|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 64 |
Apr 17 |
Reply |
That's challenging the definition of "modifications"! I'm not sure how I'll cope with a rose on the keyboard whilst playing Mozart, but I'll try!! Seriously, I like your idea for enhancing images of instruments; I must try some. |
Apr 16th |
| 64 |
Apr 17 |
Comment |
I like this image too. Some might say it lacks a subject, but the whole image is the subject in my opinion. The eye can rove around looking at the interesting detail. The little camera has done a great job and as others have said, the large depth of field from the small sensor has kept it all nice and sharp even at a fairly large aperture.
To me it is a bit grey, and I would have looked at increasing the contrast. Having said that there are light and dark tones, nothing lost in shadow or burned out, so perhaps that's just the way it is. Lightening up the top end would burn out those chinks of light, so I guess having tried that I'd have put it back to the original. Maybe a bit of general contrast increase but burning as Stan said and even dodging on the mid left shadows could help. Maybe experiment with a curve tonal adjustment. Lots of scope for experiments! But hey, why do anything, it's very pleasing as it is. |
Apr 12th |
| 64 |
Apr 17 |
Comment |
Yes, indeed, an original, interesting and attractive image, expertly shot. There's lots of detail which I like and a complete gamut of tones, if that's an allowed perversion of the colour term! I like the viewpoint and the way the bay and foreground give depth and perspective and lead the eye towards the lighthouse.
Personally I'm a bit jaded of "milky water" in seascapes and waterfalls, and feel that the use of ND filters to achieve this is getting boring. This image however is entirely "natural", a long exposure being necessary for the light conditions and other required parameters (iso, f), so milky water is inevitable and I think, quite nice here.
I'm less happy personally about the "milky clouds". Would it benefit from a bit of cheating here, pasting in a sky with clearer clouds?
I also think that cropping a bit more improves the image as the lighthouse is rather small at present. Losing a bit of sea on the left and foreground doesn't seem to detract for me and improves the impact of the lighthouse. |
Apr 12th |
| 64 |
Apr 17 |
Comment |
I guess I could make a whole portfolio of pictures on musical instruments, or even just of the piano, and different crops on the keyboard etc. This is the only image I've taken so far of the piano, there must be a lot more potential images there. That's a nice idea - I've been pondering about doing a PSA portfolio but my subject interests are so wide I was struggling to think of just one to choose.
I have had this image in club competitions and at least one judge has commented about the lack of contrast in the music, and so I'll try to make a layer of the music and increase its contrast. I can lighten the "Yamaha" too. At the moment we have builders in doing major changes to the house. so anything dusted becomes dusty again in minutes, so that route will have to wait a couple of months until, literally, the dust has settled (and been cleaned out!). |
Apr 11th |
| 64 |
Apr 17 |
Comment |
Got it now, thanks! Latin name Idea leuconoe apparently (I did Latin at school but have forgotten most of it now!)and indeed, very monochrome!
Stuart
|
Apr 7th |
| 64 |
Apr 17 |
Comment |
Hi Abhijeet,
I find that an interesting image. I think judges might comment on the picture being in three thirds vertically, and the loss of the end of the trailing boat, and the overlapping of the boats. The former I think adds to the feeling of movement across the picture, so I like it. The second might be fair comment, but it does emphasis that that boat is losing! The latter I think is fair - a slightly higher viewpoint might have been better, but that's very easy to say and might not have been possible.
I like the contrast between the white and black clothing of the rowers. The loss of shadow detail in the trees might be criticised but I like it as it prevents it being distracting from the boats but contributes to the feeling of flow.
Some people like images to flow from left to right as it is more "natural" and "restful" for left-to-right writers. However the converse is that right to left adds tension, and I think this is absolutely correct here.
Stuart
|
Apr 7th |
| 64 |
Apr 17 |
Comment |
Hi Jerry,
Welcome to our little group! I've only been a PSA member for a short time and already feel a (small) part of it, much due to this group. I'm a chemical engineer and also take pictures of failures! Fortunately they don't happen too often. I like to draw too (not very well) but am hopeless at painting - possibly why I like monochrome.
I like your Yosemite picture a lot. I'd love to go there sometime. Landscape photography is all about getting the light right, and it can be so fleeting. The light is great here. Your presentation of the tones is full and interesting (I see all shades of grey from white to black but without losing detail at both ends). The composition is dramatic and it tells a great story!
What would a judge say? (They are a picky lot!) I suspect (s)he might comment about the cloud in the top left corner - a wee bit distracting? Easy to get rid of in Affinity Photo (and I suppose in the Adobe programs too), not sure about Fastone's capabilities. (I use their resizer program regularly but have not used their viewer much).
If you like landscape, and there are many great landscape photographers as I'm sure you know, you might like to look at http://carterart.co.uk/galleries. I went to a talk by this lady last week as she dispelled the myth that landscape is unchanging and boring - and did it very well! She showed many sequences of the "same" scene taken over periods varying from a few minutes to a few hours, and wow, were they different!
Stuart |
Apr 7th |
| 64 |
Apr 17 |
Comment |
A bit like with Don's butterfly, I initially thought "Why photograph a colourful subject in mono?". So I've been trying to imagine the flowers in yellow, or red, and it's easy to do, but lo and behold, it stops me from seeing the lovely mono gradation in your picture. I guess this is a good demonstration of what, to me, mono is all about. I might have said previously that I believe "If colour is important to a picture, shoot in colour; else shoot in mono". It could be argued here that colour IS important, and you've deliberately shunned it. But the result, to me, is great - we see the subtle tone gradation which otherwise would have been swamped by bright colour. So after looking carefully and thinking about it, I really like this image. I'll now look at colour subjects differently in future! |
Apr 1st |
| 64 |
Apr 17 |
Comment |
Hi Don,
I've never seen a butterfly in mono before! Often they are such colourful creatures my first thought was "What an unusual subject to be mono". So I googled "Kite butterfly", to see what you mean, but alas found nothing (although lots of "butterfly kites"!). Maybe it only appears under its Latin name. Anyway, I take your word for it, and it makes a striking subject now.
I wondered if the highlights round the wings are sharpening artifacts, but I don't see it elsewhere so maybe it's an effect of the light.
At f3.2 you've done very well with depth of field, so your focus must have been spot on.
Do you think the image looks better turned 180° (or even 90°)?
I like the vignette, but could it be little less at the wingtips as they are tending to disappear? |
Apr 1st |
8 comments - 1 reply for Group 64
|
8 comments - 1 reply Total
|
