|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 78 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
Thanks again for being such a great addition to the group! Do you have a "twin" that would like to join us? |
Nov 27th |
| 78 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
Thanks, James! I agree its a nice image and I like it, probably most in color. I think I might darken the horses a bit in the color version. And, as you suggested, post on Facebook. I also make notecards for gifts, and its a nice image for that type of use.
I appreciate you keeping the conversation going...you are great at that!
|
Nov 27th |
| 78 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
I will say I see the spray easily now. But I had to see it several times before "my eyes went right to it" |
Nov 27th |
| 78 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
Sunil, Although you felt this wasn't your best work and missed the mark, I think you accomplished an amazing thing! Can't wait to see your next one! Bravo! |
Nov 27th |
| 78 |
Nov 23 |
Comment |
I worked on my wild horses again.
My first effort was to take the sorrel horse's head and put on the newer version, so both horses would be looking at each other. However, the difference from her elongated neck to turned neck did not work at all, regardless of transforming size and shape. I then tried to bring the better pinto horse's head into the original composition, again with no luck!
Next, I went to monochrome (thanks, Sunil), as it does solve a lot of the issues. I tried a couple dozen versions and decided to go dark and gritty, which is what Sunil had done.
I also used a tight crop at the bottom that brings us closer to the horses and we see how deep in sagebrush the horse on the left is.
I used a few different tools to remove the white out of focus sagebrush that was on the sorrel horse, and I think its less distracting.
What I did learn doing this and listening to our group, is that this is not going to be a competitive image. I love horses and had horses, so I think I was not looking at this objectively. As I worked and worked on it, I realized that this was not going to be what I hoped. Thanks so much for helping me get there...disappointing as it is. Time to move on to another photo!
|
Nov 26th |
 |
| 78 |
Nov 23 |
Comment |
I think I commented on this before? So sorry if I didn't and weird if my comments disappeared!
I love your revised images, especially the tipi with the bush in front of it, as it seems less obvious a foreground and we move past it to the "stars of the show"!
Brillant and I would love to night shoot with you sometime! |
Nov 19th |
| 78 |
Nov 23 |
Comment |
This is the best image I've seen of all your botany work, in my opinion! Fab color, great texture, and the background is blurred and a neutral tone! And it sounds like you did very little editing! Bravo! We call these cocks combs, since they look like a rooster's headdress. |
Nov 19th |
| 78 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
Ed, I think its a guy on his knee asking his girl to marry him. It's a set-up at Lisa Langell's Cowboy workshop every year in Arizona that Ken attended. |
Nov 19th |
| 78 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
Thanks for the info on helmets gassing up and the car going slow during the caution! Fun info! |
Nov 19th |
| 78 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
Thanks, Jim! This is a great discussion and you cover a lot of artistic and technical points. Here was my response to Robert...let me know if I am off track in my thoughts!
"Thanks, Robert. I often shoot at 20,000 ISO for my night birds, and use Photo AI to remove the noise. You bring up some great points and have started a wonderful discussion!
My understanding was that a professional images recommend just the subject in focus. That's why we pay $20,000 for a f/2.8 lens. That's why software lets us sharpen the subject and blur the foreground and background (although this is not allowed in Nature, PhotoJournalism and Travel PSA competitions).
I was actually mad that I was at f8.0 instead of f/7.1, which would have blurred my background better with my lens at 500mm.
I understood that only in landscapes (maybe architecture, etc) to we potentially want everything in focus and use focus stacking to get that look.
However, this pic is a hybrid--a portrait and a landscape--and because its not PSA Nature, I can do what I want with it.
I may try putting the horse head facing the other horse on this image...cut and paste...I've never done that, so it would be a good lesson.
And I love Sunil's Monochrome, which solves a lot of these issues. We are traveling now, so I'll try everything before November ends." |
Nov 19th |
| 78 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
Thanks, Robert. I often shoot at 20,000 ISO for my night birds, and use Photo AI to remove the noise. You bring up some great points and have started a wonderful discussion!
My understanding was that a professional images recommend just the subject in focus. That's why we pay $20,000 for a f/2.8 lens. That's why software lets us sharpen the subject and blur the foreground and background (although this is not allowed in Nature, PhotoJournalism and Travel PSA competitions).
I was actually mad that I was at f8.0 instead of f/7.1, which would have blurred my background better with my lens at 500mm.
I understood that only in landscapes (maybe architecture, etc) to we potentially want everything in focus and use focus stacking to get that look.
However, this pic is a hybrid--a portrait and a landscape--and because its not PSA Nature, I can do what I want with it.
I may try putting the horse head facing the other horse on this image...cut and paste...I've never done that, so it would be a good lesson.
And I love Sunil's Monochrome, which solves a lot of these issues. We are traveling now, so I'll try everything before November ends.
|
Nov 19th |
| 78 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
You are the master of monochrome. I'll give it a try with both versions. Thanks! |
Nov 16th |
| 78 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
Thanks for your initial feedback that led to this version, James! I appreciate it! I am glad you like this one much better! |
Nov 15th |
| 78 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
Ed, I redid my image in the 11/14 version using your ideas. Let me know what you think. Any better? |
Nov 14th |
| 78 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
Jim, I used your suggestions on my latest version on 11/14. Let me know what you think! Thanks! |
Nov 14th |
| 78 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
James, check out my latest version and see if you like it better. I used your suggestions. Thanks! |
Nov 14th |
| 78 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
Robert, check out my latest version. I did not brighten the horses as much. Better? |
Nov 14th |
| 78 |
Nov 23 |
Comment |
Thanks for the feedback! I reworked my image, and I have to say that once I started working on it, I did see the out of focus sagebrush on the sorrel horse as very distracting, as Jim had mentioned. I tried removing them and cloning them, without much luck.
So I moved to another version of the pair. In this one, we don't have the two horses looking at each other, which is disappointing, as that gave us a "round and round" on the composition. But we do have their bodies free of out-of-focus sagebrush!
I did add just a bit of yellow to the horses, but no "rays of the sun" made with giant radial filters, so they are much darker than they were. The DeHaze slider was my best friend on the horses, and made their sad wild horse coats look much richer.
Ed mentioned the sagebrush color being off. And James reworked the image adding some more life to the sagebrush. So I added a tiny bit of blue and a tiny bit of green to the Background Selection, which I think added some nice contrast to the warmer color horses.
Gotta say, these horses are scarred and full of burrs, ticks and the sorrel is very pregnant, but ribs showing, probably from worms. One of the horses in another image has a huge bite that healed horribly. Not so much fun for "living free".
Thoughts? Thanks! |
Nov 14th |
 |
| 78 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
Thanks for your catches, Ed! I'm am going to rework as soon as everyone's critiques are in, and see what everyone things of my new version. I appreciate the help! |
Nov 12th |
| 78 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
I'm glad you like it. I think there was a lot of glare on the metal from the sun, so I was trying to mimimize that and bring your eye right to the carrier.
I am happy to Zoom with you, if you want to duplicate the look. As you know, there are a million ways to get to the same place. ;-)
|
Nov 8th |
| 78 |
Nov 23 |
Comment |
Jim, I tried a high pass on just the containers on the back of the boat, as I feel that's the most interesting aspect of the subject. It made things more pixelated, I'm sure because we are working with such small sized photos.
So I used Camera raw. I chose the back cargo area using "Choose object" and then reduced highlights, increased blacks and was going for a more saturated intense look on the back of the boat, as the back of the boat seemed a bit muddy to me in your version.
I'm not sure I accomplished anything better for you, but here's my version. The only thing I changed are the containers on the back of the boat and red and blue areas at the bottom of the boat. |
Nov 8th |
 |
| 78 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
Wow, fascinating! I took a Travel course and was told the pix needed to be identifiable as Rome, Africa, Washington state and so on. Titles aren't read, so don't matter. Great news from you, so I can enter so many more images than I have in the past!
I'll work on yours and send it soon. |
Nov 7th |
| 78 |
Nov 23 |
Comment |
What a fantastic shot and lucky you to see the "fire sky".
Hope to go to Lisa's workshop in 2025 and get similar images.
Since we have an engagement going on, I think a more tender, romantic sky is more appropriate to support the moment. A sweet sunset shot. The "fire" sky competes with the proposal, in my opinion.
I do like the woman's entire horse, as its much more restful and timeless. It feels like she just got off her horse with half a horse. On the catcus, I do love the far one...it could always be moved to behind the woman.
You might consider giving the monster tall cactus one a little more room at the top and perhaps an "arm" so it isn't quite so phallic ;-).
This is just a wonderful shot and has so much potential to show it several ways. Congrats on getting it! |
Nov 7th |
| 78 |
Nov 23 |
Comment |
Is it the driver? If not, why is he wearing a helmet? Or is it an oxygen mask for working with fuel?
The spray is great, but I really had to hunt for it. I'd work on how to show more...clone more droplets would be my first suggestion (not to change the image, per se, but so we see what you want us to see). I'd be happy to try, if you like.
The rest is great, and I love the wrecked car on the top right. |
Nov 7th |
| 78 |
Nov 23 |
Comment |
Wow, I just love your series! Good on you to figure it out! I'm not wild about the house in the image, as I think the series is the important part.
I recently watched this webinar with two "Eclipse Experts" and decided that I wasn't up for the hard work and dedication it takes (good on you to do it!)
But perhaps there is some expertise here for you. And they are going to be in Texas helping people for a fee, so that might be useful. This was a free webinar, so I feel okay sharing it.
https://langellphotography.com/chasing-the-eclipse/?mc_cid=86b9704998&mc_eid=50e84d0620
|
Nov 7th |
| 78 |
Nov 23 |
Comment |
Jim, my understanding of PSA Travel is that it must be a recognizable place. This is certainly not recognizable. You've entered a lot more than I have, would this be a Travel contender? Or just PSA Color?
What's interesting in this is the repetition. Shipping containers and then the scaffolding taking us deeper and deeper. If you aren't going to enter in Travel, I'd be tempted to play with the saturation in the containers and then use some specific sharpening masking in Photoshop to really draw our eye to the back of the boat. I'm happy to take shot at it if you might consider a PID-Color entry. |
Nov 7th |
| 78 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
Gee, I would never have caught the out of focus brush being an issue. I can include the front sagebrush as part of my Subject Selection and see if that keeps it more in focus. Thanks for bringing it to my attention! I'll wait until everyone weighs in and then I'll rework taking it into consideration. Thanks so much! |
Nov 7th |
| 78 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
I like your rework, with the horses showing up because the sagebrush is bluer. I'll wait for group feedback and then rework. Thanks so much!
|
Nov 7th |
| 78 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
Thanks! I was afraid they might appear too "lit up". I will wait for everyone's feedback and then rework them. |
Nov 7th |
9 comments - 20 replies for Group 78
|
9 comments - 20 replies Total
|
