which looked a bit awkward. I wondered whether tilting the top two away from each other was possible and making the middle one a little shorter so it connected the top and bottom-like Tom suggested. I couldn't see the bottom stem, but I wanted to know what the small white circular blob was at the bottom. The texture on the petals is lovely and I would like you to have another go, with slightly different arrangements but with similar lighting. Flower studies like these are beautiful. |
Sep 25th |
| 32 |
Sep 21 |
Reply |
Thanks Ian. Good to hear from you again. I really like contrasty shapes in mono too. |
Sep 18th |
| 32 |
Sep 21 |
Reply |
I will try it out. I will have a go at keeping the shadow area slightly lighter and see if I still like it. |
Sep 7th |
| 32 |
Sep 21 |
Reply |
Yes, I remember red filters too.
If I'd known your cousin was there, I would have looked for his name. |
Sep 7th |
| 32 |
Sep 21 |
Reply |
Yes, that was what I was aiming for. |
Sep 7th |
| 32 |
Sep 21 |
Reply |
OK -I'll try to remember in future |
Sep 7th |
6 comments - 8 replies for Group 32
|
6 comments - 8 replies Total
|
