|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 65 |
Dec 17 |
Reply |
That would work. However, when I do this I try for something even more subtle. See my example here â¬
This is actually a double border with a black 10 pixel border on top of a 12 pixel "orange-ish" border. This yields a 2 pixel border inset by 10 pixels. This was done using the "stroke" options in the layer styles within Photoshop. (Flatten the final image and double click on the final layer to bring up the layer styles). |
Dec 27th |
 |
| 65 |
Dec 17 |
Reply |
PS: See my comment regarding "dark image border"s under Janos' image comments |
Dec 26th |
| 65 |
Dec 17 |
Reply |
I have heard (and said) similar things regarding borders and dark background projected images in my judging. I would add that such borders "could" (not "should") be added to aid in such images. In adding such a border you delineate the dimensions and edges of the image, and now you see what the maker intended you to see (the subject on the background where the maker intended it to be). Without such delineation it may be unclear how far the image may actually extend and you may loose the benefit of placing the subject "just so" in your composition.
However, the border need not be white, but any other subtle color which may accentuate the image and still provide some sort of edge reference. |
Dec 26th |
| 65 |
Dec 17 |
Reply |
I have the 42 x 42 inch box. I have really grown to love this "Studio" Its large enough inside to easily hold the subject (a flower in a vase or clamp) and the lighting equipment (LED and or flashlight with stand or clamp). The box has it's own top mounted LED light and is lined with a reflective silver material so getting a lot of light (for product shots) is easy. But reducing and controlling a light source required a bit more finesse so I lined the sides and back with black "automotive" velvet. The velvet was easily available via Amazon (what isn't these days). I attached Velcro strips to the top the velvet and the top of the box to make adding and removing the velvet sides easy.
By the way. did you like the images of Table Salt ? You know about that "grain of salt" you'r supposed to take some ideas with ? Well I finally got a picture of what they were talking about (image 10/114) ï
|
Dec 26th |
| 65 |
Dec 17 |
Reply |
Very good point. In viewing our, or other's images it's important to acknowledge those "inner feelings" and/or tensions we inevitably have. Identifying the basis of those feelings is more difficult, but will ultimately make us better photographers. I believe that these feelings and tensions represent a "window" into the effectiveness of our storytelling, and that is one of our photographic objectives, telling a great story. |
Dec 26th |
| 65 |
Dec 17 |
Comment |
Great action shot of the bee "doing its thing". Wonderful color and detail, and great separation of the subject from its background. The image looks a bit pixelated, especially in the bee's eye. You can get this if you enlarge parts of an image so much that you don't have enough information to smoothly represent the images.
If this were my shot, I would try re-crop it some to remove some of the green background at the top and right side. This would remove some of this empty space which may not help the shot, and moves the bee away from being so "front-and-center" in the image.
|
Dec 24th |
| 65 |
Dec 17 |
Comment |
What a fun shot! Who says we can't play with our toys? Great sharpness through-out the image and the colors and composition are great.
One of the consequences of getting everything in focus is that everything is in focus and clear to the eye. So now that I can see then so clearly, the scratched and dirty windshields of the toy cars bother me. "Ohhhh-man, if its not one thing, its another!"
One thing I might have tried to do is to darken the table top some. The bright table top competes with the yellow cars and to my eye becomes a distraction.
Wonderful idea and a great time to practice the focus stacking.
|
Dec 24th |
| 65 |
Dec 17 |
Comment |
Nicely seen ! I love these real-life candid shots of the everyday, which bring us something we might otherwise overlook, and with this image you have done just that! The composition and colors are great. Your choice of exposure really separates the subject from its background.
One thought I had here is what would this look like is you backed off (moved back a bit) just a bit. The wonderful detail of the subject would be maintained, but the added context moving back a bit might create might make this good shot great. Just a thought. What do you think?
|
Dec 24th |
| 65 |
Dec 17 |
Comment |
I have done a lot of macro work with focus stacking, and while it's an essential tool for expanding our depth-of-field, it just that, a tool. In this image I think that one of the strengths of your image is that the subject is not entirely in focus. This is believable, feels natural, and the contrast between the sharp and soft areas adds "focus" (if you pardon the pun) and interest to the main stem of the flower (the subject). If your vision was to get the entire flower in focus, that is well-in-good, but if your vision was the flower in its environment, maybe not. I often fall into what I consider a "macro trap" in getting everything in focus. This is OK, but the image can become one which shouts "look at my detail" and less about the subject per-se. Initially my macro images were about "look at my detail", so that was fine but now I wish to have them be more than that.
I really like the framing of the subject by the darker edges. The softer areas also frame the subject as well. I like what you have here.
One thought I had here is "what would this look like is you backed off (moved back a bit) just a bit. It's a bit "in-your face" (if I am communicating my thoughts effectively). Backing off may not detract from the subject and it's wonderful detail, but may offer a bit more context. Just a thought. See what you think !
|
Dec 24th |
4 comments - 5 replies for Group 65
|
4 comments - 5 replies Total
|
