|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 19 |
Aug 23 |
Comment |
Norm is right, true red can be very difficult in an image that is all or mostly red. Our sensors seem to allow the image to not be blown in all colors, but blown just in the red loosing a lot of detail in the flowers. If you watch just the histogram for red, you can see when you start loosing detail. It seems to me you have adequate depth of field at f/3.5, but too much to get the background as soft as I would like. The obvous choice would be to use a longer lens, but that probably will not work because you are probably looking down at the flower and your arms aren't long enough to hold the camera higher. I suspect you did about as well as you could with depth of field without doing something rather extreme. |
Aug 11th |
| 19 |
Aug 23 |
Comment |
Curious, did you enter the image just like it was in the April study group? It was an excellent image, but I like to play with my best ones a bit.
I agree, in my opinion, the bright light must go away. You could crop and still have the hoods of the cars and people but the rays of light would still intrude and be a problem. It is interesting but callenging to take this blue light image but I like the detail that results in the sky. |
Aug 11th |
| 19 |
Aug 23 |
Comment |
Congratulation on demonstrating the value of visualizing what you want and taking the actions to make it happen. You found a perfect little girl for the shot and visualized the value of that wildflower field. This is such a uniform wildflower field not all of us have two neighbors who help us get the perfect shot. |
Aug 11th |
| 19 |
Aug 23 |
Comment |
You didn't provide technical data on how you got the depth of field perfect with a nice soft background and the monarch and flowers sharp and well exposed, but you did it. You positioned yourself for the shot with the flowerss and butterfly in a plane all about the same distance from the lens a testimony to your planning and patience.
We have people along our road planting milkweed for the monarches in the ditch and on their property along with a sign warning not to spray the area. We need more people doing things like this. We also need to protect their winter territory in Mexico, but I think the main problem is our end of the migration. There is an excellent 3D movie of the migration in a butterfly museum in Scotsdale Arizona that covers the migration very well. As I recall it takes more than two generations, perhaps four to complete the migration. Lots of places can significantly impact the process. |
Aug 11th |
| 19 |
Aug 23 |
Comment |
Most would not take the shot with the direct sun throwing the shadows of the window on the subject, but I like the lines that are created making it unique and creative. I agree however that technically the image should improve if you took the ISO down maybe 5 stops to about 400, then the f-stop up a couple stops to about f/11 for depth of field and you should still have plenty of shutter speed probably still not needing a tripod. This should provide a sharper image. Holding up a large white paper or bed sheet to reflect some light from the other side or some other light source would open up the shadows but should not take away the shadow patterns. You might be able to open up the light in the shadows later in processing. I appreciate what you did putting the shadow lines on the vase, very unique and I think it worked well. |
Aug 11th |
| 19 |
Aug 23 |
Comment |
John, you accomplish so much with your photography taking parts of what others would want to take the entire thing, or small things on beaches or whatever. I like the image with all the lines and shapes that seem to take me back and forth between the two passenger compartments. The colors are great on the very nice blue sky. |
Aug 11th |
| 19 |
Aug 23 |
Reply |
It seems like too much for a Photo Travel image, but frankly, the image out of my smart phone was like this. I tried to up the contrast clarity and sharpening a bit so the color did not overwhelm the details, but I think it is still a bit too much. |
Aug 11th |
| 19 |
Aug 23 |
Comment |
I had trouble with the red and blue. They were very intent in the original and I didn't seem to get it any better. Your comment is well taken. If this image does well in other aspects, I will give it another try. |
Aug 8th |
7 comments - 1 reply for Group 19
|
| 64 |
Aug 23 |
Comment |
I am surprised you were able to pull such good detail in the splash at the bottom from that original file, but the resulting monochrome image is excellent in both the splash and the waterfall itself. It is ineresting how sometimes you can take a minor little wterfall and make an impressive waterfall image out of it. |
Aug 11th |
| 64 |
Aug 23 |
Comment |
An incredible accomplishment for a first time compsite person. Well done. I assume you repositioned the images to make the smooth arch composition, but I am not sure. If you did, it was an excellent job. Looks like a wall hanger of pride to me. |
Aug 11th |
| 64 |
Aug 23 |
Comment |
Intersting, your setup for light streaks resulted in great star bursts on the lights. The streak of light on the background bridge still resulted in an interesting line. The gentle curve of the foreground bridge contributed significanly to the composition in my opinion. The slow shutter speed flattened the watere to a very nice effect.
Well done. |
Aug 11th |
| 64 |
Aug 23 |
Comment |
A very nice capture with a monochrome conversion that appears to add some artistic filter to the process. I think it is very well done. No suggestions or more detailed comments from me.
I would appreciate some more details on how you did it. |
Aug 11th |
| 64 |
Aug 23 |
Comment |
A bautiful monochrome, much better than the color version. This image seems to have no benefit at all of having any color in my opinion. I particularly like the detail of the church itself in the lower left. It seems to be so much better in monochrome showing all the details with contrasting tones. The white sky seems perfect to set off this image. Some say that white draws the eyes and detracts if it is not the subject, but I believe it is contrast that distracts and often near white is also the highest contrastl. Here it is no contrast and the church has all the contrast. I have one minor suggestion that is hardly even noticeable, but the original color version had a small sliver of roof on the left that was in bright sun and much lighter in color. It resulted in a line nearly parallel to the roof line that is hard to understand what it is in the mono version. I think this could be selected and removed and it would be an improvement in my opinion. |
Aug 11th |
5 comments - 0 replies for Group 64
|
12 comments - 1 reply Total
|
