|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 32 |
Oct 24 |
Reply |
So you have plenty of time for sitting at the computer doing not very much except messing with photos! Or are you on a strict exercise routine? |
Oct 19th |
| 32 |
Oct 24 |
Reply |
How disappointing of you Wes! Don't you ever get the urge to produce something just a wee bit different and surprise people? I have always loved playing, even when I was trying to be clever in the darkroom -and usually failing! It all helps to keep the brain going for longer. |
Oct 19th |
| 32 |
Oct 24 |
Reply |
Thanks. I hadn't really noticed the building but it does look better without it. |
Oct 19th |
| 32 |
Oct 24 |
Reply |
Yes, I love 'playing' with alternative uses for pictures. My club members know that weird photos in competitions probably originate with me. Keep experimenting! |
Oct 12th |
| 32 |
Oct 24 |
Reply |
We do, but that is for wildlife, not inanimate objects! |
Oct 11th |
| 32 |
Oct 24 |
Comment |
I actually prefer the colour version. The neck feathers seem to have lost their softness in the mono and I really like the colouring of the bird matching the colouring of the grasses. I'm like you as I've never managed to do birds in flight . However we have just bought a new version of our camera and it is supposed to enable one to follow birds in flight easily. So watch this space! I suspect it will take a lot of practice to get it right. I do like this bird in its habitat and it could do well in competitions but leave it is colour please. |
Oct 10th |
| 32 |
Oct 24 |
Comment |
I agree - it is a different sort of chain with the twisted links, I wanted to crop much of the area above the hook so that it didn't detract from the chain - so a tighter crop to reflect that you have had to crop the bottom off. I would also crop off some from the left. That emphasises the chain and also leaves negative space to the right. I think the black at the bottom provides a stopper so it doesn't bother me. |
Oct 10th |
 |
| 32 |
Oct 24 |
Comment |
I agree with Wes -it looks better in colour. This may be because the original has more delicate colouring and lacks contrast so when converted , the petals of the flower and the spiky bits start to merge into the leaves. There is too much similarity between them. So better to keep in colour and remember what a delightful flower it is. |
Oct 10th |
| 32 |
Oct 24 |
Comment |
They both could do very well. The colour has vibrance and I think the face is better because it is brighter. However I also like the mono - as you say it gives a feel of determination and grit. I think the left side (as you view it) of his face is a bit dark round the eyes and on my monitor, the hat is starting to merge into the background, so maybe it needs tweaking a little. |
Oct 10th |
| 32 |
Oct 24 |
Comment |
This made me smile! It is such a different concept - to create a landscape with the bodies. However it is clearly NOT a landscape as the bottoms are so smooth and circular! It is a very interesting photo. I'm not sure about the area which goes up on the right hand edge. It is higher than on the left and the blend into the body below is not as good. I think it would be better removed. I do like the addition of the clouds to give verisimilitude. This sort of creative image is a style I like. |
Oct 10th |
| 32 |
Oct 24 |
Reply |
The problem with that tight a crop was that I liked the dark base to the picture because it balanced the dark trees at the top, although I agree that there is probably too much white on the right hand side. |
Oct 10th |
| 32 |
Oct 24 |
Reply |
Thanks Steve. It can be a very personal choice where to crop and I often try lots of different possibilities. |
Oct 10th |
5 comments - 7 replies for Group 32
|
5 comments - 7 replies Total
|
