|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 64 |
Feb 18 |
Reply |
Thanks, John. I agree, the message is now very clear and punchy. That was what I'd seen (or rather, anticipated when I spotted the fat woman sitting there), but I doubt I'd have ever got such a clean image by waiting for it. I'm sure that such heavy editing is not allowed if it were a "street" competition, but it was fun and if people like the result then that's fine by me. Pity my editing is a bit heavy handed, I must practice more, and I must get my graphic tablet out as it's much easier and more precise for this type of work than a mouse. |
Feb 25th |
| 64 |
Feb 18 |
Reply |
I've been having a play with Affinity and have made some changes. The pavement is now clear of litter, the two superfluous women have gone, the pigeon has been moved closer to the women, it's been cropped, some window highlights have gone, the pavement lines have been reinforced, the fat woman's bag has gone and I've messed with the contrast and brightness and with sharpening tools to try to give more impression of sharpness, but I don't think the latter was very successful. The Alahambra couldn't be removed, it's such a big reflection there was too little to clone from. |
Feb 25th |
| 64 |
Feb 18 |
Reply |
I've been having a play with Affinity and have made some changes. The pavement is now clear of litter, the two superfluous women have gone, the pigeon has been moved closer to the women, it's been cropped, some window highlights have gone, the pavement lines have been reinforced, the fat woman's bag has gone and I've messed with the contrast and brightness and with sharpening tools to try to give more impression of sharpness, but I don't think the latter was very successful. The Alahambra couldn't be removed, it's such a big reflection there was too little to clone from. |
Feb 24th |
 |
| 64 |
Feb 18 |
Reply |
Thanks, John. I'm only dabbling in it too and trying to read up on what practitioners say. Rules seem to be broken as often as they are made! I'll have a go at making it appear more sharp - I know there are tricks in Affinity to help apart from the usual sharpening filters, so I need to do some more learning. I'll try to remove some clutter too. This seems to me to be frowned on by "the community" but if they can't see it.... |
Feb 9th |
| 64 |
Feb 18 |
Reply |
Yes, the softness is a disappointment, I tried to improve it but got little improvement, you can't really add genuine sharpness. Hopefully my new M1 camera will make this mistake less often then the M5 it replaces. The white spots look like reflections or lights inside the shop. Easy to remove, but that would be treating it as a pictorial photograph, which it is not. I sometimes think that the byes given to street photography by those interested in the genre are a bit of a cop out (ie to ignore [to a point] exposure, sharpness, distractions, composition, etc) as without at least some of them the impact of the image could be lost. But here I'd like to claim some of them - the interaction between the women with that background is what I was trying to capture, and the pigeon is..... - I'm not sure what it is, but I like it! |
Feb 8th |
| 64 |
Feb 18 |
Reply |
I've never noticed that building, I'll have to look next time I go. I could clone out the other woman (if allowed), you're right Jerry, she does detract from the image. I think this is the fun of street, you've got to grab the image when you see it. Thank goodness for digital, we don't need to worry about taking hundreds! |
Feb 6th |
| 64 |
Feb 18 |
Reply |
Hmm, looks like an untidy city! To be fair to them, it was very windy that day. I like the idea to move the bird. They are very tame there, people shouldn't feed them but they do. I'm not sure if street photo "rules" allow mods like that (for competitions). |
Feb 6th |
| 64 |
Feb 18 |
Comment |
I love owls! I really like this image. Some might say that it's mainly soft focus (or even blurred), but the eye is razor sharp, and everything draws my eye to his eye and I think that's great. The eye texture is fab.
The highlights in his eyes are a bit confusing, especially his left eye - I wiped and then moved the window on my screen thinking I'd got dust on it (we are doing a lot of DIY so dust is everywhere!). But no, it's multiple reflections. Would it be better if they were removed or just one left in each eye?
Framing, texture, and tonality are all great in my view. |
Feb 3rd |
| 64 |
Feb 18 |
Comment |
There seems to be a lot of "rules" in wildlife photography, and most recently I heard a judge saying the animal should be doing something - eating, killing, copulating, fighting, etc. Well, this one is watching, and I like it, it shows how he earns his living. Some would say that the branch in front of its body spoils it, but again I'd say it shows him how he lives. Anyway, nice tones, sharp, nice background so I think this is a really nice image. |
Feb 3rd |
| 64 |
Feb 18 |
Comment |
Yes, I think mono is perfect for texture images like this. I'd love to go to Yellowstone one day, we are looking at the idea of a camper van tour some time in that region. My first impression was that there are few mid tones and a lot of highlights, but I put a screen shot in Affinity and its histogram says I'm wrong. I suspect that the low res of images here isn't a friend of this sort of image.
|
Feb 3rd |
| 64 |
Feb 18 |
Comment |
I love the menacing feeling of this picture. I bet the farmer was cursing, but at least his hay is cut. I love the perspective and recessing clouds. f32 made sure you got enough depth of field! Was such a low value needed here? Perhaps the full resolution image will have lost a little due to that. I think that the large areas of black in the top left and the far right clouds are a bit too much, and I'd prefer to see the shadows lifted a bit. The detail in the lighter clouds and corn is very pleasing though, I'd take care to preserve that. |
Feb 3rd |
| 64 |
Feb 18 |
Comment |
Yes, I think closer is nearly always better! Your images do show the difference between mono and colour for such subjects. I'd suggest that the colour ones are more record shots, but the mono is an interpretation which improves it in many ways.
Depth of field is the usual challenge and even at f7 the closer and distant parts are noticeably soft to me. Spot on exposure I think, nice diffuse light, lovely tone range.
Does anyone else see the monkey??! |
Feb 3rd |
5 comments - 7 replies for Group 64
|
5 comments - 7 replies Total
|
