|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 64 |
Oct 20 |
Reply |
Jerry, I started a reply which became quite long and I thought it was better in the Bulletin Board section, so I've put it there. |
Oct 25th |
| 64 |
Oct 20 |
Reply |
Thanks, Lance, I tend to forget about the bulletin board. My "extra"s would have been better posted there. I've found what you have written now, and will read and respond there. |
Oct 25th |
| 64 |
Oct 20 |
Reply |
And the other -
Sorry if these are "marmite" pictures, but I do like going for interesting mono conversions! This picture was back-lit, so the halo is the hair in the sunshine. |
Oct 22nd |
 |
| 64 |
Oct 20 |
Reply |
Hi, Lance
Thanks for your comments.
As it happened, we went back last week with our grandson, but alas the horses were uncooperative and weren't close enough to photograph this way.
Your comments inspired me to revisit some photos I took last year, so I worked a couple up and hope you like them!
|
Oct 22nd |
 |
| 64 |
Oct 20 |
Comment |
OK, I've redone it without using NIK and keeping the contrast in check. I've got to say I think it's a bit ordinary now, but what do you all think? |
Oct 15th |
 |
| 64 |
Oct 20 |
Reply |
Thanks, Stan, that was a function I've not tried before, all my previous cloning work having been "Normal". It worked very well. I need to experiment with all the other options, too, now! |
Oct 15th |
| 64 |
Oct 20 |
Reply |
I see that Google is offering a free pair of Bose QC35ii headphones with a Pixel 4a (5G version only) for a few days. Tempting, I have some older Bose QC 15s which cost £299 about 8 years ago and they are brilliant! Here, 4a = £349, 4a with 5G = £499, Bose QC35ii = £249. So tempting to go for the 4a with 5G and upgrade my cans! (Those symbols on my screen which you might get also are actually GB pounds.)
The 4a with 5G has a second camera with wider field of view - but these lenses are very wide anyway. Pity they don't do a true telephoto. I see there are various add-on lenses available, but they all seem to be giving wider angles, not smaller. Have you tried any?
I also see you can buy "cases" tomake holding the phone more like a "proper" camera. Some have a bluetooth shutter release so you don't have to tap the screen. Have you tried one? |
Oct 14th |
| 64 |
Oct 20 |
Reply |
It's a smart phone, Helen - seehttps://www.amazon.co.uk/Google-Pixel-64GB-Just-Black/dp/B07ZJLDFTV, https://www.gsmarena.com/google_pixel_4_xl-9895.php etc. Impressive it is. The sensor is "1/2.5 inches" (which I find a hopeless way of expressing it). It means the sensor is 5.76 x 4.39mm, or 25 square mm in area. This is only 10% of the area my micro 4/3,or under 3% of full frame sensor area. It's said that it's the software in the phones that gives such good results despite this. Very large depth of field comes from the small sensor size too - useful sometimes, not at others! |
Oct 12th |
| 64 |
Oct 20 |
Reply |
Yes, it (the glow) is an artefact that I should work on if I wanted to compete with it, I think.
The eye is as photographed. Horse eyes are pretty much like human eyes I think in terms of highlights, etc, and I resisted putting some in as I thought it would be inappropriate, but perhaps not.
Sounds like I should do that work... although I'm not competing in competitions much now. |
Oct 10th |
| 64 |
Oct 20 |
Comment |
I think it was a guy from Topaz that said in a talk a year or so ago something like "in future photography will be defined by software rather than by hardware". That's probably a bit strong, but we can all see how much clever software is changing photography. What I would love would be a phone sensor with more versatile lenses in a camera style body with a viewfinder - not the inconvenient phone body. |
Oct 8th |
| 64 |
Oct 20 |
Comment |
I like the action here, and the egret lends itself to mono. There is detail in the under-wing which is good as it could have easily been lost in that light. Could the eye be lightened a little to make it visible? |
Oct 8th |
| 64 |
Oct 20 |
Comment |
Woof!
I think it's a good landscape, but for me the interest increases as I look towards the top of the picture. I love the mountains and the sky, which contrast each other well.
Whilst the grass leads my eye in nicely and gives a god sense of depth, I feel that there's too much grass, so it detracts from the impact of the mountains. Being lighter adds to this, and so I would agree, a burn in would help avoid this. |
Oct 8th |
| 64 |
Oct 20 |
Comment |
I think it's an interesting study. The small sensor has given good depth of field even at f1.8. The textures and patterns have given good depth, and I like the way my eye is made to wander round and round. For a "simple" picture, there's a lot to look at! |
Oct 8th |
| 64 |
Oct 20 |
Comment |
Yes, I like them too, Don. The variation in tones, and the textures, are super, I think. The rope from the left is a nice lead-in, and the different shapes of the rope on the cleat and that in the coil are a nice contrast. I do like contrasty monos with texture to abrade,and this delivers those in abundance.
The only thing dragging my eye is the top layer of rope on the cleat, which somehow looks unsharp. It's hard to see how that could be a depth of field issue, it must have had a different texture I think. |
Oct 8th |
| 64 |
Oct 20 |
Comment |
I like the way the slight structure in the clouds seems to lead my eye to the largest, central building. Being the largest and brightest object, and close to the centre, this building is the centre of attention for me.
Initially I thought I didn't care for the embankment stones on the bottom right as it competes for attention and makes the composition less balanced. However it also gives depth to the picture, which I like, and I think this argument wins for me.
Considering it is only one image, it is nice and sharp. The "high structure" seems to have made it "grainy", and so I was surprised when I noticed the 100ISO. Have you tried denoising it, or do you like this graininess (as I do)? |
Oct 8th |
7 comments - 8 replies for Group 64
|
| 95 |
Oct 20 |
Reply |
Absolutely. I find it tempting to only look for "whole" subjects, but there's no reason not to select parts of subjects to achieve the 1:1 target as it gives this advantage too. |
Oct 17th |
| 95 |
Oct 20 |
Reply |
Good point. Another skill I need to get familiar with! |
Oct 17th |
| 95 |
Oct 20 |
Reply |
Thanks, Tom. Live filter layers are tools I rarely use, so I've just had a go. My observation is that the amount of sharpening available from the develop persona tool is considerably greater than that from the live filter layer. Having said that, it's easy to add too much and see unwanted effects too. I see I can also use the non-layer clarity tool in the photo persona, and it also seems to be more powerful than the clarity layer. But the layer is useful as I can turn it on and off at will. |
Oct 17th |
| 95 |
Oct 20 |
Reply |
Thanks, Barbara.
Aren't we all?
S |
Oct 12th |
| 95 |
Oct 20 |
Reply |
No, just one exposure. |
Oct 12th |
| 95 |
Oct 20 |
Comment |
As a chemical engineer, I've got to say it looks like the archimedean screw in a screw conveyor! People are getting amazingly able to make nano-manufacturing facilities now, so it could be a micro version of one of those.
Seriously though, I think it's a good, fun photo, and as you say it's opening up details that are not visible normally. Amazing how much plastic was left caught up on it. |
Oct 8th |
| 95 |
Oct 20 |
Reply |
Thanks, Carol. Some time ago I was taking some moon photos (close to the opposite of macro!) and comparing them with those taken by a friend using his Sony. I was bemoaning the lack of detail in my photos taken with Pro Olympus lenses compared to his. He then took me through his processing work flow, and the difference was revealed. Whilst he only takes jpgs (and I nearly always start with a RAW), he puts it into the RAW editor ("Develop Persona")in Affinity (I hadn't realised that is possible) and uses the Clarity and Details Refinement fuctions to improve this. I now use those to some degree in 90% of my photos, and this one is no exception. Some might say I over-do this, but personally I love the result in most cases. |
Oct 5th |
1 comment - 6 replies for Group 95
|
8 comments - 14 replies Total
|
