|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 32 |
Jul 24 |
Reply |
OK thanks. |
Jul 17th |
| 32 |
Jul 24 |
Reply |
Can you say why you don't use any sharpening tools? I often used unsharp mask, though I have found this is needed less and less with the modern cameras, especially the Olympus I use now. I notice that when I go back and use an old photo from my Canon days, then I have to sharpen. |
Jul 17th |
| 32 |
Jul 24 |
Reply |
Could it also be the rocks are wet because of the spray? |
Jul 17th |
| 32 |
Jul 24 |
Reply |
OK thanks. Send me a private email. |
Jul 16th |
| 32 |
Jul 24 |
Reply |
OK thanks. I'll go back to the odd angle and see if I like it better. |
Jul 15th |
| 32 |
Jul 24 |
Comment |
I think the blowing water actually helps to emphasise the grandeur of the Falls. When we were there in Summer there was no water at all! Very boring!
I'm not sure I really know how to use luminosity masks so I'll have to do some research id that would help when I have too bright areas. |
Jul 15th |
| 32 |
Jul 24 |
Reply |
Yes, I really like the much darker sky effect. |
Jul 15th |
| 32 |
Jul 24 |
Reply |
Yes I agree that the corner should have been included, but it wasn't possible with the lens I had and the necessity of using the banister to support my camera.
Should I tone down the bright areas on the banisters and on the strip lights which show in a couple of places? |
Jul 15th |
| 32 |
Jul 24 |
Reply |
I dislike tattoos although I can see that they could be a feature of a nude photo. I always wonder what the body will look like as it ages and starts to wrinkle!
I like nude photos but I object when the effect is awkward or angular. Semi-nude can also be a problem when a female model wears bits of clothing which are not sensible, for eg wearing high heels and little else.
I like smooth lines and curves, not uncomfortable looking shapes.
Do you take male nudes as well? |
Jul 15th |
| 32 |
Jul 24 |
Comment |
The detail on the back acorns is good but I am finding the front ones and the leaf quite distracting, although I can see that they provide a frame at the bottom. Converting to mono seems to have produced some slight aberration in the sharpening overall. I can't tell what's happened as the original is of too poor resolution to see clearly. Are these photos of a print which has then been converted? The wide white border doesn't help the image though the keyline is good.
I like the diagonal line of the acorns.
|
Jul 6th |
| 32 |
Jul 24 |
Comment |
I always find infra-red slightly odd! I am happy with the light foliage as it helps the church and crosses to stand out but I'm wondering whether the sky could go darker, which would apparently increase the overall tonal contrast of the image. I've changed it in Ps curves to make a stronger S shape and this did darken the church and sky. The only problem is that it also lightened the brightest foliage areas so they have lost some of their detail.
I think you were right to lighten the cross- a good focal point. |
Jul 6th |
| 32 |
Jul 24 |
Comment |
First, can you tell me how you converted the slide to digi, please. I am looking at all my old slides and thinking I need to convert some for my children and then throw the rest away, but I want to do a good conversion.
The ramparts look interesting and it is always good when archaeologists find something new. Think of the amount of labour involved in constructing this when there were no JCBs, though the cost of slave labour was cheap! It is a pity that you can't recover more in the sky and that the top of the pyramid shape is so close to the top edge, but that is something you can't do much about now.
I think the conversion from a slide has worked well, though there are still overdark shadows, due partly to the original contrast and partly due to the strong sunshine.
The sharpening level is fine. |
Jul 6th |
| 32 |
Jul 24 |
Comment |
Well, I'm going to start off the comments this month. Welcome to Manel and his very different style of photography! I love this kind of photo but have never managed to do anything like it. I've only ever done one nude workshop, where I wasn't in charge of the lighting and it was high key rather than low key, so I am interested in this effect you have produced. You say you used a flash behind and in front of the model but then you say you had a strip. Does this mean a strip flash or a reflector? The original shows a large bright area which I assumed was a softbox round the flash.
I really like the resulting curves of the body and the tight crop, but I am not so sure about the necklace running the full length. It seems to draw my attention too much , away from the body textures. I love the mottled effect of her skin. I like the symmetry of the body shape.
Would it be improved with a white line round the whole photo to delimit the edges? Your processing techniques sound quite complex although I can't see much difference between the original and the final image. Maybe this would show up more with a larger projection.
All in all, a beautiful image!
Looking at a larger projection after I'd written my comment, I found an odd dark curving line below the middle of her back. It loops down and then back up, circling round a dark area. I'm not sure where it has come from -did you clone out or darken a bright area which then didn't tone in with the rest of the tonal range? |
Jul 6th |
5 comments - 8 replies for Group 32
|
5 comments - 8 replies Total
|
