|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 69 |
Mar 23 |
Comment |
Lovely image. Very nice to keep the bear in his environment, but I found it relatively too small. How to crop while preserving the scenery? No easy answers. This is my take on cropping, allowing to preserve the waterline, the rocks and the vegetation. I placed the bear at the upper third intersection. |
Mar 14th |
 |
| 69 |
Mar 23 |
Comment |
Another nice aquarium image.
The colors are pleasing and the 2 main rays are sharp.
The 2 main rays are in focus + have different postures + are not overlapping on each other. I completely agree with Dean's crop, but, unfortunately, the tail of the top ray is clipped. This image would have had a much higher impact without this clipping.
|
Mar 14th |
| 69 |
Mar 23 |
Comment |
Hi Jacob.
It is difficult to keep all the details on a dark subject, especially when there is a ray of sun on a yellow flower just above!
One way to improve this capture, would have been by filling the flash on your phone.
In post-processing, decreasing the shadows and the highlights might have helped, especially in RAW mode (I don't think that you can save in RAW mode on the iPhone). |
Mar 14th |
| 69 |
Mar 23 |
Comment |
Very nice. Considering that your camera was reading the light intensity mainly on the sky (see original), I would have added 1 to 1.5 EV (either while taking the shot, or in post-processing.
This image tells a story. I like Mervyn crop the best. |
Mar 14th |
| 69 |
Mar 23 |
Comment |
I agree that the heads are a little bit out of focus. The bodies themself are sharp. I believe this is because the autofocus, targeting the heads, was misled by the drops of waters between the camera and the heads. (The camera will always focus on the closest object in the target zone!) I had the same issues with snowflakes in the past. I should have switched to manual focus! (not much time to think during this action shot! - I will keep this in mind in the future. |
Mar 14th |
| 69 |
Mar 23 |
Comment |
Very nice. I agree with the way you cropped the image. Despite this tight crop, you definition remains pretty good. I like it! |
Mar 14th |
| 69 |
Mar 23 |
Comment |
Nicely done. The Vulture is perfectly sharp + in action. The background is not competing at all due to the shallow depth of field + the fact that you were at eye level.
You cropped a little tight on the front of the bird to avoid removing the back wings of the other bird in front. This makes this image acceptable for "nature" competition as removing the back end of the other bird would be faulted.
|
Mar 14th |
7 comments - 0 replies for Group 69
|
| 70 |
Mar 23 |
Comment |
From my point of view, luck smiles to those who are planning! |
Mar 23rd |
| 70 |
Mar 23 |
Comment |
Very dramatic image. I love the colour contrast between the rocks in the foreground as opposed to the big one in the back. The main directing line goes from the bottom right to the top left despite that all the lines in the foreground are going from the bottom left to the top right. As mentioned before, the Orange hours adds to the beauty of this image, especially with the lit clouds.
Another keeper! |
Mar 14th |
| 70 |
Mar 23 |
Comment |
Hi Frans,
Nice image. I like the colour grading in the sky, the cropping, the silhouette of the man and the trees. I would have like a little more light in the foreground (less shadows?).
Nicely done. |
Mar 14th |
| 70 |
Mar 23 |
Comment |
Hi Geoff,
You have some tall farmers (and painters) in Australia!
Lovely drone image (unless you were on the top of a very tall building in the middle of a field).
Pleasing color palette and cropping, preserving the roads on the edges of the property.
Another keeper! |
Mar 14th |
| 70 |
Mar 23 |
Comment |
Hi Terina. Another, well-executed, slow shutter speed image. Nice mood, colors, reflections, and directing lines. I also like the water spray on the right side mid-image.
I personally like this silky water, but some nature photographer judges might decrease points as the water is not seen as the eye can see it (just in case you wish to submit).
|
Mar 14th |
| 70 |
Mar 23 |
Comment |
Hi Tami. Very nice scenery. The fence acts as directing lines. I agree with Kirk and Terina that the colors are a little off at the horizon, especially the clouds. I am wondering if you use a little too much "dehazing". A polarizing filter might have helps in avoiding this. |
Mar 14th |
| 70 |
Mar 23 |
Reply |
Hi Kirk, sorry for the delay on answering your questions. Camera conversions:
Basically : 1) the wave frequency that the sensor can pick are far greater than the visual spectrum. The camera manufacturers will normally add 2 filters in front or your sensors - a UV filter and a AA filter.
2) several camera conversions are possible. The most frequent is a UV conversion (several conversions frequencies are available depending on the desired effect) and an Astro-conversion.
3) the Astro- conversion consists in having all the filters removed, leading to a «Â full spectrum » sensor. This is a particular conversion frequently used for the night sky. When all the filters are removed, day time photography bring out very unusual tones - normally not done.
4) with an Astro-conversion, I can perform infrared photography by using a UV filter in front of the lens (different filter frequency available).
I can keep going, but this is the essence.
Infrared photography and Astro-photography are quite interesting!
|
Mar 7th |
6 comments - 1 reply for Group 70
|
13 comments - 1 reply Total
|