|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 69 |
Oct 19 |
Reply |
Thanks so much, Candy! |
Oct 12th |
| 69 |
Oct 19 |
Reply |
Dean, thanks for our comments. I am looking down from one peak into a "rock valley". |
Oct 8th |
| 69 |
Oct 19 |
Reply |
The area around Las Vegas is amazing and you can see A LOT in a week. Hope you get a chance to experience it. Thanks for your comments. |
Oct 8th |
| 69 |
Oct 19 |
Reply |
Thanks, Pierre. Yes, it was shot in the morning, but the sun was already up in the desert. The orange hour? I've never heard of that. |
Oct 8th |
| 69 |
Oct 19 |
Reply |
Thanks, Mervyn! I put it through NIK, so maybe it made it a bit softer? |
Oct 8th |
| 69 |
Oct 19 |
Comment |
I just love this and didn't think it was a drone shot! I like the middle, I wouldn't like to lose the clouds or any of the sky.
Is the center white streak blown out or are you okay? |
Oct 8th |
| 69 |
Oct 19 |
Comment |
Jacob, I'm in Fort Wayne, a couple of hours from you! But heading to Florida for six months, but maybe we can shoot together in the Spring.
If you are going to be using the iPhone, you'll find that Snap Seed is a free app to post-process and crop. It's really easy to use and you can google its many features.
Lots of great comments above, which I agree with.
I think it would look better with the grass darkened gently so that the mushrooms stand out more. The mushrooms seem to be centered, and I'd be tempted to crop a bit off from the right to make the composition have a bit more energy.
Glad to have you!
|
Oct 8th |
| 69 |
Oct 19 |
Comment |
What a beautiful soft composition. What fantastic lines their bodies create. I agree with Dean, it seems a bit gray to me. Really a winner! |
Oct 8th |
| 69 |
Oct 19 |
Comment |
I agree this would make a good vertical with the left cropped. It does seem a bit bright. I do like her animated look and bravo for catching a difficult bird in a difficult environment! |
Oct 8th |
| 69 |
Oct 19 |
Comment |
Agree with everything the others have said. To add, I really like the diagonal line through the pic and that it is not overprocessed (something we so often see in fall color photos).
Absolutely one of my favorites by you! |
Oct 8th |
| 69 |
Oct 19 |
Comment |
Wow, what a wild neck and funky feathers! I am glad you said the beak was under water, as I thought he had a weird bendy beak.
Super crisp, and great lighting. I'd would like to see a little more room in front of his beak, if you aren't entering it in a PSA competition.
We are in Sebring starting in November! |
Oct 8th |
6 comments - 5 replies for Group 69
|
| 78 |
Oct 19 |
Comment |
Wow, Sunil's version with the lower homes removed does look good--I would not have thought this would be a good idea, but I do like it! I do like your latest revised version. But this pic is spectacular as the original also. Love it!
|
Oct 27th |
| 78 |
Oct 19 |
Reply |
Terry, I SO appreciate you revisiting this and putting up the eimage! I think the mug and glasses add a lot and its super creative. Bravo! |
Oct 27th |
| 78 |
Oct 19 |
Reply |
Sunil, thanks so much. I used NIK detail extraction, do you think that helped the building details? |
Oct 27th |
| 78 |
Oct 19 |
Reply |
Terry, what do you think of my latest version below? Thanks for taking a look. |
Oct 27th |
| 78 |
Oct 19 |
Reply |
Thanks, Richard! See my latest version, am I on track with your thoughts? I appreciate it! |
Oct 27th |
| 78 |
Oct 19 |
Comment |
Thanks for the all the feedback that this was too dark. I've lightened everything but the sky. I also used NIK detail extractor to get some more detail in the main building, as Sunil said it seemed soft. Too much? Not enough? Thanks! |
Oct 27th |
 |
| 78 |
Oct 19 |
Reply |
Jason, thanks so much. The chimney was an issue...My lens wouldn't go wide enough to get all of the chimney and I wanted the prime building to have room, so I agree its not perfect. Since I didn't have a good sky with clouds, I didn't want a lot of boring blue sky.
|
Oct 8th |
| 78 |
Oct 19 |
Reply |
Thanks, Terry, I will lighten it. |
Oct 8th |
| 78 |
Oct 19 |
Comment |
Phenomenal moment! They look like different types of insects, not a male and female of the same species. I can live with the minor imperfections, but would love to see the dark shadow in the top left gone.
Where did you photograph them? Looks like you were quite far away at 600 mm. Were you on a tripod? |
Oct 6th |
| 78 |
Oct 19 |
Comment |
I love it and I think you've captured it well. I would be tempted to crop the sky at a tiny bit lower. The building on the left of the frame is a tad distracting, since its white going out of the frame. I don't know if darkening it slightly would be more distracting.
It's really moody and hurray for going out in junky weather to capture it. |
Oct 6th |
| 78 |
Oct 19 |
Comment |
Glad to hear you were trying something different than the group, Terry! The only thing that bothers me is the groyne out of focus. I understand it was your intention. The wall out of focus and the waves not smooth all work for me, but I agree with Richard that we are powerfully led to the subject that is blurry. I like both versions! |
Oct 6th |
| 78 |
Oct 19 |
Comment |
I really love it, having showed horses for decades. Since you mentioned you are working on this type of shot, it would be great to see some photos using the suggestions above.
I'm shocked she isn't wearing her helmet, did she take it off for you? The flying hair is much nicer than the helmets we wear when we ride. She's a good rider, a great leg and a straight line from horse's mouth to her elbow, which helps your lines and motion, also. If you are photographing for the rider, she'd love a photo where she's sitting and not up in the saddle, although the position she is in makes a better photo because she's moving with the horse and adding to your motion theme. Love to see more of these! |
Oct 6th |
| 78 |
Oct 19 |
Comment |
I love how you find kids in bright clothing! Compositionally, its lovely and you have a real winner here. I agree with the comments above. A very sweet moment and different from many other photos we see like this. |
Oct 6th |
| 78 |
Oct 19 |
Comment |
Hi Alan,
And now you are onto flowers! Quite the newbie--trying it all. Bravo!
I agree with the comments above. The ground is distracting to me. I work very hard to catch an angle where I get leaves or another flower to fill the frame and not concrete or mulch.
I also took a flower class--here are some of the points in case you find them useful--we learned the best flowers are photographed on a tripod (you didn't say if you used one) and photographed in the shade to keep color (looks like you were in shade), and photograph flower at the height of the flower to create more interaction, so it doesn't look like a cell phone photo taken from above.
The little white flowers within the magenta are awesome. |
Oct 6th |
| 78 |
Oct 19 |
Reply |
Thanks, Terry. Did you like the brightness of Richard's version above? |
Oct 6th |
| 78 |
Oct 19 |
Reply |
Stephen, thanks for stopping by! I answered several of your questions in a long reply to Richard (above your comment). ND filters are not graduated, at least these weren't. Ideally, you get long cloud movement and quiet water. Thanks for the compliment! |
Oct 6th |
| 78 |
Oct 19 |
Reply |
Richard, thanks for your comments and I do like your brighter version. I chose not to go too bright since the sky was plain (no clouds to go all wispy...darn), and I wante to keep the focus on the building and water. Do you think the brighter version doesn't distract?
I actually photographed around sunset, so the light kept dropping with each exposure. The first was six minutes and this one was two minutes. I used ND filters to give me the smooth water, as its choppy and there are a million little boats zooming up and down these waterways, so its really ugly without the smooth water.
I learned that a 10 ND with a 2 ND stacked, does not equal 12--Its about 20! I'm not sure how the stacking works, but it makes it a LOT darker and is great when its bright out.
I did use the lens correction in Lightroom, but it didn't make much of a change, as the building is really this narrow! |
Oct 6th |
8 comments - 9 replies for Group 78
|
14 comments - 14 replies Total
|
