An album for comment

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by David Hare-Scott, Jun 16, 2013.

  1. After watching the shoot-in for a while I have wanted to make an offering or
    two. I shot a few frames that might have been on topic for some subjects
    recently but none that I really liked. So I thought I would put up some
    that I do like and see what the group thinks.

    These are mainly images of the natural world, birds, landscapes and macros.
    All shot with the shiny new Nikon d5200 and various lenses. There has been
    minimal post processing done.

    This is what I see when I step out the back door.

    https://www.dropbox.com/sh/627rr3v0jwpenl5/kxUwK_DuWm


    David
     
    David Hare-Scott, Jun 16, 2013
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. David Hare-Scott

    Pablo Guest

    David Hare-Scott wrote:

    > After watching the shoot-in for a while I have wanted to make an offering
    > or
    > two. I shot a few frames that might have been on topic for some subjects
    > recently but none that I really liked. So I thought I would put up some
    > that I do like and see what the group thinks.
    >
    > These are mainly images of the natural world, birds, landscapes and
    > macros.
    > All shot with the shiny new Nikon d5200 and various lenses. There has
    > been minimal post processing done.
    >
    > This is what I see when I step out the back door.
    >
    > https://www.dropbox.com/sh/627rr3v0jwpenl5/kxUwK_DuWm


    Not that I'm qualified to comment, but why do you chop bits off your
    subjects?

    --

    Pablo

    http://www.ipernity.com/home/313627
    http://paulc.es/
     
    Pablo, Jun 16, 2013
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. David Hare-Scott

    peternew Guest

    On 6/16/2013 8:34 AM, David Hare-Scott wrote:
    > After watching the shoot-in for a while I have wanted to make an
    > offering or two. I shot a few frames that might have been on topic for
    > some subjects recently but none that I really liked. So I thought I
    > would put up some that I do like and see what the group thinks.
    >
    > These are mainly images of the natural world, birds, landscapes and
    > macros. All shot with the shiny new Nikon d5200 and various lenses.
    > There has been minimal post processing done.
    >
    > This is what I see when I step out the back door.
    >
    > https://www.dropbox.com/sh/627rr3v0jwpenl5/kxUwK_DuWm
    >
    >
    > David
    >


    Happy to see a photography topic here. Most of us are diplomatic about
    it, we try to give constructive criticism. Don't feel obligated to
    literally follow our comments, but please consider them and try to adopt
    them into your shooting style. Please feel free to disagree with
    anything I say.
    In general, I like your attempts. When shooting wildlife, it is
    sometimes impossible to get the whole creature in your image. The
    solution is to crop off larger sections of the creature, so that it
    looks deliberate. A more severe crop on # 14 wold be an example of what
    I am referring to. You did a good job of that with the eyes, and the
    peacock tail.
    the human eye is usually drawn naturally to brighter areas. Therefore,
    try to tone down, or clone out hotspots. You mantis is a nice capture,
    but I find my eye being constantly drawn to that bright spot. In # 5 you
    have nice composition, with the three buds. However, the top two are
    soft at the tips, and I have to struggle to separate them from the
    background. The lighter areas on the leaves, are distracting, as I said
    earlier.
    Overall you have made some nice attempts. Try not to have too much dead
    space, as in # 4. A vertical crop just about in the middle of the image
    would show the bird flying into your picture, not out of it. When
    shooting multiple critters, try to keep them at an odd, rather than even
    number as even number tend to look static. Having said that, your image
    of two horses is fine, because they are interacting with each other.
    Others here may differ, but that is the nature of art. Keep trying, and
    as the Duck said, we look forward to your comments on our work.

    BTW here are some nice resources for you:

    <http://www.nwf.org/news-and-magazines/national-wildlife/photozone/archives/2010/nature-wildlife-photography-tips-center.aspx>

    I was fortunate to have taken a workshop with Steve Johnson a few years ago.
    ..
    <http://www.sjphoto.com/sj_studio_home.html>

    The most important thing is to enjoy what you are doing. If possible
    join a local photography club. Most are quite willing to teach anyone
    who wants to learn.



    --
    PeterN
     
    peternew, Jun 16, 2013
    #3
  4. David Hare-Scott

    Pablo Guest

    Savageduck wrote:

    > On 2013-06-16 05:55:03 -0700, Pablo <> said:
    >
    >> David Hare-Scott wrote:
    >>
    >>> After watching the shoot-in for a while I have wanted to make an
    >>> offering or
    >>> two. I shot a few frames that might have been on topic for some
    >>> subjects
    >>> recently but none that I really liked. So I thought I would put up some
    >>> that I do like and see what the group thinks.
    >>>
    >>> These are mainly images of the natural world, birds, landscapes and
    >>> macros.
    >>> All shot with the shiny new Nikon d5200 and various lenses. There has
    >>> been minimal post processing done.
    >>>
    >>> This is what I see when I step out the back door.
    >>>
    >>> https://www.dropbox.com/sh/627rr3v0jwpenl5/kxUwK_DuWm

    >>
    >> Not that I'm qualified to comment, but why do you chop bits off your
    >> subjects?

    >
    > Paul, I have a feeling that you are just looking at the thumbnails.
    > Click on the thumbnail to see the full image. you can then navigate the
    > Dropbox viewer via the arrows below the image.


    Ah. Interesting way of doing thumbnails.

    --

    Pablo

    http://www.ipernity.com/home/313627
    http://paulc.es/
     
    Pablo, Jun 16, 2013
    #4
  5. David Hare-Scott

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 22:34:14 +1000, "David Hare-Scott" <>
    wrote:
    : After watching the shoot-in for a while I have wanted to make an offering or
    : two. I shot a few frames that might have been on topic for some subjects
    : recently but none that I really liked. So I thought I would put up some
    : that I do like and see what the group thinks.
    :
    : These are mainly images of the natural world, birds, landscapes and macros.
    : All shot with the shiny new Nikon d5200 and various lenses. There has been
    : minimal post processing done.
    :
    : This is what I see when I step out the back door.
    :
    : https://www.dropbox.com/sh/627rr3v0jwpenl5/kxUwK_DuWm
    :
    :
    : David

    Image 20 is technically awful and should be dumped. The rest range from
    mediocre to pleasingly artistic and clearly show photographic talent. I
    particularly like 19, but it needs some postprocessing work, especially in the
    shadows. I also like 22; the dog's expression and demeanor as he eyes those
    roosters is precious. Try to bring out more detail in his face. If I have an
    overall criticism, it's the lack of attention to sharpness. I tend to be a
    sharpness fanatic, though, so consider the source. In reflection pictures,
    like 24, where the rotation is a little off, the trick is to superimpose a
    grid and then rotate the image until the subject and its reflection form the
    same angle with the vertical.

    Nice colors and choice of subjects.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Jun 16, 2013
    #5
  6. David Hare-Scott

    otter Guest

    On Jun 16, 10:20 am, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com>
    wrote:
    > On 2013-06-16 05:34:14 -0700, "David Hare-Scott" <> said:
    >
    > > After watching the shoot-in for a while I have wanted to make an
    > > offering or two.  I shot a few frames that might have been on topic for
    > > some subjects recently but none that I really liked.  So I thought I
    > > would put up some that I do like and see what the group thinks.

    >
    > > These are mainly images of the natural world, birds, landscapes and
    > > macros. All shot with the shiny new Nikon d5200 and various lenses.
    > > There has been minimal post processing done.

    >
    > > This is what I see when I step out the back door.

    >
    > >https://www.dropbox.com/sh/627rr3v0jwpenl5/kxUwK_DuWm

    >
    > > David

    >
    > Nice work. It must be great to have those targets when you step out
    > your back door.
    > I like the "eye-ball self portrait".
    >
    > One of the elements of the SI is to accept the challenge of being drawn
    > out of the photographic comfort zone each of us has unwittingly
    > developed over time. You have developed a skill dealing with your local
    > wild & domestic life and landscape, there are others of us who prefer
    > landscapes, candid/street, action, documentary, or some who are best
    > described as generalists. Some handle the change quite well others have
    > to rise to the challenge of change.
    > What I suggest, is grab the bull by the horns and dive in. The next SI
    > mandate is "BBQ" which sounds simple enough, but it is going to be your
    > interpretation of the mandate that counts. Outdoor cooking is different
    > all over the World, and some barbecue is executed indoors today. So, if
    > you have the opportunity to shoot something, or if you have an archive
    > shot or two, we would like to have you join us in July.
    >


    I was about to launch into a rant about the difference between BBQ and
    "outdoor cooking", but I'll spare you my biased Texan view on the
    subject. :)
     
    otter, Jun 16, 2013
    #6
  7. David Hare-Scott

    otter Guest

    On Jun 16, 7:34 am, "David Hare-Scott" <> wrote:
    > After watching the shoot-in for a while I have wanted to make an offeringor
    > two.  I shot a few frames that might have been on topic for some subjects
    > recently but none that I really liked.  So I thought I would put up some
    > that I do like and see what the group thinks.
    >
    > These are mainly images of the natural world, birds, landscapes and macros.
    > All shot with the shiny new Nikon d5200 and various lenses.  There has been
    > minimal post processing done.
    >
    > This is what I see when I step out the back door.
    >
    > https://www.dropbox.com/sh/627rr3v0jwpenl5/kxUwK_DuWm
    >
    > David


    Ah, you are opening yourself up for comments! Be more careful what
    you ask for, in the future, LOL!

    I see a good attempt at making artistic shots, some better than others
    (which is always the case). I like the colors of most of them. In
    particular, I like the reflection in the eye of the horse (I take it
    that's a horse).

    Some of the shots look like they suffered degradation from extreme
    crops, but in a way that added to the artsy, Holga-like feel. At
    first, I thought you might be using an old point-and-shoot, but then
    saw it was a D5200.

    What you did may not appeal to everyone, but I like it. Keep it
    coming. Feel free to break the rules.
     
    otter, Jun 16, 2013
    #7
  8. David Hare-Scott

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 11:14:36 -0700 (PDT), otter <>
    wrote:
    : On Jun 16, 10:20 am, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com>
    : wrote:
    : > On 2013-06-16 05:34:14 -0700, "David Hare-Scott" <> said:
    : >
    : > > After watching the shoot-in for a while I have wanted to make an
    : > > offering or two.  I shot a few frames that might have been on topic for
    : > > some subjects recently but none that I really liked.  So I thought I
    : > > would put up some that I do like and see what the group thinks.
    : >
    : > > These are mainly images of the natural world, birds, landscapes and
    : > > macros. All shot with the shiny new Nikon d5200 and various lenses.
    : > > There has been minimal post processing done.
    : >
    : > > This is what I see when I step out the back door.
    : >
    : > >https://www.dropbox.com/sh/627rr3v0jwpenl5/kxUwK_DuWm
    : >
    : > > David
    : >
    : > Nice work. It must be great to have those targets when you step out
    : > your back door.
    : > I like the "eye-ball self portrait".
    : >
    : > One of the elements of the SI is to accept the challenge of being drawn
    : > out of the photographic comfort zone each of us has unwittingly
    : > developed over time. You have developed a skill dealing with your local
    : > wild & domestic life and landscape, there are others of us who prefer
    : > landscapes, candid/street, action, documentary, or some who are best
    : > described as generalists. Some handle the change quite well others have
    : > to rise to the challenge of change.
    : > What I suggest, is grab the bull by the horns and dive in. The next SI
    : > mandate is "BBQ" which sounds simple enough, but it is going to be your
    : > interpretation of the mandate that counts. Outdoor cooking is different
    : > all over the World, and some barbecue is executed indoors today. So, if
    : > you have the opportunity to shoot something, or if you have an archive
    : > shot or two, we would like to have you join us in July.
    : >
    :
    : I was about to launch into a rant about the difference between BBQ and
    : "outdoor cooking", but I'll spare you my biased Texan view on the
    : subject. :)

    Oh, let him have it, Bill. I grew up in the south too and can probably be
    counted on to provide some support for your rant. ;^)

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Jun 16, 2013
    #8
  9. Pablo wrote:
    > David Hare-Scott wrote:
    >
    >> After watching the shoot-in for a while I have wanted to make an
    >> offering or
    >> two. I shot a few frames that might have been on topic for some
    >> subjects recently but none that I really liked. So I thought I
    >> would put up some that I do like and see what the group thinks.
    >>
    >> These are mainly images of the natural world, birds, landscapes and
    >> macros.
    >> All shot with the shiny new Nikon d5200 and various lenses. There
    >> has been minimal post processing done.
    >>
    >> This is what I see when I step out the back door.
    >>
    >> https://www.dropbox.com/sh/627rr3v0jwpenl5/kxUwK_DuWm

    >
    > Not that I'm qualified to comment, but why do you chop bits off your
    > subjects?


    Which?

    D
     
    David Hare-Scott, Jun 17, 2013
    #9
  10. David Hare-Scott

    peternew Guest

    On 6/16/2013 2:14 PM, otter wrote:

    <snip>

    >
    > I was about to launch into a rant about the difference between BBQ and
    > "outdoor cooking", but I'll spare you my biased Texan view on the
    > subject. :)
    >


    Even though I am a suburban New Yawker, through and through, I
    understand and appreciate the difference the difference and distinction
    between grilling and barbeque. I once started a loud argument in a
    Nashville joint, over whether wet or dry rub was better. Nashville is
    one of the few places where they have both, and folks there are
    passionately divided over the issue. :)

    --
    PeterN
     
    peternew, Jun 17, 2013
    #10
  11. David Hare-Scott

    peternew Guest

    On 6/16/2013 4:41 PM, Savageduck wrote:
    > On 2013-06-16 11:14:36 -0700, otter <> said:
    >
    >> On Jun 16, 10:20 am, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com>
    >> wrote:
    >>> On 2013-06-16 05:34:14 -0700, "David Hare-Scott" <>
    >>> said

    >> :
    >>>
    >>>> After watching the shoot-in for a while I have wanted to make an
    >>>> offering or two. I shot a few frames that might have been on topic f

    >> or
    >>>> some subjects recently but none that I really liked. So I thought I
    >>>> would put up some that I do like and see what the group thinks.
    >>>
    >>>> These are mainly images of the natural world, birds, landscapes and
    >>>> macros. All shot with the shiny new Nikon d5200 and various lenses.
    >>>> There has been minimal post processing done.
    >>>
    >>>> This is what I see when I step out the back door.
    >>>
    >>>> https://www.dropbox.com/sh/627rr3v0jwpenl5/kxUwK_DuWm
    >>>
    >>>> David
    >>>
    >>> Nice work. It must be great to have those targets when you step out
    >>> your back door.
    >>> I like the "eye-ball self portrait".
    >>>
    >>> One of the elements of the SI is to accept the challenge of being drawn
    >>> out of the photographic comfort zone each of us has unwittingly
    >>> developed over time. You have developed a skill dealing with your local
    >>> wild & domestic life and landscape, there are others of us who prefer
    >>> landscapes, candid/street, action, documentary, or some who are best
    >>> described as generalists. Some handle the change quite well others have
    >>> to rise to the challenge of change.
    >>> What I suggest, is grab the bull by the horns and dive in. The next SI
    >>> mandate is "BBQ" which sounds simple enough, but it is going to be your
    >>> interpretation of the mandate that counts. Outdoor cooking is different
    >>> all over the World, and some barbecue is executed indoors today. So, if
    >>> you have the opportunity to shoot something, or if you have an archive
    >>> shot or two, we would like to have you join us in July.
    >>>

    >>
    >> I was about to launch into a rant about the difference between BBQ and
    >> "outdoor cooking", but I'll spare you my biased Texan view on the
    >> subject. :)

    >
    > I know! I know!
    > However, not all in this room are exposed to the Texas variety, and some
    > like David are South of the Equator in the Land of Oz where they have
    > their own BBQ/outdoor cooking tradition. The same could be said for
    > Argentina (pretty damn good) and South Africa (not so good).
    > Then we have those wild folks in Memphis who fail to recognize that
    > anything cooked outside of their city limits could be termed BBQ, or
    > barbecue. (I think that applies to Texans as well) ;-)
    >
    > Out here on the Central Coast we have the Santa Maria style BBQ which is
    > pretty tasty in its own special way.
    >
    > Those poor guys in the North East and in the UK can only fake it.
    >


    BS. This place is second to none. And I have had good barbecue all over
    the South, and East of the Mississippi.


    --
    PeterN
     
    peternew, Jun 17, 2013
    #11
  12. David Hare-Scott

    peternew Guest

    On 6/16/2013 5:21 PM, Savageduck wrote:
    > On 2013-06-16 13:47:08 -0700, Alan Browne
    > <> said:
    >
    >> On 2013.06.16 16:41 , Savageduck wrote:
    >>
    >>> Out here on the Central Coast we have the Santa Maria style BBQ which is
    >>> pretty tasty in its own special way.
    >>>
    >>> Those poor guys in the North East and in the UK can only fake it.

    >>
    >> For a casual meal, when Americans come to Montreal we take them to
    >> Baton Rouge for BBQ. Then we can't get them to go anywhere else.
    >>
    >> It beats 2/3 of BBQ I've had in the US which is often good, but too
    >> often crap. Worst I ever had was in Scottsdale. Absolute crap.

    >
    > Then there are times it is the character of the cook and delivery method
    > which adds to the flavor.
    > < https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/SLO-Brew-40Ew.jpg >
    >


    Looks moore like a gril, than a barbeque.

    --
    PeterN
     
    peternew, Jun 17, 2013
    #12
  13. peternew wrote:
    > On 6/16/2013 8:34 AM, David Hare-Scott wrote:
    >> After watching the shoot-in for a while I have wanted to make an
    >> offering or two. I shot a few frames that might have been on topic
    >> for some subjects recently but none that I really liked. So I
    >> thought I would put up some that I do like and see what the group
    >> thinks. These are mainly images of the natural world, birds, landscapes
    >> and
    >> macros. All shot with the shiny new Nikon d5200 and various lenses.
    >> There has been minimal post processing done.
    >>
    >> This is what I see when I step out the back door.
    >>
    >> https://www.dropbox.com/sh/627rr3v0jwpenl5/kxUwK_DuWm
    >>
    >>
    >> David
    >>

    >
    > Happy to see a photography topic here. Most of us are diplomatic about
    > it, we try to give constructive criticism. Don't feel obligated to
    > literally follow our comments, but please consider them and try to
    > adopt them into your shooting style. Please feel free to disagree with
    > anything I say.
    > In general, I like your attempts. When shooting wildlife, it is
    > sometimes impossible to get the whole creature in your image. The
    > solution is to crop off larger sections of the creature, so that it
    > looks deliberate. A more severe crop on # 14 wold be an example of
    > what I am referring to.


    OK

    You did a good job of that with the eyes, and the
    > peacock tail.
    > the human eye is usually drawn naturally to brighter areas. Therefore,
    > try to tone down, or clone out hotspots. You mantis is a nice capture,
    > but I find my eye being constantly drawn to that bright spot. In # 5
    > you have nice composition, with the three buds. However, the top two
    > are soft at the tips, and I have to struggle to separate them from the
    > background. The lighter areas on the leaves, are distracting, as I
    > said earlier.


    I would have liked the buds to be more in focus but that was ll the depth of
    field I could squeeze out at the time. I don't have your sensitivity to
    bright spots but assuming I wanted to do something about it , using the buds
    and example, how would I do it?


    > Overall you have made some nice attempts. Try not to have too much
    > dead space, as in # 4.


    A difficult situation, it was nearly dark and I had the ISO wound up, the
    subject was distant and fast moving. A closer crop would be even fuzzier. I
    will try a different crop and see if I can see it.

    A vertical crop just about in the middle of
    > the image would show the bird flying into your picture, not out of
    > it.


    I don't get it... the bird is taking off not landing.

    When
    > shooting multiple critters, try to keep them at an odd, rather than
    > even number as even number tend to look static.


    I cannot imagine why. I have never heard of that before. Can you explain or
    is this just a personal thing?

    Having said that,
    > your image of two horses is fine, because they are interacting with each
    > other.
    > Others here may differ, but that is the nature of art. Keep trying,
    > and as the Duck said, we look forward to your comments on our work.
    >
    > BTW here are some nice resources for you:
    >
    > <http://www.nwf.org/news-and-magazines/national-wildlife/photozone/archives/2010/nature-wildlife-photography-tips-center.aspx>
    >
    > I was fortunate to have taken a workshop with Steve Johnson a few
    > years ago. .
    > <http://www.sjphoto.com/sj_studio_home.html>
    >
    > The most important thing is to enjoy what you are doing. If possible
    > join a local photography club. Most are quite willing to teach anyone
    > who wants to learn.


    Thanks for going to the trouble. And yes I would like to see more material
    here actually about photography too. As opposed to the dissection of the
    cummin seeds or the comparison of penises.

    David
     
    David Hare-Scott, Jun 17, 2013
    #13
  14. David Hare-Scott

    peternew Guest

    On 6/16/2013 8:22 PM, David Hare-Scott wrote:
    > peternew wrote:
    >> On 6/16/2013 8:34 AM, David Hare-Scott wrote:
    >>> After watching the shoot-in for a while I have wanted to make an
    >>> offering or two. I shot a few frames that might have been on topic
    >>> for some subjects recently but none that I really liked. So I
    >>> thought I would put up some that I do like and see what the group
    >>> thinks. These are mainly images of the natural world, birds,
    >>> landscapes and
    >>> macros. All shot with the shiny new Nikon d5200 and various lenses.
    >>> There has been minimal post processing done.
    >>>
    >>> This is what I see when I step out the back door.
    >>>
    >>> https://www.dropbox.com/sh/627rr3v0jwpenl5/kxUwK_DuWm
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> David
    >>>

    >>
    >> Happy to see a photography topic here. Most of us are diplomatic about
    >> it, we try to give constructive criticism. Don't feel obligated to
    >> literally follow our comments, but please consider them and try to
    >> adopt them into your shooting style. Please feel free to disagree with
    >> anything I say.
    >> In general, I like your attempts. When shooting wildlife, it is
    >> sometimes impossible to get the whole creature in your image. The
    >> solution is to crop off larger sections of the creature, so that it
    >> looks deliberate. A more severe crop on # 14 wold be an example of
    >> what I am referring to.

    >
    > OK
    >
    > You did a good job of that with the eyes, and the
    >> peacock tail.
    >> the human eye is usually drawn naturally to brighter areas. Therefore,
    >> try to tone down, or clone out hotspots. You mantis is a nice capture,
    >> but I find my eye being constantly drawn to that bright spot. In # 5
    >> you have nice composition, with the three buds. However, the top two
    >> are soft at the tips, and I have to struggle to separate them from the
    >> background. The lighter areas on the leaves, are distracting, as I
    >> said earlier.

    >
    > I would have liked the buds to be more in focus but that was ll the
    > depth of field I could squeeze out at the time. I don't have your
    > sensitivity to bright spots but assuming I wanted to do something about
    > it , using the buds and example, how would I do it?
    >
    >
    >> Overall you have made some nice attempts. Try not to have too much
    >> dead space, as in # 4.

    >
    > A difficult situation, it was nearly dark and I had the ISO wound up,
    > the subject was distant and fast moving. A closer crop would be even
    > fuzzier. I will try a different crop and see if I can see it.
    >
    > A vertical crop just about in the middle of
    >> the image would show the bird flying into your picture, not out of
    >> it.

    >
    > I don't get it... the bird is taking off not landing.
    >
    > When
    >> shooting multiple critters, try to keep them at an odd, rather than
    >> even number as even number tend to look static.

    >
    > I cannot imagine why. I have never heard of that before. Can you
    > explain or is this just a personal thing?
    >
    > Having said that,
    >> your image of two horses is fine, because they are interacting with
    >> each other.
    >> Others here may differ, but that is the nature of art. Keep trying,
    >> and as the Duck said, we look forward to your comments on our work.
    >>
    >> BTW here are some nice resources for you:
    >>
    >> <http://www.nwf.org/news-and-magazines/national-wildlife/photozone/archives/2010/nature-wildlife-photography-tips-center.aspx>
    >>
    >>
    >> I was fortunate to have taken a workshop with Steve Johnson a few
    >> years ago. .
    >> <http://www.sjphoto.com/sj_studio_home.html>
    >>
    >> The most important thing is to enjoy what you are doing. If possible
    >> join a local photography club. Most are quite willing to teach anyone
    >> who wants to learn.

    >
    > Thanks for going to the trouble. And yes I would like to see more
    > material here actually about photography too. As opposed to the
    > dissection of the cummin seeds or the comparison of penises.
    >
    > David


    I will get back to you with more specifics on Tuesday.

    meanwhile take a look at my website, which while not the best,
    illustrates some of what I was talking about.

    <http://peternewman.smugmug.com/>



    --
    PeterN
     
    peternew, Jun 17, 2013
    #14
  15. Robert Coe wrote:
    > On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 22:34:14 +1000, "David Hare-Scott"
    > <> wrote:
    >> After watching the shoot-in for a while I have wanted to make an
    >> offering or two. I shot a few frames that might have been on topic
    >> for some subjects recently but none that I really liked. So I
    >> thought I would put up some that I do like and see what the group
    >> thinks.
    >>
    >> These are mainly images of the natural world, birds, landscapes and
    >> macros. All shot with the shiny new Nikon d5200 and various lenses.
    >> There has been minimal post processing done.
    >>
    >> This is what I see when I step out the back door.
    >>
    >> https://www.dropbox.com/sh/627rr3v0jwpenl5/kxUwK_DuWm
    >>
    >>
    >> David

    >
    > Image 20 is technically awful and should be dumped.


    It isn't good. Thanks for honesty. Now that you mention it I think I
    intended to publish another somewhat similar and put this by mistake.


    The rest range
    > from mediocre to pleasingly artistic and clearly show photographic
    > talent.


    Some shots are documentary and included for the benefit of other viewers to
    whom they will have more meaning.

    I particularly like 19, but it needs some postprocessing
    > work, especially in the shadows.


    To what end? How?

    I also like 22; the dog's expression
    > and demeanor as he eyes those roosters is precious. Try to bring out
    > more detail in his face. If I have an overall criticism, it's the
    > lack of attention to sharpness. I tend to be a sharpness fanatic,
    > though, so consider the source.


    I will keep trying.

    In reflection pictures, like 24,
    > where the rotation is a little off, the trick is to superimpose a
    > grid and then rotate the image until the subject and its reflection
    > form the same angle with the vertical.
    >


    Where is this vertical to compare to? Are you just saying I don't have the
    water surface horizontal? If it is not that then I don't understand you.

    > Nice colors and choice of subjects.
    >
    > Bob


    thanks for going to the trouble.

    David
     
    David Hare-Scott, Jun 17, 2013
    #15
  16. otter wrote:
    > On Jun 16, 7:34 am, "David Hare-Scott" <> wrote:
    >> After watching the shoot-in for a while I have wanted to make an
    >> offering or two. I shot a few frames that might have been on topic
    >> for some subjects recently but none that I really liked. So I
    >> thought I would put up some that I do like and see what the group
    >> thinks.
    >>
    >> These are mainly images of the natural world, birds, landscapes and
    >> macros. All shot with the shiny new Nikon d5200 and various lenses.
    >> There has been minimal post processing done.
    >>
    >> This is what I see when I step out the back door.
    >>
    >> https://www.dropbox.com/sh/627rr3v0jwpenl5/kxUwK_DuWm
    >>
    >> David

    >
    > Ah, you are opening yourself up for comments! Be more careful what
    > you ask for, in the future, LOL!


    Well so far so good.

    >
    > I see a good attempt at making artistic shots, some better than others
    > (which is always the case). I like the colors of most of them. In
    > particular, I like the reflection in the eye of the horse (I take it
    > that's a horse).
    >


    One horse (Jabba) one dog (Flynn).

    > Some of the shots look like they suffered degradation from extreme
    > crops, but in a way that added to the artsy, Holga-like feel. At
    > first, I thought you might be using an old point-and-shoot, but then
    > saw it was a D5200.
    >


    Which ones?

    Some were taken in quite difficult conditions (nearly dark well after
    sunset, distant fast moving subject).

    > What you did may not appeal to everyone, but I like it. Keep it
    > coming. Feel free to break the rules.


    thanks for going to the trouble.

    David
     
    David Hare-Scott, Jun 17, 2013
    #16
  17. Savageduck wrote:
    > On 2013-06-16 18:31:32 -0700, Savageduck
    > <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> said:
    >> On 2013-06-16 17:37:38 -0700, "David Hare-Scott" <>
    >> said:
    >>> Robert Coe wrote:

    >
    >
    >>> In reflection pictures, like 24,
    >>>> where the rotation is a little off, the trick is to superimpose a
    >>>> grid and then rotate the image until the subject and its reflection
    >>>> form the same angle with the vertical.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> Where is this vertical to compare to? Are you just saying I don't
    >>> have the water surface horizontal? If it is not that then I don't
    >>> understand you.

    >>
    >> If anybody is going to be totally anal about these things, in that
    >> image there is one one logical line to use to fix the horizontal
    >> with, and that is the on waterline separating the duck from its
    >> reflection. There is no vertical line to use for adjustment, and the
    >> uneven waterline around the reeds is not going to work.

    >
    > Here is a version leveled in Photoshop with a guide line showing.
    > < https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_236.jpg >


    This looks wrong to my eye, I expect the water to run downhill to the right.
    You have made the line of irises horizontal with respect to the frame which
    would only happen if the sensor was parallel to it, which it wasn't, the
    right hand side of the image is further away from the camera than the left.
    Perspective is a strange thing.

    D
     
    David Hare-Scott, Jun 17, 2013
    #17
  18. David Hare-Scott

    J. Clarke Guest

    In article <2013061618313211967-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
    savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com says...
    >
    > On 2013-06-16 17:37:38 -0700, "David Hare-Scott" <> said:
    >
    > > Robert Coe wrote:
    > >> On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 22:34:14 +1000, "David Hare-Scott"
    > >> <> wrote:
    > >>> After watching the shoot-in for a while I have wanted to make an
    > >>> offering or two. I shot a few frames that might have been on topic
    > >>> for some subjects recently but none that I really liked. So I
    > >>> thought I would put up some that I do like and see what the group
    > >>> thinks.
    > >>>
    > >>> These are mainly images of the natural world, birds, landscapes and
    > >>> macros. All shot with the shiny new Nikon d5200 and various lenses.
    > >>> There has been minimal post processing done.
    > >>>
    > >>> This is what I see when I step out the back door.
    > >>>
    > >>> https://www.dropbox.com/sh/627rr3v0jwpenl5/kxUwK_DuWm
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>> David
    > >>
    > >> Image 20 is technically awful and should be dumped.

    > >
    > > It isn't good. Thanks for honesty. Now that you mention it I think I
    > > intended to publish another somewhat similar and put this by mistake.
    > >
    > >
    > > The rest range
    > >> from mediocre to pleasingly artistic and clearly show photographic
    > >> talent.

    > >
    > > Some shots are documentary and included for the benefit of other
    > > viewers to whom they will have more meaning.
    > >
    > > I particularly like 19, but it needs some postprocessing
    > >> work, especially in the shadows.

    > >
    > > To what end? How?
    > >
    > > I also like 22; the dog's expression
    > >> and demeanor as he eyes those roosters is precious. Try to bring out
    > >> more detail in his face. If I have an overall criticism, it's the
    > >> lack of attention to sharpness. I tend to be a sharpness fanatic,
    > >> though, so consider the source.

    > >
    > > I will keep trying.
    > >
    > > In reflection pictures, like 24,
    > >> where the rotation is a little off, the trick is to superimpose a
    > >> grid and then rotate the image until the subject and its reflection
    > >> form the same angle with the vertical.
    > >>

    > >
    > > Where is this vertical to compare to? Are you just saying I don't have
    > > the water surface horizontal? If it is not that then I don't
    > > understand you.

    >
    > If anybody is going to be totally anal about these things, in that
    > image there is one one logical line to use to fix the horizontal with,
    > and that is the on waterline separating the duck from its reflection.
    > There is no vertical line to use for adjustment, and the uneven
    > waterline around the reeds is not going to work.


    You don't necessarily need a line for a reference, two points will do--
    the duck's eye and its reflection for example. The farther apart the
    points are the better.

    The more I look at that duck, the more interesting it gets. Did you
    notice that the way the plants are bent form an interrupted circle
    around it?
     
    J. Clarke, Jun 17, 2013
    #18
  19. David Hare-Scott

    Tony Cooper Guest

    On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 14:55:03 +0200, Pablo <> wrote:

    >David Hare-Scott wrote:
    >
    >> After watching the shoot-in for a while I have wanted to make an offering
    >> or
    >> two. I shot a few frames that might have been on topic for some subjects
    >> recently but none that I really liked. So I thought I would put up some
    >> that I do like and see what the group thinks.
    >>
    >> These are mainly images of the natural world, birds, landscapes and
    >> macros.
    >> All shot with the shiny new Nikon d5200 and various lenses. There has
    >> been minimal post processing done.
    >>
    >> This is what I see when I step out the back door.
    >>
    >> https://www.dropbox.com/sh/627rr3v0jwpenl5/kxUwK_DuWm

    >
    >Not that I'm qualified to comment, but why do you chop bits off your
    >subjects?


    Why do you look at the thumbnails and not click so the full photo is
    in view?

    Click on the first one and it will open the full image. Then use the
    arrows to view as a manual slideshow. No bits have been chopped off.

    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando FL
     
    Tony Cooper, Jun 17, 2013
    #19
  20. David Hare-Scott

    Tony Cooper Guest

    On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 11:14:36 -0700 (PDT), otter
    <> wrote:

    >On Jun 16, 10:20 am, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com>
    >wrote:
    >> On 2013-06-16 05:34:14 -0700, "David Hare-Scott" <> said:
    >>
    >> > After watching the shoot-in for a while I have wanted to make an
    >> > offering or two.  I shot a few frames that might have been on topic for
    >> > some subjects recently but none that I really liked.  So I thought I
    >> > would put up some that I do like and see what the group thinks.

    >>
    >> > These are mainly images of the natural world, birds, landscapes and
    >> > macros. All shot with the shiny new Nikon d5200 and various lenses.
    >> > There has been minimal post processing done.

    >>
    >> > This is what I see when I step out the back door.

    >>
    >> >https://www.dropbox.com/sh/627rr3v0jwpenl5/kxUwK_DuWm

    >>
    >> > David

    >>
    >> Nice work. It must be great to have those targets when you step out
    >> your back door.
    >> I like the "eye-ball self portrait".
    >>
    >> One of the elements of the SI is to accept the challenge of being drawn
    >> out of the photographic comfort zone each of us has unwittingly
    >> developed over time. You have developed a skill dealing with your local
    >> wild & domestic life and landscape, there are others of us who prefer
    >> landscapes, candid/street, action, documentary, or some who are best
    >> described as generalists. Some handle the change quite well others have
    >> to rise to the challenge of change.
    >> What I suggest, is grab the bull by the horns and dive in. The next SI
    >> mandate is "BBQ" which sounds simple enough, but it is going to be your
    >> interpretation of the mandate that counts. Outdoor cooking is different
    >> all over the World, and some barbecue is executed indoors today. So, if
    >> you have the opportunity to shoot something, or if you have an archive
    >> shot or two, we would like to have you join us in July.
    >>

    >
    >I was about to launch into a rant about the difference between BBQ and
    >"outdoor cooking", but I'll spare you my biased Texan view on the
    >subject. :)


    I'm not sure what you mean. I see a difference between BBQing and
    grilling, but if both are done outdoors, then both are outdoor
    cooking.

    Go ahead and rant.
    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando FL
     
    Tony Cooper, Jun 17, 2013
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Bad Dog

    Comment about Firefox

    Bad Dog, Oct 2, 2005, in forum: Firefox
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    429
    Old Gringo
    Oct 2, 2005
  2. History Fan

    Firefox extensions comment

    History Fan, Nov 17, 2005, in forum: Firefox
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    484
    History Fan
    Nov 17, 2005
  3. firemarsh
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    459
    firemarsh
    Jan 21, 2004
  4. Replies:
    5
    Views:
    1,325
  5. Giuen
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,158
    Giuen
    Sep 12, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page