|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 17 |
Jun 22 |
Reply |
Joe
I didn't think you were - it was just my poor choice of words. In fact your suggestion add me go back and alter the image much more to my satisfaction so thanks very much. |
Jun 10th |
| 17 |
Jun 22 |
Comment |
Glenn, getting up at 5 am would not be for me - it would have to be extremely worthwhile! And not being a wildlife photographer, this mule deer would not be pull me out of bed! But each to their own. However, I can see that this is a great crisp shot despite the moulting coat. Well exposed with perhaps only a hint of burn out on the deer's rear quarters. I'm not sure how much tinkering you're allowed to do with shots like this but for me I would flip the image so that it was moving left to right, ten I would remove some of the branches behind its ears and also consider adding a small vignette to darken the edges and in particular the very green grass and foreground branches. Especially that very bright white one curving round directly below the deer's chin. |
Jun 10th |
| 17 |
Jun 22 |
Comment |
I think Joe has summed this up pretty well. But it all depends what you want this shot for. As a record of the house it's fine and would be a good shot for a guide book or poster advertising the house. But if you want it for a competition then I guess a judge would say it was a straight win record shot, well exposed but with perhaps a bit too much sky. I suggest cropping it down by at least two inches. |
Jun 10th |
| 17 |
Jun 22 |
Reply |
Joe thanks for your comments which were very helpful. As a result I went back and totally changed the background and removed the offending flag which I hope has improved this shot. |
Jun 10th |
 |
| 17 |
Jun 22 |
Comment |
Brian
I have done a lot of studio portrait work recently and know how hard it is to get the lighting, poses and all the other things wright to achieve a good image. It would be interesting to know where and how you shot this. If you have your own studio then perhaps you would have more control over the lighting. But in any case in a studio shoot it should also be possible to adjust and vary the lighting. Here, the lighting on the right side of the model as we look at the image is quite strong. This has not led to burn out on her white scarf or covering but her face and cheek is over bright and needs toning down. Likewise her right eye has been thrown into a dark shadow. You could remedy both of these by using the raw filter brushes to increase/decrease exposure on both parts of this image. The other thing to consider is her left hand which has been cropped or not included in the shot. As a result I m might consider quite a drastic crop to remove that arm (!) so that your image ends just below her right elbow. |
Jun 10th |
| 17 |
Jun 22 |
Comment |
Joe, this certainly fun image and a shows a good deal of imagination. I like the idea of this being an orbiting spacecraft. I did wonder about adding some motion blur to parts of it but then remembered that objects move almost totally slowly in space. You might consider toning down the shine on the top near the handle. |
Jun 10th |
4 comments - 2 replies for Group 17
|
| 99 |
Jun 22 |
Comment |
Randy, as I am also a retired teacher, I can completely agree with your comments on the make-up of a class of students! For me this is a wonderful capture of seven students - always good to have an odd number - each absorbed or not in the assignment they have been given. I too would not crop the clock off because that adds to the story - have they a time limit on their work? If you did consider some slight editing then I would suggest you see if you could dull down the foremost Omega sign which is a little bright and if there is any way of bringing out what is on the sketch pad of the foremost girl as that is so white and blank that it ois a little distracting. Wouldn't it be good too if she was wearing an Omega watch but probably too much to hope for! Great shot. |
Jun 2nd |
| 99 |
Jun 22 |
Comment |
Great editing job with this - those rocks in the foreground appear like m monsters rising out of the sea. My question is, do I really want to see the horizon and have all that sky when the interest is in the rocks and the water? For me, the rocks alone provide a perfectly good picture. |
Jun 2nd |
| 99 |
Jun 22 |
Comment |
For me, this is about the whole horse - not the one with three legs! You have certainly caught the muscular structure of the horse very well and I like the flip as it makes the horse coming towards you more obvious. I'd consider replacing the band sky. |
Jun 2nd |
| 99 |
Jun 22 |
Comment |
I puzzled over the title for a while and have come up with something different from Randy. My feeling is that this is just like any handiwork I would attempt where the sim pole task of knocking in a nail involves considerable resistance from the nail and the bent head shows just that defiance. Certainly works better in mono but I feel you don't need the intruding object on the left. The contrast is also pretty hard so it might be helped by toning down some of the major surface area.
|
Jun 2nd |
| 99 |
Jun 22 |
Comment |
Barbara
This is indeed a transformation! The colour inversion works really well, as does the flipping and re-adjustment of the position of the leaves. I'm in two minds about the remains of the shadow. It does give extra depth to the image but I also wonder what it might look like without it. |
Jun 2nd |
5 comments - 0 replies for Group 99
|
9 comments - 2 replies Total
|
