|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 3 |
Oct 17 |
Comment |
You do indeed have a lovely array of colours here, but please do include more in the
"how I did it" than just the tech info. |
Oct 13th |
1 comment - 0 replies for Group 3
|
| 5 |
Oct 17 |
Comment |
Tks for all your help. I am going to resubmit it next month for comp. and see what transpires |
Oct 24th |
| 5 |
Oct 17 |
Comment |
I like the title, and your looking at the dog emphasises it. It's fun but I would have rather the car was sailing through the air than plonked on the railings. |
Oct 16th |
| 5 |
Oct 17 |
Comment |
This is a great idea Phil but, like Nick, I would like to see a little bit more detail on the shaded side. If you could lighten it just a little I think it would give more impact. |
Oct 16th |
| 5 |
Oct 17 |
Reply |
Actually Oliver, it is quite lovely with the little colour brought back, but of the three I still prefer the original. |
Oct 15th |
| 5 |
Oct 17 |
Reply |
Yes Oliver I like this version VERY much, you have brought out so much texture in the building and that which it sits upon--with just Nik's silver efex pro? But I still lean to the orig. |
Oct 13th |
| 5 |
Oct 17 |
Reply |
Yes I think you are both right it does perhaps need lightening. I too thought of removing the OOF line (which you have both done) but I thought it just might add some interest, but I am sure you are correct it does need to go. I entered this in our CC's comp last week and it only earned an 8! |
Oct 13th |
| 5 |
Oct 17 |
Comment |
I rather think the switch to a monochrome was an experiment and one should always experiment to find that which appeals, but in this case John I do prefer the colour original, the tones are so soft and appealing , but it might too benefit from a boost in saturation to liven it a little--just another way of looking at it. The composition is lovely. |
Oct 12th |
| 5 |
Oct 17 |
Comment |
This image lends itself so well to the sepia tone, although the original displays well in monochrome the sepia gives the image that WOW look. So well done, as usual, David, I can add nothing to enhance this image.
I copied your description of using the Iphone to our Phoneography group no. 51 for their enlightenment. |
Oct 12th |
| 5 |
Oct 17 |
Reply |
yes, Oliver I do prefer the white parts lessened and your 'corrected' image is much to my preference. |
Oct 1st |
| 5 |
Oct 17 |
Comment |
As a reminder I went back to the May image and there is no doubt that this is indeed a huge improvement; the clouds do resemble water. The boosting of the eyes may perhaps be a little overkill but to me they emphasise the feeling that he is coming straight for me. Who was it said "the eyes (ayes) have it!)" Well done!
|
Oct 1st |
| 5 |
Oct 17 |
Comment |
Isn't it fun play with the various filters! It just adds a spark to the sameness (seen a hundred and one times) of the butterfly orig. image. I would tone down the white areas in the top centre and the LH side, in my opinion they draw the eye too much. someday think it is too much filter but I like the difference it presents. |
Oct 1st |
| 5 |
Oct 17 |
Comment |
Hmmm, the border doesn't show! It was white, 2 pixels. I cleaned up the white "rims" around the edges of the petals but looks as though I missed the bottom RH side. |
Oct 1st |
8 comments - 4 replies for Group 5
|
| 24 |
Oct 17 |
Comment |
I know you are new to the group Judith but I do want to remind you that the days for comments are almost up. Your input is as important to DD as your own image submission. Eager to hear your remarks. |
Oct 28th |
1 comment - 0 replies for Group 24
|
10 comments - 4 replies Total
|
