|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 83 |
May 23 |
Comment |
Michael, thank you for you comments, and thoughtful critique and suggestion. |
May 27th |
| 83 |
May 23 |
Comment |
Lance, if you would, please talk about the hexagonal shapes present in the photo. I see that as well occasionally, and I assume it is the reaction of the sunlight passing through the lens at a certain angle as a result of the crystalline structure of their glass. In photos, is that removable and, if it is, on a finished product, should it be. |
May 8th |
| 83 |
May 23 |
Reply |
Oh, yes I see. |
May 7th |
| 83 |
May 23 |
Reply |
I was finally able to make a copy of your photo and in doing so took the liberty to crop it a bit to demonstrate what I thought was a more targeted view of your bridge. Without so much vegetation on the left, it seems to me to be a more interesting photo, but I do realize that beauty, as well in interest, is in the eye of the beholder. The crystal clear clarity of the scene is wonderful, and old bridges like this certainly carry a great deal of nostalgia. |
May 6th |
 |
| 83 |
May 23 |
Comment |
Margaret, Is it possible to show us the two photos you used, just of curiosity sake? |
May 6th |
| 83 |
May 23 |
Comment |
Lance, luckily for me, I only had to cross a ditch to get far enough into the field to get the scene I was looking for. As far as camera dynamics, I was not as thoughtful about that as I have become since joining this group. I knew I wanted as great a dof as I could get, and since it was not a very bright day it made sense to boost the ISO to get the exposure I wanted. I did take several shot with this being the one I liked the most. I think the exposure I got in this photo added a bit to the sense of isolation you feel during a winter storm in a wilderness setting that I was looking for. |
May 5th |
| 83 |
May 23 |
Comment |
Thanks Lance, interesting perspective. |
May 4th |
| 83 |
May 23 |
Comment |
Lance, I like the picture, in general, but I'm not sure I like the intensity of the sun's rays coming through the canopy. The question I must ask is are you attempting to highlight the tree, the sun's rays, or how they interact with each other? This old tree is just a beautiful specimen of climax growth in a mature forest and seems overshadowed by the light from the near noon sun. I realizing that my comments are totally subjective, but, to me, it would be better if the rays were more subtle than they are so the tree could be in more balance with each other allowing the tree to "shine." |
May 2nd |
| 83 |
May 23 |
Comment |
Jon, I think it is a great photo. The only thing I would have done differently is I wouldn't have included quite as much of the vegetation. I think that is so thick that it nearly completely dominate the whole picture. |
May 2nd |
| 83 |
May 23 |
Comment |
Overall, I like the photo. The fact that the clouds are a bit blurred giving a sense of movement, almost makes it seem as though the sky was pasted there from a different or similar photo: It just seems out of context with the rest of the photo. Crystal clear in all respects except the clouds. It would be interesting to me to see the same photo with the clouds frozen in time like the the rest of the photo. I might also have taken off a bit more of the foreground, but that is purely a sense of taste on my part, which undoubtedly, can be said about the whole comment. |
May 1st |
8 comments - 2 replies for Group 83
|
8 comments - 2 replies Total
|
