Re: [SI] Looking Up/Looking Down is UP!

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Robert Coe, Mar 25, 2013.

  1. Robert Coe

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Mon, 18 Mar 2013 19:20:32 -0400, Bowser <> wrote:
    : Some nice shots this month, so please take a look:
    :
    : http://www.pbase.com/shootin/looking_up_down

    My comments; sorry they're so late:

    Cooper Lighthouse
    What's not to like? It's a workmanlike shot of the sort that anyone who lives
    near the shore captures from time to time. I might have Siskerized the sky a
    bit, but it's a sharp picture with everything in its place.

    Cooper Looking Down
    Very well done. Exactly wht the mandate evvisioned, I guess I'd have to say.

    Cooper Looking Up
    Compositionally, I don't think this quite matches the previous shot, but I
    like the colors. Again it's an excellent match for the mandate.

    Bob Coe 1 & 2
    These pictures capture the gloominess of the day, possibly to an extreme. When
    I took them, I was thinking only of the "looking down" aspect of the mandate.
    If I had if to do over, I'd make the "looking up" picture show more of the
    reservoir and a better angle on the dam. Quite honestly, I left a bit sooner
    than I might have, because I was alone, the area was deserted, and the two
    strangers seemed just a bit too eager to engage me in conversation without
    showing any actual interest in what I was doing. Probably an overreaction on
    my part. I guess it's worth mentioning that the pictures tend to illustrate
    the limitations of an APS-C camera for landscape photography. While the Tokina
    11-16 is one of the best WA lenses available for this type of camera, it's not
    the sharpest lens in my bag. With a FF camera, you have more options at the
    wide end.

    Bob Coe 3
    It's an understatement to say that this one wasn't a hit with the group. My
    excuse is that I liked the colors, the shadows, and the lines created by the
    ramp and the skylight. I watched that elevator being built for a good two
    years and always wanted a chance to photograph it. The station is in
    Cambridge, so the picture goes into my stock photos of Porter Square.

    Martha Coe 1 & 2
    Martha didn't get many opportunities to get out and shoot this month, so she
    settled for a couple of shots in the nieghborhood. They're nice pictures, but
    I can see why some said they don't meet the mandate very well.

    Martha Coe 3
    Martha has always liked the pictures we took at the Whaling Museum a couple of
    years ago, and this one does meet the mandate. Someone suggested that it might
    have been better as a WA shot, which strikes me as a good suggestion. If we
    get down there again, we'll give it a try.

    Bowser 1
    This is about as good a shot out of an airplane window as I've ever seen.
    (Well, some of the Savage Duck's air show pix probably match it.) I poked
    around Google Maps and a AAA road atlas to try to locate the site, but without
    success. On the assumption that it was taken on Bowser's way to Las Vegas, I
    think statistical probabilities place it near Farmington, NM, a location often
    mentioned by pilots explaining their flight plans to their passengers. I
    surmise that Farmington is the site of a major navigational beacon.

    Bowser 2a
    This one sort of leaves me cold. I guess I've seen too many good pictures of
    the real SOL for this one to make much of an impression. I might feel
    differently if some obvious Las Vegas kitch were included.

    Bowser 3
    Well, here's the Las Vegas kitch, but little else. It feels very constrained.
    Fisheye shots were once Bowser's specialty, and I suspect that this could have
    been a good one, had he had the proper equipment at hand.

    Anonymous Reflection
    I forget who took credit for this. It's an OK shot, but seems intended for one
    of last year's mandates. I rather like the colors. I'd probably have tried to
    normalize the orange out, which I suspect would have been a mistake.

    Rob's Stairwell
    Not as elegant as Tony's two, but an interesting picture nevertheless. I don't
    think it helps that some of it is OOF, but that may have been unavoidable.

    Rob's Trees
    I kind of like this, for no good reason. The blue looks highly artificial,
    though I'm sure it isn't. I guess its abstract qualitity is what makes it
    work; if the picture came from Peter Newman, I'd assume that was done
    intentionally. What accounts for the odd shadow(?) in the upper right corner?
    I think I have to knock off a couple of points for that.

    Savageduck 1-3
    Three nice landscapes that serve the mandate well. The third one, in
    particular, has an understated, painterly quality about it that may or may
    not have been intentional. Like some of the Duck's previous work, these look
    like they've been worked over in post-processing, but to good artistic effect.
    And like last time, he'll probably tell me they haven't. I don't think it
    really matters: I'm not at all opposed to artistic post-processing, although I
    don't do it very well myself. And the Duck is certainly a good enough
    landscape photographer to know when a picture needs work and when it doesn't.

    Tim Conway 2
    This one doesn't work. It suffers acutely from the obvious comparison with
    Rob's trees, but it's technically defective even without the comparison. I
    don't recall exactly what Tim said about this picture and his other one, but I
    believe he indicated that at least one of them was done in by a mis-adjusted
    scanner.

    Tim Conway Old
    This one came out horribly noisy, as others have pointed out. I suspect the
    picture might have been a bit bland anyway, but will give it the benefit of
    the doubt. The technical problems preclude a rational assessment of the
    composition and color.

    Bob
    Robert Coe, Mar 25, 2013
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Robert Coe

    Tim Conway Guest

    "Robert Coe" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Mon, 18 Mar 2013 19:20:32 -0400, Bowser <> wrote:
    > : Some nice shots this month, so please take a look:
    > :
    > : http://www.pbase.com/shootin/looking_up_down
    >
    > My comments; sorry they're so late:
    >
    >
    > Tim Conway 2
    > This one doesn't work. It suffers acutely from the obvious comparison with
    > Rob's trees, but it's technically defective even without the comparison. I
    > don't recall exactly what Tim said about this picture and his other one,
    > but I
    > believe he indicated that at least one of them was done in by a
    > mis-adjusted
    > scanner.
    >
    > Tim Conway Old
    > This one came out horribly noisy, as others have pointed out. I suspect
    > the
    > picture might have been a bit bland anyway, but will give it the benefit
    > of
    > the doubt. The technical problems preclude a rational assessment of the
    > composition and color.
    >

    I don't have a scanner, etc and had to copy some old prints. The
    focus must've been off on my old camera. Exposure was too, but PS6
    relatively saved that as much as it could.
    Thanks for commenting
    Tim
    Tim Conway, Mar 25, 2013
    #2
    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. Tony Cooper
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    210
    Robert Coe
    Mar 17, 2013
  2. Rob
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    189
    Robert Coe
    Mar 15, 2013
  3. Robert Coe
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    174
    Robert Coe
    Mar 14, 2013
  4. Robert Coe
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    195
    Robert Coe
    Mar 15, 2013
  5. Rob
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    178
Loading...

Share This Page