Activity for User 792 - Stuart Ord - stuart@CEDCS.com

Avatar

Close this Tab when done

1111 Comments / 775 Replies Posted

= Current Round

= Previous Round


Group	Round	C/R	Comment	Date	Image
64	Oct 18	Comment	OK, I've had a go at that. The original picture does have a lot of mid grey in it, and trying to increase the constrast in the mid range using a curve adjustment does easily cause blown highlights and black shadows. However fiddling for a compromise, this does seem to be better!	Oct 26th
64	Oct 18	Comment	I agree with most of the above, and would echo the comment about the white paper and the child. Also the flag obscuring much of the bearer's face is unfortunate. However I can't agree with the comments to shoot more from the front. I like the recession and depth that this composition gives. There are few faces looking towards the camera, but the key ones mainly in profile are fine to me. A more central observation place would have had a rear view of the Colonel in the foreground which would have been less attractive I think. Technically I think it's spot on, with detail in the snow and a little detail in the sky. Maybe a little more detail in the closer roof would be nice. Oh, and like Abhijeet's picture, there are a couple of little stowaways on the right edge (a bag?) which I'd like to see removed.	Oct 19th
64	Oct 18	Comment	There's a lot to like in this picture for me. The ripples and clouds frame the subject well. Contrast and clarity are super. There is bags of depth yet the subject is so clear and distinct. Very enjoyable. I do agree with the "decisive moment" comments. For me, ideal would have been one man's clothing held aloft as shown, and the other one splashing into the water. So yes, sequential shooting might have got a more interesting frame. I would suggest a little more cropping or some cloning out on the left as there are a few artifacts on the very edge of the bottom left that are distracting to me.	Oct 19th
64	Oct 18	Comment	Gosh, I had a bit of a feeling of deja vu with Gerry's picture, and I've got a strong one here. Has this subject appeared before in group 64? I seem to remember a flag pole or something that people commented on. Anyway, that's probably my dicky memory. I do like this picture. I like the ripples and composition. I agree that the foreground is flat, but that doesn't bother me as the main subject (the building) has plenty of contrast and punch so the peripherals don't detract from the subject. Indeed I think it adds emphasis to the picture. I feel it's a pity that the extension area to the right of the main building merges into the trees on the island, and indeed the left of the building could be more distinct from the background, but my impression is that moving viewpoint would not have helped. So to me it's a job really well done.	Oct 19th
64	Oct 18	Comment	Yes, a very interesting subject I think. They say that landscapes should contain a foreground, mid ground and background, giving recession and depth. This actually has bags of that, but I'm struggling with the transition from foreground to mid ground here. It's rather fuzzy, and indeed something recognisable in the foreground would help there together with more visual contrast between fore and mid grounds. I agree the clouds would be great in many photos, but here they seem too strong. They are a nice backdrop, much better than a bald sky, but not the subject.	Oct 19th
64	Oct 18	Comment	Super! I like the result. My only comment would be that a silhouette of a person in the tepee would have been interesting!	Oct 19th
64	Oct 18	Reply	Yes, I agree Don, this needs punch and it has too little in that respect. Back to Affinity etc!	Oct 19th
64	Oct 18	Comment	I've got to agree with Don (both here and in his comments on my photo) - it's rather lacking in punch. A contrast increase can help here I think. I suppose that leads to the debate about whether all our photos should conform to the "0 to 255" model of whether the subject matter calls for a reduced range sometimes. Generally I do like 0 to 255, but I've seen some lovely flat photos which have a contrast range similar or less then this one. However I don't feel that this is one that benefits from that.	Oct 19th
7 comments - 1 reply for Group 64
7 comments - 1 reply Total

199 Images Posted

= Current Round

= Previous Round

Group 06
Feb 20	Jan 20	Dec 19	Nov 19	Oct 19	Sep 19	Aug 19	Jul 19	Jun 19	May 19	Mar 19	Apr 19
Jan 19	Feb 19	Dec 18	Nov 18
Group 64
May 26	Apr 26	Mar 26	Feb 26	Jan 26	Dec 25	Nov 25	Oct 25	Sep 25	Aug 25	Jul 25	Jun 25
May 25	Apr 25	Mar 25	Feb 25	Jan 25	Dec 24	Nov 24	Oct 24	Sep 24	Aug 24	Jul 24	Jun 24
May 24	Apr 24	Mar 24	Feb 24	Jan 24	Dec 23	Nov 23	Oct 23	Sep 23	Aug 23	Jul 23	May 23
Apr 23	Mar 23	Feb 23	Jan 23	Dec 22	Nov 22	Oct 22	Sep 22	Aug 22	Jul 22	Jun 22	Apr 22
Mar 22	Feb 22	Jan 22	Dec 21	Nov 21	Oct 21	Sep 21	Aug 21	Jul 21	Jun 21	May 21	Apr 21
Mar 21	Feb 21	Jan 21	Dec 20	Nov 20	Oct 20	Sep 20	Aug 20	Jul 20	Jun 20	May 20	Apr 20
Mar 20	Feb 20	Jan 20	Dec 19	Nov 19	Oct 19	Sep 19	Aug 19	Jul 19	Jun 19	May 19	Apr 19
Mar 19	Feb 19	Jan 19	Dec 18	Nov 18	Oct 18	Sep 18	Aug 18	Jul 18	Jun 18	May 18	Apr 18
Mar 18	Feb 18	Jan 18	Dec 17	Nov 17	Oct 17	Sep 17	Aug 17	Jul 17	Jun 17	May 17	Apr 17
Mar 17
Group 95
May 26	Apr 26	Mar 26	Feb 26	Jan 26	Dec 25	Nov 25	Oct 25	Sep 25	Aug 25	Jul 25	Jun 25
May 25	Apr 25	Mar 25	Feb 25	Jan 25	Dec 24	Nov 24	Oct 24	Sep 24	Aug 24	Jul 24	Jun 24
May 24	Apr 24	Mar 24	Feb 24	Jan 24	Dec 23	Nov 23	Oct 23	Sep 23	Aug 23	Jul 23	Jun 23
May 23	Apr 23	Mar 23	Feb 23	Jan 23	Dec 22	Nov 22	Oct 22	Sep 22	Aug 22	Jul 22	Jun 22
May 22	Apr 22	Mar 22	Feb 22	Jan 22	Dec 21	Oct 21	Sep 21	Aug 21	Jul 21	Jun 21	May 21
Apr 21	Mar 21	Feb 21	Jan 21	Dec 20	Nov 20	Oct 20	Sep 20	Aug 20	Jul 20	Jun 20	May 20
Apr 20	Mar 20