|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 6 |
May 19 |
Reply |
Yes, I agree Dick. Attention to detail by me is required! |
May 24th |
| 6 |
May 19 |
Reply |
They are offering a 4-in-1 deal at the moment for $199, which still seems a bit expensive considering Affinity costs £50 here! I think someone in group 64 recommended the denoise to me, but Affinity seems to do a good job of that. I've just tried a few online sharpening tools but didn't find them very helpful. I think I'll stick with trying to get it right in the first place! |
May 24th |
| 6 |
May 19 |
Reply |
A good improvement, I think, Tom. I do like the reduced background brightness and cloning to fill the burned-out area.
Topaz AI has improved the sharpness of that bud, which is good. I got the trial version and found it made little improvement to my test photos, and it ran very slowly on my i5 2.5GHz Win 10 machine with 8GB RAM and SSD, so I uninstalled it. How does it work for you? |
May 23rd |
| 6 |
May 19 |
Reply |
Thanks Madhusudhan,
It wasn't actually snow, just a bright area, but that doesn't matter, I like your interpretation!
Yes, a smaller aperture would have increased the DoF, and I probably could have got away with a slower shutter speed. I could say that smaller apertures give less sharpness to points in focus according to lens tests, but we've seen some good pics here with f22 and less. So I think you are right, I should have done that. |
May 21st |
| 6 |
May 19 |
Comment |
I'd agree, a nice picture apart from the green stalks. Perhaps others think it wrong, but I do a little "gardening" in such situations. The top background is a bit distracting I agree, but cropping it off would remove the tops of the top fungi and spoil them. Perhaps the blur brush to reduce this? |
May 18th |
| 6 |
May 19 |
Reply |
But didn't you reduce it to 1024x768 as well? It does look nice and sharp and the appearance of most pictures on this site does make a bit of a mockery of 50MP etc cameras for most club use, but 1024x768 does make it difficult to be sure. I'm not into Nikons (although I do have a Nikon P500 bridge which has a smaller sensor than my micro 4/3 and can take extremely good pics despite having been dunked in a river once, more mockery of some full frame enthusiasts) (initial noun censored). 12.3 MP with a decent lens is obviously more than enough in my view.
I'm getting jaded with comps as well - but as the local club comp secretary I daren't say that out loud! And I agree, I had a judge hat on as they are the sort of comments that judges do make, but aesthetically it is very pleasing, so job done.
f27 is still good! |
May 6th |
| 6 |
May 19 |
Comment |
Just the opposite of Tom's photo, here we have small depth of field used to equally good effect I think. I'm suprised so much seems to be in focus, as the background is so way out of focus, giving a splendid contrast to the leading lady and gent. Super stuff, I love it. |
May 6th |
| 6 |
May 19 |
Comment |
I suggest that you stick it in a competition, Tom! It looks grand to me. I suppose one could comment on the light edge areas top and bottom right, and the bright spot at 11 o'clock half way from the middle to the edge, and perhaps to lighten the central part (stamen?).
f38??I've never seen an aperture that small. The pundits would shout "diffraction" but it seems pretty sharp to me. Is the original image as sharp as this suggests? If so, I'm impressed. The benefit to the DoF is obvious. |
May 6th |
| 6 |
May 19 |
Comment |
Yes, a tad more (or a toad more?) to the right giving him more space might have been better, but it's got bags of impact despite his camouflaged appearance. Curious colouration, and the eye is so attractice despite not having a catchlight. I suppose the nature photographers would object to adding one! |
May 6th |
| 6 |
May 19 |
Comment |
I like it! The ropes lower down in the pile are soft, but that's good in my view, it emphasises the foreground ones. The orange really stands out - would it do so more if a bit of the front left purple one were removed? |
May 6th |
5 comments - 5 replies for Group 6
|
| 64 |
May 19 |
Comment |
Well the tripod made the camera steady, but it is amazing that the model remained still enough to make it reasonably sharp. Prsonally I'd have increased the ISO to reduce the exposure time.
The title does seem inappropriate to me.
I'm surprised, the shadows are quite soft for a single light source. |
May 18th |
| 64 |
May 19 |
Reply |
Some years ago, scientists created the world's first cloned animal, in Scotland. It was a sheep and was called Dolly. It lived for quite a few years and looked like a normal sheep. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolly_(sheep)
I was making a pun on the use of cloning in Affinity to remove part of a sheep. Sorry, it's my sense of humour! |
May 9th |
| 64 |
May 19 |
Comment |
How about this - I've sharpened the face as John suggested and blurred the background as Jerry suggested. |
May 8th |
 |
| 64 |
May 19 |
Reply |
Thanks, Jerry. It took no patience at all, sheep are over-curious animals. They left their mark on my trouser knees....
Yes, I like the idea of blurring the background a little. I'm wondering whether f11 was too small, but I think I was wanting to make sure that it was sharp enough. I tend to foget that blurring is easy with digital. The converse still isn't, I think, so best to err on the safe side. I got a trial version of Topaz' "artificial intelligence" sharpening program recently after a PSA podcast, but it didn't work for me. |
May 8th |
| 64 |
May 19 |
Reply |
Thanks, John. I've never tried selective sharpening so I'll give it a go tonight whilst ignoring the TV.
|
May 6th |
| 64 |
May 19 |
Comment |
Wow, it made me feel light headed! A fascinating picture. It must have been very calm (before the rock). I can't suggest anything other than showing it to someone tipsy to see how they feel! |
May 6th |
| 64 |
May 19 |
Comment |
but I'll also post what I got when I tried to de-converge the verticals - ghastly! The towering building have been reduced to squat, little ones. I much prefer the towering appearance of the original. |
May 6th |
 |
| 64 |
May 19 |
Comment |
I like this too! I think I'd have moved a little to the left to get less foliage over the right tower, but I'm nit-picking.
As Don said, the wires are not a big distraction, but they are very easy to remove in Affinity, and I'm sure in other programs too. I'll post my result.... |
May 6th |
 |
| 64 |
May 19 |
Comment |
I agree with Don, and think that the mono here is better than the colour, although that too is an interesting abstract.That sounds like a fascinating place to visit. |
May 6th |
| 64 |
May 19 |
Comment |
I think this is a dramatic picture! I love the clouds and background, but I think the foreground lets it down a bit. I find the roof of the cabin being in line with the river shoreline is confusing - a slightly higher vantage point and lightening the roof would have separated them and made the feeling of depth better. Also I think the grass in the foreground is too light; I'd suggest cropping some off and darkening it. Finally the cabin is very central. Cropping off the right side to change that seems to be an improvement to me. Sorry for being critical, but the initial impact wore off as I looked, but I'm sure that it could be a good picture with a bit more manipulation. |
May 6th |
| 64 |
May 19 |
Comment |
At first I thought it was a grainy negative. I wonder where they got the name from - an over active imagination perhaps!
I must say I often get captivated by effects I've happened on and am under critical of whether it will be appealing to others or indeed appropriate to the subject. With the right subject this effect might be interesting, but I agree with Don, the colour version is attractive if fairly ordinary in terms of flower pictures. The composition is interesting I think, although I've been criticised in the past for showing part of a leaf in a not dissimilar final result! I was thinking it was here, but no, I posted that one in group 6 in December last. |
May 6th |
8 comments - 3 replies for Group 64
|
13 comments - 8 replies Total
|
