|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 47 |
Jan 21 |
Reply |
Thanks Albert. I've strengthened the ripples, cropped a bit on the sides, and added some dark vignette. I'm not sure this is what you were after, but it's another take:
|
Jan 10th |
 |
| 47 |
Jan 21 |
Comment |
Albert I find myself agreeing with Jen, in that I want to take a few steps in to the image. The accents of the snow are quite nice, but perhaps because you wished to frame the image with the top branch, the effect ins't as prominent as it might be. I'm not sure if I slightly tighter crop would help, or if it needed different positioning and/or lens as Jen illudes to.
I also think removing the wire, if that weren't too difficult, would also improve the image. |
Jan 10th |
| 47 |
Jan 21 |
Comment |
On this image, Adrian, I also find myself preferring the original color version. Black and white tends to focus attention on shapes and patterns, graphical elements, more. So here, the symmetry of the reflection is very prominent. Yet it is the rich colors and nice light, the foreground wildflowers, of the original image which make it quite a nice landscape. Also, in your black and white processing, there is a lot of local contrast, and it's throughout the image, it's a very "scrubbed" look, if that makes sense. For example, there is a lot of detail in the foreground grass, where it really doesn't contribute. I think a bit of softness, at least in parts of an image like this can add to a more dreamy effect, which the color version is already exhibiting.
All that said, I love the scene, and you have piqued my interest in visiting Iceland one day! |
Jan 10th |
| 47 |
Jan 21 |
Comment |
I have to agree with Albert, Ed, in that the color has more interest, in fact it's quite appealing, and I can see why it drew you in. The tree leaves do pop nicely in black and white, but other elements, like the lovely light in the rear window, are lost.
I would have been tempted to take the shot leaning over the railing, if that were possible. I see your point about context, but in this case I think a bit of mystery might have been more compelling. |
Jan 10th |
| 47 |
Jan 21 |
Comment |
I agree with Albert's comments, Colin. It's very well done, but I prefer the higher contrast version of the original. There is some nice directed lighting in the original which is absent in the black and white. Others in the group are more experienced with nature and wildlife closeups, and I look forward to their opinions. |
Jan 10th |
4 comments - 1 reply for Group 47
|
| 66 |
Jan 21 |
Reply |
I like this version very much. The flip works, even the original sky works, for me. But then I am a fan of gloomy black and whites ;) |
Jan 4th |
| 66 |
Jan 21 |
Reply |
Thanks, Emil, that's an interesting idea about the flip, I gave it a try |
Jan 4th |
 |
| 66 |
Jan 21 |
Reply |
Thanks, Gary, the dreaded foreground blur! I think I agree with you, and will check for alternative versions that might address this. |
Jan 4th |
| 66 |
Jan 21 |
Comment |
Oh, the light line at the bottom? Good catch, Palli! |
Jan 3rd |
| 66 |
Jan 21 |
Comment |
I think this works very well, and conveys the mood you were after, Emil. Scenes like this seem to be so busy, that the work of the photographer in making a pleasing scene like this go under-appreciated. The added contrast is just right.
A couple of minor points: The tree trunk on the left edge seems to straddle the edge, and I might have cropped it out. And the foreground leaves are very nice and add some mood to the image. I see you have lots of foreground in the original, so I might have left just a little bit more. |
Jan 3rd |
| 66 |
Jan 21 |
Comment |
It makes a nice companion image to Charles', and in this one you've got a nice sky with those puffy clouds, Palli. I've no suggestions for improvement, other than that some might ask you to remove that little thing that remains where the waste can was. |
Jan 3rd |
| 66 |
Jan 21 |
Comment |
I love stopping to enjoy sunflower fields also, Gary, and you've got a nice scene here, even before you took it in another direction.
It certainly is eerie, and no doubt it wows the viewer. Probably no surprise here, but for me, I think a lighter hand on the effect might work better. In particular, I wish the halo around her were less bright, or perhaps removed altogether, so that just the woman is illuminated, and even then perhaps a bit less bright. On the other hand, the bits of light on the leaves, especially to the right, work very well. I applaud the creativity, it's fun seeing what the photographer was envisioning when he took the image! |
Jan 3rd |
| 66 |
Jan 21 |
Comment |
Simple, minimalist images like this are my favorites, Charles. It's not just the S curve of course, but the beautiful shadows, then the uniformity of the trees, and no distractions. It's very effective. My only nit-pick would be, I like the feel of the foliage better in the original. It's as if the increase in contrast has blown out the whites somewhat? Could be something else, but overall, I find it a compelling image. |
Jan 3rd |
| 66 |
Jan 21 |
Comment |
It's a lovely setting indeed, Melanie! You'll excuse me for asking, given what you came up with, why you didn't just take the image with a conventional camera? The grass in particular, and the whole scene look very natural, which makes the little imperfections stand out as just that. For example, there is some blue sky behind the tree, and the foliage of the tree (which is where my eye goes in the image) is of uneven tones.
The light on the bales in the original is just beautiful; it's too bad it isn't as noticeable in the final version. I only notice it as you pointed it out.
Even so, good job on the conversion to a color image, it's more than I could do, and the result is still very nice. |
Jan 3rd |
6 comments - 3 replies for Group 66
|
10 comments - 4 replies Total
|