|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 5 |
Jul 19 |
Comment |
Beautiful image; I like the color harmony, texture, detail and composition. Very well presented. |
Jul 19th |
1 comment - 0 replies for Group 5
|
| 6 |
Jul 19 |
Comment |
Lovely image |
Jul 19th |
1 comment - 0 replies for Group 6
|
| 25 |
Jul 19 |
Comment |
Nice detail and color. Very nice image. |
Jul 19th |
1 comment - 0 replies for Group 25
|
| 35 |
Jul 19 |
Comment |
I like your image. The tonality is lovely. My only thought, is the leaves both in the foreground and, especially the background, don't seem have the same clarity as in the original image. |
Jul 19th |
1 comment - 0 replies for Group 35
|
| 44 |
Jul 19 |
Comment |
Beautiful image. |
Jul 19th |
1 comment - 0 replies for Group 44
|
| 52 |
Jul 19 |
Reply |
Trash bin is pretty drastic, I think. |
Jul 15th |
| 52 |
Jul 19 |
Comment |
Thanks for the comment and suggestions. |
Jul 15th |
| 52 |
Jul 19 |
Comment |
Nicely done. I have no suggestions. Run with it as is. Well presented. |
Jul 13th |
| 52 |
Jul 19 |
Comment |
Really nice capture. I agree with Mike that you could tone down the highlight at the center of flower. Well done. |
Jul 13th |
| 52 |
Jul 19 |
Comment |
Wonderful image, Tom. To enhance, I suggest, adjusting the water tilt and burn slightly the left side of the frame. Again, very nicely seen and presented. |
Jul 13th |
| 52 |
Jul 19 |
Reply |
Mike, Thanks for the texture addition suggestion. |
Jul 13th |
| 52 |
Jul 19 |
Comment |
Lisa, I like the composition, clarity and sharpness of the original image as well as in the edited version. I find though in the edited version the flower lost some bright softness that was so appealing in the original. I tend toward the original with edits that tonally controlled the leaves, left the flower alone except for some spot healing that I see in the edited version. |
Jul 13th |
| 52 |
Jul 19 |
Comment |
The scene is nicely composed and I prefer the original for cloud tonality, color and texture. The clouds could have contrast in the original added. I believe in the original the clouds color work much more naturally. Perhaps a bit more tone curve in the original and add a slight vignette. I find the edited version far to bright in the foreground and not quite as magical as the original. |
Jul 13th |
| 52 |
Jul 19 |
Comment |
The butterfly is lovely and well presented exclusive of the two distracting blurred branches, upper left and lower right. Perhaps with very careful use of the lasso tools you might be able to eliminate them and subdue the areas left behind. I say only because I have seen folks that can do that. That is outside my comfort or interest zone. |
Jul 13th |
7 comments - 2 replies for Group 52
|
| 64 |
Jul 19 |
Reply |
Thanks for the comments, everyone. |
Jul 23rd |
| 64 |
Jul 19 |
Comment |
Lovely image. The tonality and manner of precessing gives us a nice image to look at, scene to feel and think about. I think Jerry has a nice suggestion to crop more of the sky out and while this is nice pano crop, I think you could have other images which cropped it more for a regular landscape say 13-19 view. I like it lot. |
Jul 13th |
| 64 |
Jul 19 |
Comment |
Stuart, this is very nice. I agree with Jerry. It has an IR tonality. Well done. |
Jul 13th |
| 64 |
Jul 19 |
Comment |
I like the image, Abhijeet. I works for me. Very nicely presented. Both color and monochrome works nicely and have different feeling, but are quite lovely. |
Jul 13th |
| 64 |
Jul 19 |
Comment |
It works nicely Stan both the original and monochrome. My only nit, is pretty minor, I would prefer absolute symmetry. I say that understanding position in a busy environment might not be readily available to get the pews and columns to match the right and left frame exactly. Regardless, it is very nice image. |
Jul 13th |
| 64 |
Jul 19 |
Comment |
I like both images. Well done. I particularly like your choice for the vintage monochrome presentation. |
Jul 13th |
| 64 |
Jul 19 |
Comment |
I like the image very much. My only suggestion is to open the shadows slightly on the supporting beam. |
Jul 13th |
6 comments - 1 reply for Group 64
|
18 comments - 3 replies Total
|