|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 32 |
Jan 26 |
Reply |
I agree that it is better to have a bit more space in front of her foot so maybe I should leave the arm of the couch in. |
Jan 29th |
| 32 |
Jan 26 |
Reply |
Thanks. It seems to be well received here. |
Jan 16th |
| 32 |
Jan 26 |
Comment |
I noticed that Tom sharpened with AI sharpen, but if you are going to use this image or any other then AI cannot be used. At the moment AI is a no-no, however small the use. I don't know how judges will know if it has been used and I suspect a couple of years down the line, it will be used frequently without any fuss but at present, the powers that be don't allow it. |
Jan 16th |
| 32 |
Jan 26 |
Reply |
Yes- what a good idea -import a deer or a moose just emerging, startled from the woodland. |
Jan 15th |
| 32 |
Jan 26 |
Reply |
I didn't pick up the shadow from the truck but no shadows from the diffuse light on the building but Somdutt is right -there will be people who notice and criticise! |
Jan 15th |
| 32 |
Jan 26 |
Reply |
I thought the larger aperture would give a slightly softer background so she would stand out better. I could have tried both apertures because it was well lit. She was wearing net gloves which explains the darker hands.
You are both right- I need to lighten the face and darken the shoulder and legs. |
Jan 15th |
| 32 |
Jan 26 |
Reply |
I love the shot but my mind also said 'how easy for a rhino to not see you and step on you!' |
Jan 15th |
| 32 |
Jan 26 |
Reply |
Yes your sky is better than mine ever was but I still like my more contrasty effect at the bottom, but we always have a different look to our photos, don't we? |
Jan 14th |
| 32 |
Jan 26 |
Comment |
What an odd image. As you say, the statue appears to be trying to hold up the branch. However, there are two parts to this -the bit below the branch and then the bit above. I would have cropped through the branch I think though then it isn't as obvious that it is a low hanging branch. The texture is good on both branch and statue. |
Jan 9th |
| 32 |
Jan 26 |
Comment |
second try with curves |
Jan 9th |
 |
| 32 |
Jan 26 |
Comment |
I can't see much effect of infra red on the finished image. usually the foliage goes very pale when taken in camera. i tried the infrared filter in color efex and got much the same as you but I tweaked the sliders and got more contrast with a gleam on the water, although the sky went completely white. However I got the same effect by just using curves on your mono. I think it needs more separation between the grey tones as it looks a bit muddy but maybe mine are too contrasty. |
Jan 9th |
 |
| 32 |
Jan 26 |
Comment |
I think this works really well. You've nailed the separation and brought out the texture beautifully. As a portrait it is super but viewers are never going to appreciate that it isn't a zoo shot! There is nothing to show it is a wild animals in it's natural habitat. It should score highly in an animal portrait or a mono comp but might not get anywhere in a nature section. I still think you were very brave to be out of the truck with rhinos around! |
Jan 9th |
| 32 |
Jan 26 |
Comment |
I agree that they are beautiful trees but both in colour and mono, there is no point of interest for the eye to settle, so it is probably better in colour because then you are concentrating on that. The separation between the three layers works well, but my eye still wanders. The foreground trees have gone almost silvery so they are lovely. It is one of those photos that you go 'Yes, lovely, but...', which is annoying. It is probably one which I would print big and hang on my wall and appreciate but wouldn't get anywhere in a competition. |
Jan 9th |
| 32 |
Jan 26 |
Comment |
I think you've done very well with thee composite image as the two elements fit well together and it isn't obvious that they started out as two photos. I'm not sure why you ended up with so many layers-was each layer for each small alteration?
I did find my eye swapping between the building and the truck -and not quite knowing which was the focus point. This may be because the shack is lighter in overall tone than the truck. I wondered whether the building and sky could do with being more contrasty. However the only real criticism I have is that there is a very bright white area just to the right of the picture at the bottom of the clouds which I think should be darkened considerably.
It is a successful composite. Well done! It works both in colour and in mono. |
Jan 9th |
7 comments - 7 replies for Group 32
|
7 comments - 7 replies Total
|
