|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 32 |
Apr 26 |
Comment |
One thing I do notice is the 'fuzziness' of the film base -we get so much sharper images now digitally. |
Apr 17th |
| 32 |
Apr 26 |
Comment |
I like both the colour and the mono versions. I agree that the feather is better removed so no good for nature unfortunately. The water drop is great but for some reason the bubble on the drop that has already landed seems to disappear in the mono one. The detail of the plumage is fine and the reflection is good too. I would expect it to be ruffled and the circular lines help to keep the eye on the bird. Good one! |
Apr 17th |
| 32 |
Apr 26 |
Reply |
I hadn't thought about interior access. Ed's adding some more to thee top solves the problem of being too close to the edge and the vignette helps too. |
Apr 10th |
| 32 |
Apr 26 |
Reply |
Yes I liked the hands. The only problem was making sure I got them in focus as well as her face. I have photos where her hands are not in the frame as well. |
Apr 10th |
| 32 |
Apr 26 |
Comment |
Yes I should have done Tom's wife taught me that and I forgot to do it. |
Apr 7th |
| 32 |
Apr 26 |
Reply |
Yes please |
Apr 6th |
| 32 |
Apr 26 |
Comment |
I agree that a figure on the stairs would be good.
Is it possible to eradicate the slight 'bloom' which shows up as green on the original? It means the conversion has a sort of fuzzy look to it -yes it looks old but I itch to increase the contrast and lose the greyish midtones. |
Apr 6th |
| 32 |
Apr 26 |
Comment |
I'd have been there with you taking the close-ups of the wheels and every other bit of the machines. They have obviously cleaned up the rust etc so everything looks shiny and new. I like the sharp focus at the foreground of the shot and the diagonal line you chose. |
Apr 6th |
| 32 |
Apr 26 |
Comment |
I agree that the shirt is totally wrong! I also wish people could manage without modern glasses! I like the expression on his face and that he's not actually looking at you so it becomes a candid shot.
I agree that the soft sepia is a good choice. |
Apr 6th |
| 32 |
Apr 26 |
Comment |
This is a super record of the area and the contrast looks about right. I agree with Som that the peak is rather close to the top edge. i would not remove the shed and it's bits as it actually provides a focus for the eye. I think you may have lost some detail in the very bright rock faces. It's a very interesting landscape- studying it I found all sorts of bits carved out of the rocks and I wondered how they were accessed. I presume they haven't been eroded since the climate is dry so they've not been washed away. |
Apr 6th |
| 32 |
Apr 26 |
Comment |
I started my comment and then checked with the bulletin board and forgot to save it! So I prefer the mono though I think the colour would make a good portfolio as well. The 3 chasing each other seem to have lost too much detail in the breast area so the necks and head are not connected to the body. If you could retain even just a single line then it would do fine. I like the difference in this one as the others are usually just 2 birds dancing. |
Apr 6th |
| 32 |
Apr 26 |
Reply |
One way to do this is to use the Bulletin board at the top and tell the group what you want to have help with. |
Apr 6th |
| 32 |
Apr 26 |
Reply |
Yes, that's good. Thanks. |
Apr 4th |
| 32 |
Apr 26 |
Reply |
Yes I agree that a rim light would be good and we do actually have another light but we need to buy a bulb for it-what a shameful admission! We must do that before we have another go. We all were amazed at the make-up and clothing and very appreciative of her willingness to be our model. |
Apr 4th |
| 32 |
Apr 26 |
Reply |
In fact the shot was very dark when I looked later and I had to lighten the whole image so I could easily increase the contrast. I'll have a go. |
Apr 4th |
8 comments - 7 replies for Group 32
|
8 comments - 7 replies Total
|
