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

avatar
Avatar

Close this Tab when done

1111 Comments / 770 Replies Posted

  = Current Round   = Previous Round
Group Round C/R Comment Date Image
64 Apr 21 Comment I think this was well spotted and your processing was even better. Super!

I think a letterbox version in mono would also be interesting.		 Apr 9th
64 Apr 21 Comment I'm glad you told me the location Jerry, as I'd not heard of this viewpoint. Although perhaps I could have guessed.

Personally I find it interesting but unexciting despite the large amount of detail, until perhaps when the scale is known. I suppose it's not on most people's doorstep, so waiting for unusual weather is impractical, but a ray of sunshine across part of it would have added drama.

I like the horizon present, it would be very anonymous without it. As for a sky replacement - not for me unless done gently, as the even sky gives a pleasant contrast to the ground.

Apr 9th
64 Apr 21 Comment Interesting picture, a place I've not been to or even seen before. The tones and patterns are interesting, perhaps too detailed in the mono as I find it confusing at first sight.

Credit to the camera and its software as you say, it's something our DSLRs and CSCs can't do (well, mine can't) despite their cost and complexity.

I would remove some of the light, bland area at the bottom. Personally, I find the colour version easier to understand and therefore preferred.		 Apr 9th
64 Apr 21 Comment I would agree. The composition and varying sharpness in all parts lends to a picture focussing on the rider, which is great.

Some might say more space is needed in front of the horse for it to "run into", but from what I've seen on TV, rodeos travel more vertically than horizontally!		 Apr 9th
64 Apr 21 Comment I sometimes wonder why we bother with our expensive DSLRs and CSCs, as this is a super photo. I've just sold a Nikon P500 bridge camera which survived immersion in a river 9 years ago which caused it to "die", only to fully recover after a couple of weeks' drying out, and took many good photos after that. Although it was desperately slow compared to modern cameras.
Pictorially, here I would have removed the detail on the horizon on the left and maybe the enlargement of the quay on the right, brought out the ropes to the front of the ship if possible, and darkened and strengthened the clouds a bit to make the ship pop out more.		 Apr 9th
64 Apr 21 Reply Thanks. Indeed - how about a blue one? Apr 6th
5 comments - 1 reply for Group 64
95 Apr 21 Reply Thanks, Bill.

That's a puzzle. The optical performance of a non-macro lens does fall off when it's out of its comfort zone, but not drastically, I've taken many photos using tubes and a 50mm lens. Does it look unsharp in the camera viewfinder, or are the results unsharp? If the latter, I wonder if the problem is movement? You need a fast shutter speed if things are wobbling around. Try that, or flash. If the former, sounds to me that you are using an inappropriate lens - can you try a different one?

If it's the lens, reversing it can help as it's then working closer to its design distances (object and image distances from the lens centre, [or more correctly its focal points]). However this means the electrical contacts are dangling in the air, not talking to the camera, so it brings other issues to tackle - loss of autofocus, metering and diaphragm control. You can get reversing adapters such as the Novoflex which re-connect the contacts. I did have one but found it no good (in my opinion) as the working distance from my micro 4/3 lenses was small enough, reduced literally to zero in some cases by the adapter itself. So reversing lenses is a difficult avenue to pursue in my view.

Tom has tubes and a bellows so might offer more comments.

Come to think of it, are the tubes giving problems with the auto focus? Try switching to manual focus and see if that improves things. Also, all tubes are not born equal. I had problems with some tubes bought for my Olympus, cheap plastic ones, the information from lens to camera was compromised by them. These problems were resolved with some slightly more expensive plastic ones made by Meike, which work fine apart from internal reflections which are a problem sometimes.		 Apr 21st
95 Apr 21 Reply Alas what I think is that I'm struggling to see a difference between mine and your two, Tom. I agree, I habitually sharpen up to the maximum I can, provided no artefacts are visible, but more subtle photographers might think I over-do it. It comes from defending negative comments in the past levelled at micro 4/3! Apr 18th
95 Apr 21 Comment Very nice. I keep thinking of changes I might suggest, but none seems to improve what you have, for me. I like the way the turned petal links together the petals and the stigma (?).

For full flowers, I agree with Carol, a bit of softness is often nice, but for a small section like this, I think sharper is better. f45 has its disadvantages!		 Apr 9th
95 Apr 21 Comment Very attractive colour and detail. It's difficult to get one exposure in this situation, so I won't suggest a bracket at larger aperture to oompress the sharp area! However more blurring of the background can be done in post.
It's very square and tight in the frame; I wonder if a little more space to the bottom and right might have given it room to breathe and enhanced the leading line effect of the leaf below?		 Apr 9th
95 Apr 21 Reply Hi Bob,
Well spotted. I usually look round the border for light patches, but the dark one caught me out. Proofing you own photos can be as hard as proofing you own writing at times. Once I got going with the clone brush, I did a few white spots in inconvenient places, but it's hard to decide if they are real features or specs of dust on the subject or what. Anyway, I hope this is better.		 Apr 8th
2 comments - 3 replies for Group 95
7 comments - 4 replies Total

197 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

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

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

Close this Tab when done