|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 19 |
Dec 21 |
Comment |
Thanks for telling us the sky is replaced in Photoshop, I think that explained what I was concerned about. I don't understand why the buildings on the left shoreline are blue. That doesn't seem real to me. When you replace a sky in photoshop with some settings it adjusts the rest of the image to the new sky. I am guessing something like that happened, Photoshop seems to make it easier to use one of their skies than one of your own. I would try to have a group of my own skies to use instead of theirs. Then it is all my own content.
Tell me if I am wrong and that blue is the true color. |
Dec 16th |
| 19 |
Dec 21 |
Comment |
You have the water drops sharp and the goldfish is close to sharp. I think having the stem holding up the goldfish being soft is a plus and the soft background is wonderful. Generally this is hard to accomplish in garden shots.
If you were trying for a very limited depth of field, that is what you accomplished. I think the 1/500 second should be adequate to prevent camera shake with modern cameras and unless there was noticeable wind that should be fast enough hand held. At the same time unless you felt you needed it for limited depth of field, the ISO 100 is lower than you probably needed to prevent noise with a modern camera. ISO 200 would allow either a faster shutter speed or closing down the lens a stop for more depth of field.
Frankly, I like the image you achieved. |
Dec 16th |
| 19 |
Dec 21 |
Comment |
I like the image because it is so different than the typical image of Mesa Arch. The colors are excellent. I suspect you shot a bunch of shots. If so, you might consider one where there isn't an intersection of those background rock columns with the bottom of the arch. In any case, this is an excellent shot of Mesa Arch. |
Dec 15th |
| 19 |
Dec 21 |
Comment |
Amazing, you took a picture with an iPhone with a very small sensor, cropped so tight you threw away about 90% of the pixels and you still have a good image. I think I would bring up the left side of the face as Norm suggested. I have mixed emotions about the straightening suggestion. Yes, the horizon is not straight, but it is not very obvious and it would change the composition significantly to straighten it. I would say, try it, you may like it. |
Dec 14th |
| 19 |
Dec 21 |
Comment |
One of those images that gives you no choice but to try to figure out the story. All the elements are there, his backpack, his unusual pose with his legs hanging off the wall and his arms outstretched. His takeout lunch. What is he contemplating. I suspect this is what made you capture the image and makes all those who see it take time to give it some thought. That all says a good image. At the same time, I agree with Norm, I would take out the bit of land. A small crop or a little content aware fill and a potential distraction from the story is gone. |
Dec 14th |
| 19 |
Dec 21 |
Reply |
This is a wonderful image and it brings up an interesting subject. We can achieve the depth of field we want by closing down the aperture, but with modern technology we can also achieve it by focus stacking. Using an f-stop with narrow depth of field makes the background soft, but then stacking the number of images to result in all of the flower being in focus results in all of the flower being in focus without improving the focus on the background, in this case the wall. At this point you can even stack the photos in camera with some models, generally Olympus is considered a leader in this. I believe this is also possible with some smart phones so you only end up with one perfectly stacked selectively focused image. If you go to this website, https://brucetaubert.smugmug.com/Galleries, and click on the galleries that include the word "stacked" you will see wonderful examples of the results with an Olympus camera. If you go to the gallery of "Common Loon 2019" you will see a series of Bruce's pictures taken when we were together shooting loons, in this case Bruce was using a Canon camera with a fuji 150 to 600 lens as I recall. |
Dec 6th |
| 19 |
Dec 21 |
Reply |
Shirley was the one that noticed what the light was doing to the sand at our feet. I need to credit her for that. |
Dec 6th |
5 comments - 2 replies for Group 19
|
| 64 |
Dec 21 |
Comment |
I like the relatively fast shutter speed which shows the wave detail. I think your monochrome conversion with the light tones pretty much throughout works very well. Good contrast where it should be in the eye, beak and the legs. Bird and waves well positioned in the frame with the breaking wave in the foreground and the next rise making a nice background behind the bird. with additional contrast behind the head where it works well. |
Dec 16th |
| 64 |
Dec 21 |
Comment |
Sorry I am late. A lot of good comments have been made. My take is perhaps a bit different. I fully agree about toning down the path. I think I would brighten the smoke and leave the tree dark, maybe even darker for more contrast. The fireman is very well positioned in that dark area for good contrast. I also wish it was easier to understand that he is a fireman. It looks like there might be some flames behind him, I wonder if that could be made more obvious if that is what they are. |
Dec 16th |
| 64 |
Dec 21 |
Comment |
I like the color version, but the mono version is great also. In the mono version some of the black background has spots of near white. You might consider a selection of the black and take those white specs and things down a bit. In any case, this is well done and classic Jerry Funk. |
Dec 16th |
| 64 |
Dec 21 |
Comment |
I started out considering it a very compelling abstract, but after enjoying it, the background told me what I was looking at. Frankly, I welcomed that information. I like it as it is. I could see selecting bqckground and perhaps reducing contrast or something, but I like it telling me what I am looking at after I study it. |
Dec 16th |
| 64 |
Dec 21 |
Comment |
I think this is a great capture even if they are on the wrong side of the street. I thought you were driving in rain, but you didn't mention that, so it is just motion blur. However it was done, it is well done. A real keeper. |
Dec 16th |
| 64 |
Dec 21 |
Comment |
I find the mono version a little hard to understand, I prefer the color version. I think the composition would improve if something unexpected had been in the image someplace. Perhaps a seal or an unusual chuck of ice. |
Dec 16th |
6 comments - 0 replies for Group 64
|
11 comments - 2 replies Total
|
