|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 49 |
Aug 24 |
Reply |
Hi Craig, I believe everything on the internet is sRGB, so regardless of how you process, when you upload - it'll be converted. I too work in Pro, but always convert to sRGB myself so that I can review it before it gets out into the wild. |
Aug 22nd |
| 49 |
Aug 24 |
Reply |
Man... wish I'd asked before the hours of tinkering! Next time I do this, I'll hit you up Craig, assuming I can remember ;) |
Aug 22nd |
| 49 |
Aug 24 |
Reply |
Thanks Alan, I would have too. A good learning experience for me, I figured I was set w/the f/8, must remember the change of rules when working with that high of a focal length at such a short distance. |
Aug 22nd |
| 49 |
Aug 24 |
Reply |
Thank you Peggy! |
Aug 22nd |
| 49 |
Aug 24 |
Reply |
|
Aug 22nd |
 |
| 49 |
Aug 24 |
Reply |
Good Morning Mark
Thanks for the feedback. Ya'... you can definitely still see it a bit, my minimal photoshop skill on full display ;) For context, here's a copy of the original, as well as a version with no catch light at all. The one I landed on ultimately bugged me the least. |
Aug 22nd |
 |
| 49 |
Aug 24 |
Comment |
Hey Alan
There's a peacefulness about your image that I really like. The sky is awesome, and the scene just feels like a pleasant summer day with a nice breeze blowing. I like your choice of sepia tone too; it goes really well with the wood and overall feel of the image.
Two minor thoughts on adjustments. Clone out that little white thing about mid-way up the image on the far-left hand side (or just pull the crop in from the left) and address that partially visible fence post just below horizon, on the right side of the image.
I MUST get to the Palouse one of these days! |
Aug 18th |
| 49 |
Aug 24 |
Comment |
Hi David
Nice shot man, this is a fun one, and the last thing most folks would think to do with a sunflower! You hear sunflower and you think giant yellow flower - nice work thinking outside the box.
As far as how you cropped in on it, I like your choice to get up close, it's interesting, and almost otherworldly looking.
I guess if I had to offer-up a suggestion, it would be to play with focus stacking next time so you could get those awesome little fuzzies in there as well as those yellow tips that converge on the center.
Thanks for sharing! |
Aug 18th |
| 49 |
Aug 24 |
Comment |
Hi Mark
Nice image! The timing of it with those moving lights working so nicely with your subject, but not covering her face works well. That awesome textured background and hint of another performer on stage add solid interest without being distracting too. This is a small image, so it's hard to zoom in too much, but there appears to be very little noise, which I would imagine could be a problem in a venue like this, which I'm guessing has wildly changing lighting conditions throughout a performance.
As far as suggestions, I'm really not seeing anything jump out me - great work!
|
Aug 18th |
| 49 |
Aug 24 |
Comment |
Hi Craig
Wow, I haven't seen one of these guys before - that's quite the plumage he's got, interesting critter you've captured. The image does feel a little underexposed to me and a touch on the blue side.
|
Aug 18th |
| 49 |
Aug 24 |
Comment |
Hi Tyrah
Nice image! I'm a fan of the blacked-out foreground on Milky Way shots like this. Your shutter speed is just right, you captured a great amount of light but didn't give those stars a chance to start leaving trails.
David's correct about getting the second exposure of the ground itself, but I rarely see those that don't look somewhat artificial, so often go the route you did.
A few thoughts on edits. Clone out that one bright star on the bottom left that's all but touching the ground as well as that object on the left side of the image at the very bottom, just off the ground. I'm not sure what body you're shooting with, but depending on megapixel of your raw files, it's very possible you may be able to coax a bit more color, detail, and contrast out of that night sky. |
Aug 18th |
| 49 |
Aug 24 |
Reply |
Good evening Dave - thanks for taking the time to provide feedback on my image! I would have liked to have seen more of the iris in focus too and you got me thinking. I went out to PhotoPill's depth of field (DOF) calculator https://www.photopills.com/calculators/dof and it turns out that despite being at f/6.3, because I was only about 12" away from Pip's eye, maybe 18", and at 100mm, my overall DOF would have been somewhere between .1 - .24" inches deep!! Good thing eye tracking was on because there's no way I'd have pulled that off free hand 😉
Thanks for the kudos on the Photoshop work, it took ages - I'm glad it looks good to you. Incidentally, I joined the local fair's photography competition this year for the first time and submitted this as one of my images. Would you believe it, it won a blue ribbon! |
Aug 18th |
5 comments - 7 replies for Group 49
|
5 comments - 7 replies Total
|
