|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 8 |
Aug 21 |
Reply |
Sorry, I was referring the the attached work of art, which your image strikingly reminds me of. Looks like a coincidence. It is an ancient Minoan fresco of non-violent bull leaping by gymnasts. |
Aug 11th |
 |
| 8 |
Aug 21 |
Comment |
This looks like it represents an ancient bull-leaping work of art. Is that it? |
Aug 9th |
1 comment - 1 reply for Group 8
|
| 9 |
Aug 21 |
Comment |
Hello John, this is a stunning subject matter, and I am sure you are right to compare it to the AF chapel.
Comments:
1. Your finished image and the original are different shots--there is a cross visible in the finished shot, not present in the original image.
2. I think you excessively changed the perspective beyond vertical.
2a. I prefer such upward-angle shots to keep a little of the "soaring upward" perspective, because that is your actual viewpoint.
2b. In this case, the perspective alteration makes the viewer feel like they are looking straight on at the organ balcony--a view that is not physically possible unless you are standing in midair above the nave.
3. I think you could have shot at 1/200 or even 1/100 and reduced the ISO. |
Aug 9th |
1 comment - 0 replies for Group 9
|
| 17 |
Aug 21 |
Comment |
Hi Marisa,
All photographers, experienced or not, struggle with "seeing" what they shoot. As you look through your viewfinder or at your screen, ask yourself if what you see is a picture you want to capture. |
Aug 8th |
1 comment - 0 replies for Group 17
|
| 20 |
Aug 21 |
Comment |
Quite interesting and creative. I took them to be a married couple that were having trouble communicating. A title might be, "I can't hear you!" or "That isn't what I meant." |
Aug 8th |
1 comment - 0 replies for Group 20
|
| 24 |
Aug 21 |
Comment |
Everything is fine in this shot, and your colleagues' comments are helpful.
It is very hard to get a good shot of ballet performers in actual performance. You did very well in this one, but the ballerina's tutu half obscures her partner's face. In such a lift, this might be unavoidable, so I don't know if you could have done any better. |
Aug 8th |
1 comment - 0 replies for Group 24
|
| 29 |
Aug 21 |
Comment |
Very pleasing shot and largely successful technique. Gunter has the point--the top half has sky spots showing through and when blurred these turn into distinct white bars showing the duration of your deliberate camera movement. But in the bottom half, that effects is invisible because of the density of the trees. Nothing wrong with the top half, but not consistent with the bottom half. You might try the same thing again, shooting against a full forest. |
Aug 14th |
1 comment - 0 replies for Group 29
|
| 30 |
Aug 21 |
Reply |
Just guessing, but it looks like the light below the table is falling on a different, less reflective, surface.
But I was commenting on the light falling above the table and behind the couple (brighter), because the beams are expanding from their inception in the narrow slats of the blinds, and I think that light is bright enough to blow out to pure white in the image. |
Aug 11th |
| 30 |
Aug 21 |
Comment |
You were alert to capture an extremely interesting light situation. You correctly described it as "light and shadow patterns on the wall," whereas your colleagues said they were light beams. In this situation, the light beams are invisible, there being no dust in the air to show them up, and they only manifest as light and shadow on the wall. The patterns are brighter between the two people because of the expanding angle giving a wider light pattern further from the blinds. You can reduce that brightness if you like, but I am not for that.
Compositionally, I have comments as follows:
1. There is a gentle atmosphere in the air in the color version that does not come through in the monochrome--I am sorry to see that lost.
2. Although you captured a great opportunity, I am sorry to see that the light/shadow play did not fall on the two people in the shot. I know you could not control that. |
Aug 8th |
1 comment - 1 reply for Group 30
|
| 32 |
Aug 21 |
Reply |
Thanks, Jennifer. This was one time I should have studied the composition and planned the image. I shot on automatic and my Canon G10 selected f/4. But I have four f-stops from 2.8 to 8.0, and I could have chosen aperture priority and set f/8. You ideas sound good all around. We go to Seattle at least twice a year, so I will have another chance at shooting around Lake Washington. |
Aug 23rd |
| 32 |
Aug 21 |
Comment |
Here is my suggestion for a slight perspective "skew" on the right side. It is a compromise. |
Aug 16th |
 |
| 32 |
Aug 21 |
Reply |
Yes, good advice. Grab shots without thinking don't work. I did not emulate you, who plan very carefully. |
Aug 14th |
| 32 |
Aug 21 |
Comment |
Jennifer, this NEVER comes up in your photography, but Wes has the point. Because of your upwards view of the mountain, you are getting the same problem that architectural shots have when tilting the camera up--convergence of vertical parallel lines. This is actually what your eye sees, but your brain filters out in real life. I would not recommend removing it entirely. I LIKE the feeling of upward soaring given by leaving some vertical convergence in the image. I suggest applying a little perspective alteration using PS skew, only on the right side. I am away on vacation now, but I can do a sample this weekend when I am back home.
Wes's suggestion looks great, and I will send mine soon.
For all the rest, I think the tree line is striking in its whiteness, and I like it. Everything is SOooo sharp. |
Aug 12th |
| 32 |
Aug 21 |
Comment |
Contrast looks good to me. I also would have like to see a bit of the other eye. |
Aug 8th |
| 32 |
Aug 21 |
Comment |
Looks great, as other have said, especially the stone texture.
I have a comment about the perspective angle. Because you were shooting at standing height (I think), the image shows the flat treads of the lower flight of stone steps, but the second flight of flat treads is not visible because your angle compresses them away. I only know they are there because the original with the railing makes it clear that there are rising steps with flat treads there. My suggestion would be to shoot from a higher angle--tripod at maximum extension, or hand-held from above your head. What do you think? |
Aug 8th |
| 32 |
Aug 21 |
Comment |
What a great accident to find this gift from nature sitting on your light box. |
Aug 8th |
| 32 |
Aug 21 |
Comment |
This is quite original the way you have done this, as others have mentioned.
My only comments are to agree with Diana's remarks, and perhaps to wonder how this would look with a bit of a turn of the head to catch a bit more of the orb of the other eye? |
Aug 8th |
| 32 |
Aug 21 |
Comment |
For me? Just for me? Wow.
I like the stem placement, but I also think the monochrome needs more contrast, and the color version is very attractive. I see you gave a little space on the right, and although nothing is moving anywhere in that direction, it seems appropriate just because the seed head is leaning in that direction. |
Aug 8th |
| 32 |
Aug 21 |
Reply |
Good hint about using the foreground branch to point to the mountain--here I just sort of framed the mountain. As Ata pointed out, I did not shoot with sufficient depth of field to include both the foreground branch and the mountain. I have to plan these shot better--this was grabbed in a rush while we were at a picnic. Nobody likes the grassy foreground, and now I don't either. |
Aug 8th |
| 32 |
Aug 21 |
Reply |
Thanks, Wes, I will get rid of the bather and show another version later this month. |
Aug 4th |
| 32 |
Aug 21 |
Reply |
Thanks, Tom, those are good suggestions. I will try that and show it again later this month. |
Aug 4th |
| 32 |
Aug 21 |
Reply |
Thanks, Lynne. I was trying for whatever foreground vegetation was available, but I don't think this works. |
Aug 2nd |
| 32 |
Aug 21 |
Reply |
Thanks, Ata, I think your suggestions are right on. I have four f-stops to play with on my camera, so I could have done better. |
Aug 2nd |
7 comments - 7 replies for Group 32
|
| 34 |
Aug 21 |
Reply |
Alan, always great to chat with you on the subject matter!
We have a summer home in Turkey walking distance from the Aegean Sea, where the waves dance in the sun like diamonds for our daily swims. We have made it there for summer vacations for 20 years, but missed last year and this year due to COVID-19.
"Aslan" is the Turkish word for lion. Remember the name of the lion in C.S. Lewis's Chronicles of Narnia? Lewis used life to create a character name in his stories. (My wife just told me that "Kaplan" is tiger.) |
Aug 14th |
| 34 |
Aug 21 |
Comment |
Hello Alan,
The discussion so far is about your image, but nothing on the question you ask about life<-->imitating<-->art.
First off, the juxtaposition of the viewers viewing themselves viewing art clearly asks that question. I interpret this also as an internal process that we can all experience viewing art, as we say to ourselves in a museum, "here I am viewing this artwork."
However, I think the question is an oversimplification of the complex relationships between the many arts and life. For example, I have read that Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet actually taught western civilization the notion of romantic love. So life imitated art in that case, if you accept the notion. Certain novels created social and political movements. Many painting and photographs delved into life and created pressures to change how people lived. The swirl of interactions is like a grand explosion of influences.
Can this apply to your image? I note that you did not choose an infinite regress--that would probably be trite. You might experiment with the viewers in your image being in different positions from their internal poses. What do you think of that?
Also, please cite the names of the Tate works that you have shown, just for my interest. Thanks for that and thanks for a very stimulating image.
Oh, I am not sure about the train. |
Aug 14th |
1 comment - 1 reply for Group 34
|
| 36 |
Aug 21 |
Reply |
Yes, I understand about the light situation.
Someday, I would love to wander your way and take a shooting hike with you. I was walk training last fall 3-5 miles in my neighborhood, but I had better scale that up before I try it on the trail. I can turn towards home in a few blocks on the neighborhood walks, but I would not want to take to the trail until I am comfortable with 10 miles. |
Aug 14th |
| 36 |
Aug 21 |
Comment |
Hi Larry,
This is an interesting study in photographing a small falls. It is successfully intimate, dampness evident everywhere, and your 10-second exposure, as you say, magnifies the appearance of the flow, although I do feel the loss of being able to see actual clots of water falling. I prefer the main image a great deal, compositionally.
But...still with the bears, and now coyotes! |
Aug 14th |
1 comment - 1 reply for Group 36
|
| 47 |
Aug 21 |
Comment |
Your model's pose is perfectly arranged, but I can't get my head to find agreement between a pose that modestly covers all the intimate parts of the model's body but boldly shows the face, as well as the hair in informal arrangement. I would have found the hair gathered at the nape of the neck better, and the face turned away.
Also, your model's face shows discomfort of some sort, or a strange intensity not consistent with the graceful pose. Hope you don't mind my reaction--it's personal--set it aside if you see nothing in it. |
Aug 13th |
1 comment - 0 replies for Group 47
|
| 51 |
Aug 21 |
Comment |
The effect you have created of a night or dusk shot is very successful, with so many tones from near black to near white, all with good detail. Your colleagues are urging you to do a book of alley sights. I also hope you do so. Several others in the other Digital Dialogue groups shoot alleys--if you browse around the other groups each month you may see some. |
Aug 7th |
1 comment - 0 replies for Group 51
|
| 57 |
Aug 21 |
Comment |
Bob has given excellent suggestions. I might add that this shot looks to me a bit overexposed--deeper color saturation might look better. Also, what about trying it with the cooking tools (knife, cutting board, etc.), and itty bitty pyramids of the herbs and spices?
Lots to organize. This is not a simple project you undertook. |
Aug 13th |
1 comment - 0 replies for Group 57
|
| 62 |
Aug 21 |
Reply |
LuAnn, thanks for the explanation. I get the idea. |
Aug 8th |
| 62 |
Aug 21 |
Comment |
This is a really great building shot, especially the way you bought out the grit. My only suggestion is to revisit the location when there is sunlight casting diagonal shadows on the building--if the geometry of the situation permits that. |
Aug 7th |
| 62 |
Aug 21 |
Comment |
Very good eye. Great cropping and finishing. Your group has good comments. I might add that I think this is also a fine "negative space" composition--am I right about that? Does this qualify as "negative space?" |
Aug 7th |
2 comments - 1 reply for Group 62
|
| 64 |
Aug 21 |
Reply |
I am not at all sure. Perhaps perfectly solid black, whereas the curved area has texture and is not totally black. I might experiment.
Thanks for the Levitas reference. Not related to me. We call ourselves Leviti, in the plural--just a Latin joke. My name was created on Ellis Island as a vague sound-alike of my paternal grandfather's Eastern European name, Lewitz, pronounced Loo-vitz. |
Aug 12th |
| 64 |
Aug 21 |
Comment |
You did a very interesting thing with the pointillism effect, although I think I would prefer solid black.
I think the keystone effect is good the way it is because that is what your eye sees, and it give a sense of the building soaring upwards from your point of view. Try altering the perspective if you like, but that may have distortion problems (which I don't like). |
Aug 7th |
1 comment - 1 reply for Group 64
|
| 71 |
Aug 21 |
Comment |
Hello John, this is a fine shot, but I don't care for the grassy foreground--it has little excitement compared to the fantastic clouds you captured. Would it work if you cropped out almost all of the grassy foreground, leaving only the gentle hillsides with dark trees?
On the other hand, what if you revisited this place and lowered your point of view to include flowers within two or three feet of the lens? You would need f/16 for this. What do you think?
I can't say if any of this would be better--I am only asking your opinion about such options. Thanks for listening and responding. |
Aug 13th |
1 comment - 0 replies for Group 71
|
| 74 |
Aug 21 |
Comment |
Hello Ata, what a pleasant shot to see of your travels. I see your group has made good comments. We have a close friend who is Norwegian, so we hope some day to see sights like this ourselves. |
Aug 7th |
1 comment - 0 replies for Group 74
|
| 78 |
Aug 21 |
Comment |
Helen raises an interesting point. Should this tell a story? I am guessing you shot this as an image of tranquility. Therein lies a duality: tell a story, or communicate tranquility. I suppose you could try for both, as with a monk meditating in front of his monastery, but I generally feel the two approaches go in different directions. I like this image just as it is, communicating the tranquility (even meditative focus) of both flame and water. But if you want to pursue Helen's suggestion, you could add in a couple of birds sitting on the top corners of the lantern??? |
Aug 13th |
| 78 |
Aug 21 |
Comment |
My wife and I had a day of travel on the backwaters of Kerala some years ago. How I wish we had stayed at this resort--it is just beautiful.
I like very much the point of view from inside the docking area. |
Aug 7th |
2 comments - 0 replies for Group 78
|
| 81 |
Aug 21 |
Comment |
I think Angela's suggestion to crop to just the bottom two windows is excellent. I would include the bit of tree branch now sticking into the left window area--as a sort of enigma asking to viewer to wonder what is beyond the neat limits of the two windows. |
Aug 13th |
1 comment - 0 replies for Group 81
|
| 94 |
Aug 21 |
Comment |
Yes, please show the original and tell us about your adventure in LR so we can all learn from your experience. |
Aug 13th |
1 comment - 0 replies for Group 94
|
28 comments - 13 replies Total
|
