|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 64 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
Someone said to me (a judge, I think) that lettering that completes full words and is readable isn't usually a problem, it's when when the viewer has to spend time figuring out what it is that is a distraction. These words locate the scene, to me. |
Nov 30th |
| 64 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
Santiago, I'd like to think that everyone in this group only says positive things, even if they are suggesting ways to improve an image. And if we don't agree with the comments another has made, we are confident to say it knowing that the others see it as constructive, as no two people think exactly alike.
From the title, I think Stan saw this as a scene rather than a picture of the couple, they are just part of the scene. But like you, I like giving many pictures a "tonal hug" when appropriate. Chris commented on the "light strip between sand and cliffs", and now I've seen that I'd be inclined to agree. Making the clouds and grass a little darker as well would be interesting, I think. |
Nov 30th |
| 64 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
Yes, amazing, isn't it? Having a memory like a seive, I had to look back to the original files when I did the mono conversion, as I didn't remember anything like that from when I took it. The originals show wispy cirrus clouds on a blue sky, and darkening the blues has created what you see. No time lapse, sky substitution or any other tricks! Doing the same to the best-exposed original of the 3, I get the same effect, so it's not the HDR merge. So,it's just a good, old-fashioned "red filter". |
Nov 22nd |
| 64 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
I think that signing your work is an indication of your pride in it. Good for you! Perhaps I don't have any in mine :-(
Alas I think the incessant increase of rules is a sign of the times. As a professional engineer, I hated many regulations. They were necessary for some things, of course, but over the top for others. They often stifled creativity and innovation. The people who make the rules often don't know when to stop. At least with a hobby we can do as we wish. |
Nov 20th |
| 64 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
That's absolutely fine. I often wondered why I take photos, as not many people see them. The answer is, I came to realise, they are for me, so by and large I do them as suits me. You're welcome to do the same! I'm glad you captured your feeling of the moment.
I put a signature on all the photos on my web site, thinking it was correct to do so. But now I think I wasted my time. Reading some articles, it is staggering how many images are uploaded onto the internet every day. According to https://www.lightstalking.com/photo-statistics/, 3.2 billion images are posted onto social media every day. Now I know all our photos are a cut above most of those :-) but I have no doubt that no-one is going to copy mine to my regret. |
Nov 20th |
| 64 |
Nov 23 |
Comment |
The same is true of other HDRs I did there, such as this one. |
Nov 20th |
 |
| 64 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
Thanks, John. My reply is below! |
Nov 20th |
| 64 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
Thanks for both of your comments. I see both of your points, thanks.
The dust spot is a bird, he can migrate.
The curvature is interesting. I hadn't really noticed, and it either came from the HDR merge or from correcting converging verticals. The original RAW files are all dead straight. So I've been doing some experimentation, the result I think is really interesting.
The curvature is coming from the HDR merge. Why? John hit the nail on the head, it's the lens correction. I was going round in circles for a while, as I was noticing that neither the "curved line right corner" (actually the edge of the lawn), nor the plant pots, are on the RAW files. Huh??? How can that be? When I open the RAW files in Affinity, those bits are cropped off. But if I then click off the lens correction, the "lost" bits re-appear, looking just like the merged file.
So, the HDR merge of the RAW files is not applying the lens correction. After merging the source files, Affinity opens the result in the Photo persona. If I then click into the (RAW) Develop persona, the lens correction is OFF. If I click it to ON, the cirved line becomes straight and the cropping occurs, presumably it's automatically cropping off the bits that became blank in the corrected image. Had I developed the RAW files to jpgs first and then merged them, this wouldn't have happened as RAW files go into the Develop persona with the lens correction ON by default.
What fun!
I hope you like the revised version here. I've toned this using a normal "black and white" layer in Affinity.
|
Nov 20th |
 |
| 64 |
Nov 23 |
Comment |
Interesting! I didn't realise that Sonny Liston has been incarcerated, although Pretty Boy Floyd was a thug, it seems.
The picture is even more interesting, I do like it. It has all the hallmarks of great mono to me. I like the inclusion of the tiles, it makes it "real" rather than "abstract". Perhaps I'd have included a little of the wall above the door for balance, but maybe it wasn't suitable.
|
Nov 10th |
| 64 |
Nov 23 |
Comment |
I think that a playoff is needed here, between the amount of sky shown and the amount of road. In my view, there is too little road, the picture feels unbalanced to me. The sky is interesting, no doubt, albeit a little monotonous, but it just swamps the land. I've been looking at cropping the top to make a letterbox style, and that's OK, it feels more balanced, although the "space" feeling does decrease. Alternatively, if there was more land to add (from a previous cropping) then perhaps that would give more balance. Or both!
I understand your policy, but I do agree with Lance that a signature is a distraction in all images. My view is that if anyone wants to copy my online images and can do something with them and don't care about being a thief, then they can please themselves! Nowadays, it is easy to remove a signature from a copied image, anyway.
|
Nov 10th |
| 64 |
Nov 23 |
Comment |
I think this is an interesting viewpoint of a simple and pleasing still life. I like the idea, the brightness range, texture and sharpness.
The grapefuit is bang in the centre due to their position in the plate, and the plate on the table cancelling each other out. Would a crop on the right make a more pleasing result?
I would darken the top left and bottom right corners, not to the depth of the other two, but a little to balance the tones.
I'd remove the light triangle on the table, bottom right (it would come off with my suggested crop), and also the white speck on the top right of the plate.
I'd also lighten the left grapefruit surface to make it the same as the right one, just for balance.
|
Nov 5th |
| 64 |
Nov 23 |
Comment |
Yes, if looks could kill, you'd have been in trouble!
I love the pose, the framing, the detail, the texture - all super. You are so lucky having those birds nerby.
The blue sky is a bit bland. You could say it doesn't distract from the bird, but perhaps a few wispy clouds would be nice. If you don't plan to enter it into wildlife competitions, you could clone in some. Just a few.
I think I'd try to lighten the wing and tail feathers a little to make him pop out more, and vignette the corners slightly.
|
Nov 5th |
| 64 |
Nov 23 |
Comment |
I think this is a very attractive landscape, Stan. The foreground and the clouds make me feel like I'm peering into the distance through a window, to a compelling view, a great result. The foreground, midground and farground are all very clear and progressive. The beach is a strong leading line through the picture. The mono conversion is very successful I think.
I did wonder a little about removing the figure on the right as well, but it emphasises the sense of scale and distance, so on balance I'd keep it. Progressing that thought, I wonder if the figure you removed would have been OK as it would be another leading diagonal and sense of scale and distance?
There are a couple of light arc lines at that outcrop - could they be cloned out?
|
Nov 5th |
| 64 |
Nov 23 |
Comment |
I think you've made a great improvement in the original image, which was probably grabbed in a hurry. The final framing is perfect I think. A good opportunistic capture.
I'm less sure about Gaussian blurring, but that's your artistic style, not mine! I'm sure many would like it. I suppose I would sometimes blur the area around the figure in a shot like this, as blurring via reduced depth of field wasn't possible. But I like my subjects to be sharp, except perhaps pretty girls in dreamy settings.
I would also attend to the lighter areas in the final version - in front of his face, across the picture in the window, and the building on the left of the frame - to reduce their distraction.
|
Nov 5th |
7 comments - 7 replies for Group 64
|
| 95 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
How are you getting on with your photography of the brocolli?
I've read that it has elements that follow the Fibonacci sequence (which I think is 1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,34 etc) but I can't find anywhere which explains this. I can't see it. Here's a closer picture, lit by white light and a highlight from a red laser. (Weird effect!) Can you see it? If only I'd not sold my MP-E lens, that might have been clearer.
|
Nov 17th |
 |
| 95 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
It seems to me that the main effect of your editing is to darken it and to improve the colour saturation. An improvement! The vegetable, as you can see in my second image, is amazingly flat in colour and contoured in its shape. Most colours on the light made little effect, apart from red. The white I guess is my white main light being reflected, it was unexpected when I set it up. |
Nov 17th |
| 95 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
Here's a picture of it, with a normal-size mug for scale. |
Nov 7th |
 |
| 95 |
Nov 23 |
Comment |
Ah, he's cute, I like him. Or her.
I had some crabs in my aquarium once, and they were small (less than 2cm across) and cute, but they kept escaping. In the end I found them behind a curtain, and crispy.
I've been looking back to your emails, and I can't see a difference between your "original" and "final" ones. That's no matter, I don't see much needing any change. There aren't lots of highlights that might have indicated that a polarising filter had been needed. The claws are a bit light for my likeing, I'd have toned them down a bit to avoid distracting too much from the face. I think your settings were perfect for this image, and the result rewards you, it's very enjoyable.
As for your skeleton - if he was a photographer, his exposure was set too long! ;-)
|
Nov 5th |
| 95 |
Nov 23 |
Comment |
I think this is an interesting result, and quite amazing that it has come from that original. It's a great testament to that lens, that this result can be obtained from heavy cropping.
Given the conditions, I think the result is good for sharpness and texture, surprisingly low noise. It's fairly framed, I'd have made it a little more diagonal.
To me, the biggest improvement you can make is by getting closer. Even with a 105mm APS-C lens, you need to get "up close and personal" with the subjects, pushing the lens to 1:1 (magnification 1) or to frame the subject so that cropping can be not needed or minimal. With a macro lens, cropping more than a little just means you weren't close enough! |
Nov 5th |
| 95 |
Nov 23 |
Comment |
Well, I think it all depends on what satisfies you at the end of the day. Your current image does look a bit soft to me. I can't see any plane of sharp focus here, which could be enlarged by focus stacking were you to do that. So if it were my picture, I would re-take it to get it sharper. There are nice hairs around the stigma ends which I would like to jump out at me.
As I've mentioned, I now routinely take focus brackets, and decide in post whether any one hits the focus I want on its own. If not, I can then stack appropriate images. If one is fine, I delete the rest. (Nothing is better at eating hard disk space than focus brackets!)
The light is nice I think, I would just darken down a bit the top and bottom right corners to make the stigma stand out more.
Turning to your tryptic, I've got to say I'm increasingly interested in multi-image mini portfolios. The US company Lenswork ran a challenge called "Seeing in sixes", which is a project to form portfolios of 6 images on any subject. Some portfolios are shown in their magazines, and some were published in books. I've recently managed to get one of those books, and some of the contents are quite amazing to me. These are not macros, just "ordinary" photos, but they are far better "art" than I can do. These books are not cheap, but I could live with that, but the postage to the UK is daylight robbery! I managed to find this book on ebay, and whilst it took a few weeks to arrive, it was a reasonable cost. I'm looking for a second one!
I guess such portfolios start at tryptics (although there's no reason not to have duets, people just seem to like odd numbers) and run all the way up to portfolios like the PDA's portfolio distinctions. I entered for the bronze level (10 images) a few years ago but made some silly mistakes and it was rejected. I'll have to try again! I made another to the Welsh Photographic Federation (12 images) a couple of years ago, and it was accepted. The PSA also does silver and gold levels with 15 and 20 images needed. Doing these is a sizeable project, but tryptics and sets of 6 are much easier. Yet they tell such a great deal more about many subjects - I love them! So go for your tryptic!! They don't all have to be macro images, but the balance and flow aspects that are much emphasised in the larger portfolio "rules" are just as important here. So, I'd suggest for example that whilst your current images are well arranged in being landscape, portrait, landscape, they are not well arranged in being red, red, yellow. You can't have both with these 3 images, so when re-taking them, I'd think about the balance of the final tryptic.
I'm really looking forwards to your result!! |
Nov 5th |
| 95 |
Nov 23 |
Comment |
I like patterned leaves, and autumn is a great time to find colours, shapes and textures in them. As soon as I say "shapes and textures" I think "Should it be converted to mono?". No, the colour is important here, this is a nice result.
The image is sharp in the centre, falling off towards the top and bottom, but that's fine for this type of shot I think.
I like the diagonals of the veins and the overall colour gradations. I think your crop is spot on. Super! |
Nov 5th |
| 95 |
Nov 23 |
Comment |
I think that has been very successful. Your original 1 has the closest berry sharp with the rear ones blurred, and original 5 has the opposite. The final image has good sharpness across the range of the berries, and the background is still nicely blurred. I can't see any unwanted ghosts. It's a good example of exactly how focus stacking should work, well done!
Doing it hand held is a further credit if each one was taken with an individual press of the shutter button. I can do hand-held stacks because my Olympus will take a range of images at increasing focus distances very quickly, altering the focus distance by itself through the range, as soon as I press the shutter button. However without that facility, I'd find it much harder, getting the framing much the same and the focus distance increasing with every frame, and I think you have succeeded in doing that well. Double well done!
You're not very close to the berries, I think, and that's the only negative comment I'd make here. However I think we've decided in this group to take images at any magnification between fairly close up through to extreme macro using macro techniques, so I've no problems with that. |
Nov 5th |
| 95 |
Nov 23 |
Comment |
Yuk! I'd suggest you let me delete it ;-)
But no, it's quite appropriate. And again, good "for a smartphone". Once again they exceed what my prejudice expects. What macro lens are you using? I presume a clip-on? I've seen several for sale and if I could get a decent one for my humble Samsung A50, I would. The detail isn't up to a camera + macro lens I'd contest, but it's pretty good as a small image.
Your cutting has left a light halo round its outline. Perhaps a random blurred green background would have been better. |
Nov 1st |
6 comments - 3 replies for Group 95
|
13 comments - 10 replies Total
|
