|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 64 |
Jul 25 |
Comment |
It has taken me quite a while to figure out what I'm seeing. I think it's a window with a metal grid over it (the larger squares) and a finer gauze over that. The gauze (the "veil") is torn in a couple of places. Is this right?
|
Jul 8th |
| 64 |
Jul 25 |
Comment |
What a fascinating bridge. I think you've found a great vantage point to show it off in its environment. The short focal length has emphasized the perspective very well. Super! |
Jul 8th |
| 64 |
Jul 25 |
Comment |
Simplicity, pattern - and wonky bits! I think the bent eyelets add a lot of interest to this, so they keep pulling my eyes to them.
I'm wondering if it would have been possible to find a shooting place so that all of the eyes were not behind other eyelets? I think the very bent ones are too bent to have all the eyelets completely separate, I think there have to be a couple crossing over others, but I would prefer at least separating the eyes from overlaps. |
Jul 8th |
3 comments - 0 replies for Group 64
|
| 95 |
Jul 25 |
Reply |
Thanks, Carol.
Macro and focus stacking sometimes throw out odd artefacts as we all know, and sometimes it's hard to figure out what the camera and computer saw to give the result. The left eye was a bit confused, and I tried to clone from the appropriate image in the bracket to fix it, but it still didn't work cleanly. My subsequent hand/mouse art work is not that of an artist! I'm lazy, I have a graphics tablet that should make manual corrections easier to do, but I usually forget.
Being an awfully high ISO I did use Topaz Denoise with sharpen and denoise both set to high levels. I don't usually sharpen again after that, eg in Affinity, but it's worth a try I guess. Over the summer I can't find the time to do much of anything as there are so many things to do! |
Jul 15th |
| 95 |
Jul 25 |
Comment |
Thank you. It's always a nice surprise, I think, when a photo comes out much better than you thought it would, such as here! |
Jul 9th |
| 95 |
Jul 25 |
Comment |
We are all for razor detail this month, and this has bucket-loads of good detail.
I wouldn't worry about ISO 1250 on a Sony sensor - they make the best sensors in the world, I think. You'll have lots of latitude at this ISO if you need it. Here, I rather think that the shadows enhance the picture, no need to lighten them. |
Jul 6th |
| 95 |
Jul 25 |
Comment |
Lovely detail, Carol.
Why did you leave the leaf in? I would have done a bit of gardening first. |
Jul 6th |
| 95 |
Jul 25 |
Comment |
I think this is a very clear picture of the business end of a camera. Rather more interesting than doing the same with a DSLR. I like the lack of detail outside the main components.
My only suggestion for improvement would be to make the reflection in the lens surface more interesting somehow. Even if done in post. |
Jul 6th |
| 95 |
Jul 25 |
Comment |
This is the beauty of focus stacking I think, you've made a striking photo that seems to jump out of the screen. Well done! I wish we could do this in stereo! Perhaps we could - get that focus rail out and move the camera sideways!! |
Jul 6th |
| 95 |
Jul 25 |
Comment |
I've been to Inverewe gardens too, but it's a shorter journey for me! I'm always surprised when I see a globe, we are much further north than New York, say, but have a much milder climate. The Gulf Stream is great for us.
Anyway, I think you've done well to get a lovely picture with a non-macro lens. I guess you were watching weight. I'd suggest that an extension tube on a shorter focal length lens, that you probably had with you anyway, makes a very lightweight alternative in such a situation. The surface of that petal screams out for a macro lens! |
Jul 6th |
| 95 |
Jul 25 |
Comment |
I think this is a striking (mono!) image. Beautifully sharp, well done. |
Jul 6th |
7 comments - 1 reply for Group 95
|
10 comments - 1 reply Total
|