|
Forum: General Talk
04-14-2010, 06:47 AM
|
| |
would love to win one of these
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
02-24-2010, 03:20 PM
|
| |
Fair enough, I'll link to one of the smaller sizes on flickr next time (or figure out how to link to flickr properly so people pick which size they want).
I didn't really think about ISO, if I remember correctly, I was in lower light for the previous image, and had not changed the ISO from that one. Point well taken though, the image does get noisy in places.
Thanks for not holding back, I appreciate the honesty.
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
02-24-2010, 12:10 PM
|
| |
I like the concept a lot, part of me wishes the background were a bit more lit up, but then you wouldn't get the shadow effect that I do find very interesting.
I think I want slightly more light around the bowl and the apples, but not enough to lose the shadowing. Otherwise, the only other thing is the texture of the towel is distracting, but that mya just be me.
Overall, I really like it.
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
02-24-2010, 10:32 AM
|
| |
the A is behind the sign facing backwards :) What that means is my angle is off a little bit :-/
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
02-23-2010, 11:40 PM
|
| |
I like the slightly OOF background here, and I like the lines that line up in parallel with the street signs (either one or the other). I'm not sure I like the angle, but I wasn't sure what else to do about it (given that I'm shorter than a streetsign).
Please be harsh, I'm trying to learn. I've got thick skin. Thanks!
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
02-22-2010, 10:07 PM
|
| |
Yeah, that sounds about right :-P I'm still having difficulty melding all of the "techniques" together. If I remember to play with angle, I forget about rule of thirds. If I remember rule of thirds, angles tend to be thrown out the window. I appreciate the input. I might go reshoot and see what I can do about angle and things.
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
02-22-2010, 08:58 PM
|
| |
I liked this image a lot, particularly the contrast of orange and yellow against white. I also really like the tape following the curve of the snow.
I might have upped the saturation/vibrance too much in PP, but I like it where it is.
Please be harsh, trying to learn.
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
12-09-2009, 05:50 PM
|
| |
I like the simplicity of the single coke bottle against a mostly light background. That said, I do find the black column behind it and the orange light to the left distracting, as Damn Brit mentioned.
Overall, I like it a lot.
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
12-07-2009, 08:13 AM
|
| |
There was no wind, and I was sort of going for the "dark" feel, but I can see how others might not like it as much.
Kevin/goddo: yes, I probably could have opened up the lens more, I was trying to get the building in the background to be more clear. This is as close as I could get, and that's after post-processing.
As Kevin said in another thread, this blur is likely motion blur from me holding the camera, as compared to being OOF (although possible a little of both). I'll make sure to pay more attention to camera settings.
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
12-07-2009, 08:09 AM
|
| |
Kevin, again, you're probably right. You may notice, all of the 4 most recent threads that I've put up were taken on the same day (or perhaps over the course of two days), and there was very little overhead light. I appreciate the reminder about camera settings.
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
12-07-2009, 08:07 AM
|
| |
Gary, thanks.
Kevin, in retrospect, I see what you mean. You're actually probably exactly right, this might be motion blur instead of OOF. I'll remember that.
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
12-06-2009, 11:05 PM
|
| |
As you said on one of my other shots, I need to pay more attention to everything in the frame, and not just the subject itself.
Thanks for the feedback.
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
12-06-2009, 11:02 PM
|
| |
I was very unsure about posting this, because of exactly what you said. I felt like perhaps the trees themselves were interesting enough that the forground wouldn't matter, but I agree, there's not a lot to look at.
Thanks for the feedback on the WB/overall.
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
12-06-2009, 10:58 PM
|
| |
what would've been better? more towards the top or bottom of the frame? I like that the nut is right up against the wood and the brick. Maybe more space on the left?
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
12-06-2009, 10:56 PM
|
| |
I did play with the saturation/vibrance, this seemed to be the best mix of the two, I'm still not sure how I feel about it.
I see what you mean about needing to pay more attnetion to everything in the frame, I think I tend to put too much attention towards the subject itself (clearly not enough, given the blurriness :-D )
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
12-06-2009, 09:37 PM
|
| |
I realize the foreground is a little bit out of focus. I'm also not sure of the post-processing saturation/vibrance settings on it, the field seems too "orange" almost. Overall, I like the cool feel that this has.
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
12-06-2009, 09:35 PM
|
| |
The walnut is out of focus, but I'm not sure that's a bad thing, I like how this turned out.
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
12-06-2009, 09:33 PM
|
| |
This angle is weird, in retrospect, I think I would've preferred shooting straight on. Although, it's possible it just does this because of the wide focal length?
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
12-06-2009, 09:30 PM
|
| |
I'm not sure I like how blue it turned out, thoughts?
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
12-04-2009, 03:40 PM
|
| |
I really like this shot. I find the leaf blurred in the foreground distracting, and I find the top of the leaf on the left also a little bit distracting. The DOF is generally well done, and I like the composition, I wish that top portion of the leaf weren't in a different focal plane.
The blur in the background strikes me as... not "fake" exactly, but perhaps overdone? Maybe I'm just making that up, I can't really put what I mean to say into words.
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
12-04-2009, 03:15 PM
|
| |
The only reason I called it a macro was that I used the "macro" setting on my smc a 35-105mm f/3.5 lens. How is "macro" defined? My understanding has been a 1:1 magnification (or higher). I just assumed that's what the "macro" setting on the lens was doing.
I think I'm gonna try and re-shoot this later tonight or tomorrow, and see if I can fix the metering/composition some.
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
12-04-2009, 02:51 PM
|
| |
Some things I notice. The snow is a bit overexposed, I'm not sure how to deal with correctly exposing situations where it's "white on dark", I always either end up overexposing the white, or the dark portion not being exposed enough. Perhaps this can be cleaned up in Post-Processing? Suggestions?
Otherwise, I'm pretty pleased with how this turned out, I like the DOF, and I like the colors.
All feedback welcome!
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
11-26-2009, 03:35 PM
|
| |
How reasonable is it to try and repair it myself? Would it be better to just go to a camera store and see what it would cost there? Or is it safe to try and do it myself?
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
11-23-2009, 11:41 PM
|
| |
can you explain more by what you mean when you say "jumped"?
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
11-23-2009, 06:55 PM
|
| |
I appreciate the suggestion, but it didn't do anything. When watching what happenes when I press the lens release button, the shaft gets pulled into the body. However, when a lens is off, the shaft defaults to being out of the body, despite the fact that I'm stuck in MF mode.
|
