|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 35 |
Feb 17 |
Reply |
I was really surprised when Arnold said there were structures like this in part of England. Michigan is a peninsula that was formed from glacial activity, so I thought it was unique! |
Feb 19th |
| 35 |
Feb 17 |
Comment |
I like the contrast between the bright greens and the grays and blacks. Also, the softness in the green area i think is quite lovely. To me, the leading lines seem to take my eye out of the image. I agree with Julie that it needs another element to keep me in the scene. |
Feb 15th |
| 35 |
Feb 17 |
Comment |
To me, this is another very interesting and photogenic structure. I like the leading lines of the shadows in the foreground, and I am glad that the leafy branches do not overlap the spire. I think the antique treatment works well. In my opinion, the contrast could be increased to add impact.
I wish you would tell us more about your choices of ISO, aperture and shutter speed. Also, do you set a custom white balance? More information would help us all learn more about how to create good IR images. |
Feb 15th |
| 35 |
Feb 17 |
Comment |
I agree with the others that I would like to see more foreground. The is a great structure and other than the lack of foreground, you have presented it in a way I find very visually appealing. |
Feb 15th |
| 35 |
Feb 17 |
Reply |
I have been thinking about his since I first read your comment. I went back to look at the original of this image as well as some I shot in color. I think the stones in the church are actually represented here exactly as they appear, I lived in this area for a number of years and saw many structures - including some on our own property - that were made of these round rocks that were left by glacial activity. I guess if one has never seen this kind of construction it might appear that there is too much detail in the stones, but for those of us who are familiar with it, it might look quite natural.
However, I did not notice the halo on the spire, so thanks for pointing it out. |
Feb 15th |
| 35 |
Feb 17 |
Reply |
Thanks, Julie. I will see what I can do with that tree. |
Feb 15th |
| 35 |
Feb 17 |
Comment |
I think there is a great deal to look at in this image. I like where you have placed the structure within the scene. I am not sure the fence in the foreground helps the composition. There are so many different textures here that I feel like it needs to be simplified. Cropping from the bottom to eliminate that fence would create a sort of panorama of the landscape and would, for me, make it more visually appealing. |
Feb 15th |
| 35 |
Feb 17 |
Comment |
I too have only been to the location once (so far), but I know it is quite dramatic. Compositionally, I think you have done quite well. I like the placement of the spire and the balance between sky and rock. My only suggestion would be to work on trying to get more contrast. To me, the blacks do not seem dark enough, nor the whites light enough.
|
Feb 15th |
5 comments - 3 replies for Group 35
|
| 52 |
Feb 17 |
Reply |
You are so right! I can't get any more detail into that wing without making it look really faked no matter what I do. After shooting in Florida for a couple weeks I think my skills have improved but for me it's still low percentage shooting. Thanks for your comments. |
Feb 22nd |
| 52 |
Feb 17 |
Comment |
I find the warm colors in this image appealing and I too like the tight crop. My eye wants to go to the reds and I like that you have positioned them on a diagonal line because I beleive that adds strength to the composition. I agree with Lisa that the upper part of themain flower is a little soft. An easy adjustment that might fix this would be to use the radial filter and move the clarity slider in Lightroom to the right - I would guess not above 15. Other than that I think you have done a fine job with a flower that is often difficult to photograph. |
Feb 12th |
| 52 |
Feb 17 |
Comment |
These creatures are adorable - unless you are a mouse or a lizard I guess. You really nailed this one with that reflection in the eye. I can't see anything I would suggest changing. This just goes to show how patience and persistence can pay off for nature photographers. |
Feb 12th |
| 52 |
Feb 17 |
Comment |
I continue to admire your sense of humor, John. And this is such a unique perspective that your title really works. My bird photographer husband and I go back and forth all the time about images where part of the subject is amputated, so I guess it is a very personal preference, but I would like to see the whole bird. The others have made some editing suggestons which I pretty much agree with. Good job catching this. |
Feb 12th |
| 52 |
Feb 17 |
Comment |
I have seen enough spider images to know how hard it is to present them artistically, but in my opinion you have done so. I like the adjestments Mike has made overall, but like you, I can't make up my mind about the line. It is part of the web, so maybe it should stay. Congrats on seeing this - most of us would have just walked on. |
Feb 12th |
| 52 |
Feb 17 |
Comment |
Congratualtions on this capture - not just one Eagle in flight ,but two! I have been repeatedly watching a B&H video by Arthur Morris and Denise Ippolito on "Bird Photography for the Serios Photographer." They have pretty much convinced me that there are wing positons which are much more artistic than others and this image is a good example of that. When I first looked at it I had a little difficulty finding the head of the bird on the left. It doesn't easily separate from the body and feathers. I am thinking just a little light added there might bring my eye to it more easily. It just drives me crazy to get a great image like this and have an obstuction such as vegitation in the way. The obstruction is, for me, more of a problem on the left than the right. My experience is that it could be removed if done very carefully. I think that would improve the image. |
Feb 12th |
| 52 |
Feb 17 |
Reply |
Thanks everyone. I went back to work. I tried to add a little detail on the edge of the wing on the left. I darkened and slightly blurred the blue water except for the refleciton per Mike's suggestion. Then I gave it a subtle HDR look in OnOne. |
Feb 11th |
 |
| 52 |
Feb 17 |
Comment |
Thanks, Mike. Those are good points. I appreciate the help.
|
Feb 3rd |
6 comments - 2 replies for Group 52
|
11 comments - 5 replies Total
|
