|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 69 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
Thanks, Jacob. I went ahead and reworked it with the post. I will just have to enter it in "Open" and not "Nature". Do you like it? |
Apr 30th |
| 69 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
Thanks for your thoughts! I actually did catch a Little Blue heron in a tree close by, but finished this one off by adding in the post. Check it out below. Appreciate your critique! |
Apr 30th |
| 69 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
And now you can see the entire leg and foot! See my new version below. Thanks! |
Apr 30th |
| 69 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
Hi Candy, thanks! I added in the post AND ITS ANCHORED ON THE RIGHT--a trick I learned from you. See pic below. |
Apr 30th |
| 69 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
Thanks, Mervyn! After a hospital stay and a move up north, I got a chance to make another version--see below. |
Apr 30th |
| 69 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
Geoff, I added an entry below--immproved? The trick to a 1.4X by Canon is to use it on a full frame. It's very annoying on a cropped sensor! Thanks! |
Apr 30th |
| 69 |
Apr 21 |
Comment |
I added back in the fence post, and made this an "Open" entry instead. Thanks for all the advice! |
Apr 30th |
 |
| 69 |
Apr 21 |
Comment |
Mervyn, I like your revised version, but I think it needs just a bit more room at the top for mom's head and dad to fly in. Would love to shoot this some day! |
Apr 30th |
| 69 |
Apr 21 |
Comment |
Sorry I missed this earlier this month! I agree with everyone, your work has really improved! Love it! I do agree it needed a bit of room at the top and the stroke Mervyn added was nice. Those would be two great techniques for you to learn. Thrilled for you! |
Apr 30th |
| 69 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
Dean, Yep, I understand about cropping in on nature shots, particularly birds. Topaz has an amazing program called Gigapixel AI . It can increase the size of a photo six times, so when you crop in, its still a great photo. I also recommend their DeNoise AI and Sharpen AI. They also have a JPG to Raw converter that is helpful with cell phone pix or pix from long ago, or other people. With Gigapixel, even with a big crop, you'd have loads of pixels to crop. |
Apr 3rd |
| 69 |
Apr 21 |
Comment |
Geoff, this is an amazing capture, even if it wasn't a rare wallaby! So cute! Tack sharp! Great lines with the mom framing the baby, who is in sight and in focus! Look at those eyelashes! Good separation from the background! Mom alert and great eye contact! Her hands touching adds some great lines. Pink rocks! Is the baby sniffing its own yellow/black tail, or mom's? Is the wallaby in the pouch and just peaking out? Even more cool, if it is!
How the heck did you get an in-focus pic at 400mm with just 1/125 sec? Were you on a monopod or tripod?
Being super picky, there are a couple little light brown things on the left side you could remove (border patrol). A bright small pink thing on the right near momma is distracting. Below mom's hands is a white rock that could be darkened just a tad (maybe leave as is, as it doesn't lead my eye off the subject, but maybe blown out a bit?).
Phenomenal shot! Bravo! So, wallabies aren't endangered, but this pretty one is? |
Apr 3rd |
| 69 |
Apr 21 |
Comment |
Interesting high key, Candy! And a great Great Blue Heron behavior that stops our eye with the mouthful of green fluff. The lines are simple and clean. Brilliant. I would have probably just deleted the photo, thinking it was too bright, but I love the almost Chinese simplicity of it.
I am surprised you flipped it...you light the weight on the right, and so that's why you did flip?
And you didn't add a background, what was your thinking on not adding a texture that we see in so many of your compositions. |
Apr 3rd |
| 69 |
Apr 21 |
Comment |
Oh, lucky you, to see a fox in the wild and holding still enough for a portrait! Great setup with him at eye level and looking at you and no distractions like tall grass around him and you looking down at him (the common fox pic).
Wow, far away, with an 800mm lens. On a regular Canon full frame, you'd want to be at least 1/1000 to have it be sharp enough, perhaps that is why it seems just a tad soft to me. Or does the mirrorless not require the speed on a long lens?
I see you used Denoise AI. You might run the Sharpen AI also, which I do after I run DeNoise. I bought their Gigapixel AI, which allows for the tight crops and gives you a lot more play room. I'm super happy with it on nature pix, where I do have to crop in far.
He seems almost centered, but not quite. You might choose to move him center or more off center, and then add a slight vignette.
The rich reds of the fox in golden light with the gray of the boulders is striking and you should be thrilled with this shot! Unique!
|
Apr 3rd |
| 69 |
Apr 21 |
Comment |
Hi Dean, yes, these are white Ibis, we have a lot around us in central Florida. And they are very pretty in flight and often fly in small flocks, which is even more spectacular, and with a loud call as they fly.
I like that you have two habits, the beak in the water and the standing, so the viewers can see ibis in action and their fantastic scimitar beaks.
Its a bit difficult to see the eyes, so you might selectively sharpen the bird feathers and eyes, avoiding the marsh grasses.
If you aren't entering it in a PSA nature competition, maybe remove the grass near the beak of the right Ibis. I wonder if a 16:9 crop wouldn't remove some of the distracting grasses that don't lend to the composition.
I'm glad you got to see them, we just adore them here. |
Apr 3rd |
| 69 |
Apr 21 |
Comment |
Hi Mervyn, wow, you were close just 240mm and in a boat! Well done! Tack sharp eye. I love we can see all the unusual nest materials very clearly. I think this is the mom, she has the definite eye stripe and "necklace of spots" on her chest. The females are 20% bigger than males, very rare in the animal world. Lots better birders than me in this group, so they may be able to help determine the sex.
I'd be tempted to give the baby a bit more tail room and that allows the parent more room to look into with that piercing gaze. It's great that they are looking towards each other, if not quite at each other.
Another thought: the baby's eye is a bit muddy, perhaps you can add a bit of contrast there.
Since the sky is plain, you could swap it out. Or, if you are competing in nature, just crop down a bit.
Fab capture! Can't wait until I get a chance to add something like this to my tiny birding collection! Hope we can get together in the fall when we return and Covid has left!
|
Apr 3rd |
8 comments - 7 replies for Group 69
|
| 78 |
Apr 21 |
Comment |
Mitch sent me this bear in a Drop Box file, but I thought he was sending larger May files. My fault! Here is Mitch's final bear! Sorry, Mitch! You can post any changes directly yourself, unless they don't post correctly. |
Apr 30th |
 |
| 78 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
Thanks, Stephen! I appreciate the feedback! |
Apr 29th |
| 78 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
Jim, can you take a look at my 4/10 version? I actually went lighter on the blur, and then selectively kept the watching spectators unblurred. Thoughts? Thanks! |
Apr 10th |
| 78 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
Jason, are you saying you don't like the rider's shadow? Yes it does throw the weight to the left, but it does make the rider more of a part of the composition and not looking like a bad composite. Thoughts? Also, I made the other changes you and Sunil suggested, if you can check out my 4/10 post and let me know your thoughts. Thanks! |
Apr 10th |
| 78 |
Apr 21 |
Comment |
I've reworked a second time--this time I took down the blur and made the transition smoother (thanks, Sunil and Jason). Then I removed the blur off of the guy and young girl that are going OOOOH!! and also took the blur off some random folks that were paying attention (thanks, Jason!).
Terry is correct that we are looking at the horse's anus, and I could blur that or make it disappear, good idea? I do like how the high kick shows the force, the horse has already turned before the rider has hit the ground, and we see clearly the belt on his genitals--that's why horses buck.
I would love everyone's thoughts on whether the blur is better or worse and how to handle the horse's anus. Thanks! |
Apr 10th |
 |
| 78 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
Mitch, I think your improvements have really added to a crazy cool moment! Great job! |
Apr 9th |
| 78 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
Yes, its a great discussion and I always get fabulous ideas from my group. I am in the habit of getting improvements on my images before I compete with them locally. It always moves my quality up dramatically. We appreciate you stopping by, Stephen! |
Apr 7th |
| 78 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
Thanks, Jason! So helpful and I'll see about saving some of the crowd and doing a version in color and mono and see what works. |
Apr 7th |
| 78 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
Thanks, Terry! All great points. I'll do some more versions and see what everyone likes. |
Apr 7th |
| 78 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
Brilliant edit, Jason! The four dark lines in the front and dark trees completely change the look of it--we see everything close up and then it disappears. You are on fire today! |
Apr 7th |
| 78 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
Ooooohhhhh, so fun, Jason! Can't wait to hear what Terry thinks! It does feel like an Alfred Hitchcock to me!
|
Apr 7th |
| 78 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
Nice, Terry! It's a crazy photo, right? Wild powerful bear right near Mitch. Yikes! |
Apr 7th |
| 78 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
Jim, I think you've made the right improvements. Just love those furrowing lines leading us in and over! |
Apr 5th |
| 78 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
Thanks, Jim. So more gaussian blur and bring it lower, is what I need to try next. Do you think my tail is okay for competition or do I need to do more intricate work? Thanks for your assistance! |
Apr 5th |
| 78 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
Revised version is really great! The lines are even more intriguing! |
Apr 5th |
| 78 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
I like your improvements! But I do notice the wire (?) that jim mentioned now. |
Apr 5th |
| 78 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
I gave it a try, Jim. It's improving. Any suggestions on improving my blur? Thanks! |
Apr 3rd |
| 78 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
New crop and new blur. Check out below. I think its improved a lot! Thoughts? |
Apr 3rd |
| 78 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
Check my reworked version below--your advice was a big help! |
Apr 3rd |
| 78 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
Check my reworked version below, with the shadow! |
Apr 3rd |
| 78 |
Apr 21 |
Comment |
I used your ideas and cropped 16:9. I kept the cowboy's shadow, which does help it look more realistic. I wasn't sure on how to get the best blur on the background, so this is what I did--select background, make a separate layer, Gaussian blur, then a mask to brush it off the horse's tail. It seemed a bit much, so I dropped the opacity. Thoughts? I do like the crop and just not sure I have too much or too little blur, or should it be feathered into the dirt more? Thanks for the great advice! |
Apr 3rd |
 |
| 78 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
Reloaded, Helen! Thanks! |
Apr 3rd |
| 78 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
Thanks, Helen, I'll work on it! |
Apr 3rd |
| 78 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
Oh,I love it, Jim! What did you use to blur the background? |
Apr 3rd |
| 78 |
Apr 21 |
Comment |
What an exciting shot! I love the action, the claws, the lines of his "arms" and the curve of the fish, the blood on the fish tail! In your original, you have a darker bear, which seems more attractive to me. I'd be tempted to put him off center instead of in a square crop. You have a lot of interesting textures/movement on both sides of the bear. You were way too close---153 mm on a full frame...Terrifying!!! |
Apr 2nd |
| 78 |
Apr 21 |
Comment |
I think its so interesting, Terry! I like the story, the night, the fog in the headlights of the second bus. Is there any reason you didn't bring us closer by cropping up from the bottom and losing the road? |
Apr 2nd |
| 78 |
Apr 21 |
Comment |
Helen, what a cool place! I like Mitch's ideas. Do you have your SOOC pic for us to look at? Fantastic lines! |
Apr 2nd |
| 78 |
Apr 21 |
Comment |
Sunil, how cool you are hanging out in a junk yard! I love your capture and in b/w. The lower left corner is bright and a bit distracting. I agree with Mitch's idea of cropping down the sky a bit, as it is not very interesting in the monochrome. |
Apr 2nd |
| 78 |
Apr 21 |
Comment |
I love this, Jim. I think it might make a good sepia, also. I think the photo feels a bit tipped down to the right. It might be the horses are really going uphill a bit, but it might be worth leveling, if anyone else notices? |
Apr 2nd |
| 78 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
Sunil's idea is great. Another idea is to use a softer spot healing brush, so it doesn't leave crisp lines. |
Apr 2nd |
| 78 |
Apr 21 |
Comment |
Sunil, I like the idea of a 16:9. Thanks for your compliments! |
Apr 2nd |
| 78 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
Mitch, I think it is a great idea to leave the shadow. Thanks for that. |
Apr 2nd |
| 78 |
Apr 21 |
Comment |
Jason, I do like the removal of the extra branch and leaves from your original You clearly decided not to darken the sticks(?). They really draw my eye. Did you feel they added? They do frame the bird, was that your thinking? |
Apr 2nd |
10 comments - 23 replies for Group 78
|
18 comments - 30 replies Total
|
