Re: Opinions on these shots please
- From: Craig M. Bobchin <craig@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 06 Aug 2005 00:09:40 GMT
Thanks for your opinions and thoughts they are quite helpful.See my
comments below:
In article <1123283383.290609.156500@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
sbrisendine@xxxxxxxxx says...
> Craig,
>
> The observatory I like, but I cant tell which way is up. If you could
> have gotten very wide angle, like 12mm, and added a person to get the
> sheer size of the place captured, you would have a "great" picture.
I do have other images, but the ones I posted were geared for a more
artistic/abstract feel. I wanted to capture the detail of the
latticework and the juxtaposition of the telescope and the observatory
slit.
> The oracle buildings have no point and no composition. Maybe zooming in
> to get the juxtaposition of the residential right next to the cold
> glass structures.. dunno. You obviously saw something, you need to
> decide what elements NEED to be there to convey the idea of what you
> was, and leave th rest out.
I did like the contrast of the residences and the glass buildings. I
felt that the wood borders around the rocks acted as an angle pointing
to that. Maybe cropping it closer to eliminate the water will help.
> Pyro chef needed to have the pyro chef in the picture. Close in on the
> subject and wait for the flame. The people in the background are
> superfluous.
I see what you mean on this.
> Rock candy did have different composition, but it was not engaging.
> Can't see the rest of the scene here. The angle of the flash deleted
> any real contrast. Need off camera or a diffuser or something.
Hmmm I intentionally wanted this as a kind of abstract looking shot.
What would you have liked to see?
> I didn't mind snoopy glass, but then again, I just didn't mind it. It
> didn't make me think or feel anything besides, "oh, snoopy" and move
> on.
For me I liked the colors and the curves, but would have preferred to
remove the sclupture, but that was not possible.
> Coit sky. Too much sky, not enough Coit. You might look silly, but if
> your lense is not wide enough, then lie on the ground. I looked like an
> idiot at Yellowstone half of my trip, but I got some good pictures.
I actually had the camera lying on the ground wide open. I guess I
needed a wider angle lens on this one.
>
> Doorway. I like this one. Would have been better if you were dead in
> the center of the door. Also, it seems as though the door is not quite
> in focus. Could be wrong.
I thought I was in the center when I shot it. I looked at the RAW and
the door is in focus.
>
> Guard tower. Too little contrast IMHO. I didn't mind the truck. Good
> picture, but not striking.
I was going for the sepia toned snapshot style of this so it looked like
it was taken back in the 40s.
Again thanks for your helpful critique.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Opinions on these shots please
- From: salgud
- Re: Opinions on these shots please
- References:
- Opinions on these shots please
- From: Craig M . Bobchin
- Re: Opinions on these shots please
- From: salgud
- Re: Opinions on these shots please
- From: Craig M . Bobchin
- Re: Opinions on these shots please
- From: wavelength
- Opinions on these shots please
- Prev by Date: Re: Any Olympus Digital Camera Owners out there?
- Next by Date: Re: digital darkroom
- Previous by thread: Re: Opinions on these shots please
- Next by thread: Re: Opinions on these shots please
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|