Great subject, great composition. I think the B&W conversion could probably be better. Do you really want this much contrast and this much loss of shadow detail? Is there more detail in the origiinal?
I have to disagree with Ginger. Sunsets are nice, but, hey, we all shoot them. They are not "photographer's pictures" as Ginger says. But this one is. Jim, the images of yours I like best are like this one. They convey a sense of place, of history, and rightness. The scale is smallish, but everything is so peaceful and right. It's your style.
As with so many of the images posted here, I'd play with shadow/highlight and LAB curves here a little to open the shadows a bit and make it pop.
I also got this shot over the weekend. I'm not completely happy with the framing of the shot, but considering I nearly got sick taking this picture, I wasn't in a hurry to reshoot:
By the way, all three images were shot at 35mm.
But I am with the group, the woman on that torture thing, by far!
ginger
That is my question??? It has occurred to me, why in the world anyone rides those things. I almost broke my nedk on one years ago. I won't get on them. And if you scream that you want off, they think you are having fun!
I think they are dangerous, smile.
So, a photo like that would be about the only good reason I can think of to be on one,
Ginger, I think you have chosen well. This is a very interesting image. I love the broken symetry, the shape of the lights cast on the wall. I think this is plenty atmospheric in color. Perhaps a little work with curves could further excentuate? I'll play a little if you like.
I'm told this kind of tiny sailboat is called an "Optimist". It's sort of the mini of sailboats, at least in terms of size. Probably not in terms of performance. This family towed theirs across the harbor with a Zodiac.
21mm:
Rutt, this is my favorite of the shots posted this AM. I happen to be a strong fan, though, of well done center placement.
This shot and the shot of the window are my two favorites. I think this is strong as a scenic, but the window is "different", so it has a stronger chance of being liked, or not. I think these are kind of "just shots", kind of middle ish, and I don't think they have as strong a chance at much of anything.
Sorry, that didn't come out very well.
I would say that if I were doing a coffee table book on good photography, August 2004, I would pick your window shot.
ginger
(And my shot, too. Gonna be tough. Oh, yes, Cletus shot, and that is just what I am thinking of at this moment.)
I have to disagree with Ginger. Sunsets are nice, but, hey, we all shoot them. They are not "photographer's pictures" as Ginger says. But this one is. Jim, the images of yours I like best are like this one. They convey a sense of place, of history, and rightness. The scale is smallish, but everything is so peaceful and right. It's your style.
As with so many of the images posted here, I'd play with shadow/highlight and LAB curves here a little to open the shadows a bit and make it pop.
That might work, good gosh, Rutt, no one was on commenting all weekend, except a few of us. So I wanted to say something when I saw it.
What I really thought was that we have a week left, and I would keep shooting.
That would be my emphasis. And I could be completely wrong about the photos, as you have pointed out about the sunset. I was impressed by the flat wide open ness of the country with the small bldgs on the left. Wide open............ Most impressive sunsets do need a hook and a "sky" (clouds or something like that).
comments:
Rutt: I like your small boat in a big ocean shot
Ginger: Would love to see your dining ladies in B&W, great shot
Snapapple: Your tree shot looks great to me.
Cletus: I really like the spinning girl shot, I think the framing is fine. Nice shot.
Mitchell: the lighting is really cool on your beach shot, love the shoes.
Rutt I think your comments about a pure wide open shot versus foreground interest is interesting. I think a pure wide shot can look great, but I think that the shots that include foreground and even fore, middle, background can be very interesting, but I think are much more difficult to pull off. Playing around with perspective is interesting too, but it seems to be difficult to get a shot that doesn't look gimmicky.
I still can't find anything of mine that I like, but its been educational just walking around with a 27mm lens. Its a different world.
Why do you all want to see Dining Women in blk and white?
I know that street shots are usually blk and white. I am a big fan of blk and white, but I see this as a color shot.
Why do you all see it as a blk and white shot?
ginger
(made this post short and sweet )
Think Edward Hopper here, too.
I know it has not been mentioned here, but it has been mentioned elsewhere.
I think PF is right... you should try this one as a grainy black and white. I think it will be the finishing touch on a great image.
That was my first thought Cletus - I even suggested Andy's Tri-X look with significant grain, but on reflection( pun!!) Ginger MAY be right about color here. I see her comment about Edward Hopperesque also, and that my disappear in B&W.
Been stuck in side and evacuated my home to avoid hurricane Charley. Not much wide angle shooting for me. Finally ventured out to the beach today and the clouds were nasty.
mitch
I like the beach and the shoes - makes one wonder where are the people - did they swim to Tahiti? Dark forboding clouds fit the scene also.
I've been finding this challenge, err, challenging. I already knew that it was hit or miss with my WA lens. The little hint about having a strong foreground element, doesn't seem to correspond to my best WA images (like the Yellowstone Reflections entry.) Look at Penelope's image that Andy posted! This is one beautiful WA shot, and were is the foreground image?
Anyway, I do seem to be good at using WA to make my subjects seem a small part of a huge enviornment. Here are a few I took yesterday of my son and dog.
21mm:
21mm:
John - I think your son IS the foreground element in the picture - if he were not there the picture would lose most of its interest - the wide angle article Andy posted talked about using WAs as portrait lenses to allow the individual to be placed in a location or occupation - not head shots but whole body shots - The article showed a young man with a pitch fork throwing a thatch of hay .
Your second image with him on the path, centered, I find less compelling. Too much greenery, and fine detail, but no center of interest except your son, but ( in my humble opinion) he is depicted as too small.
I think that is one reason why WAs are hard to use - they minify images UNLESS you are very close to the subject.
I almost did not post my image of the sidelit tree in the cemetary for this reason - lovely lighting in person - but the image has nice lovely detail in the file but when cut back to 800x600 pixels it loses a lot of its fine detail on the monitor. You have discussed the difference between great images and images that win Challenges - I think some images are better viewed on a monitor verses as a large fine art print. The monitor favors brighter colors, large graphical simple images - Imagine trying to present a lovely 8x10 view camera slide of a WA landscape scene as an 800x600 pixel image.
I plan to re shoot in that cemetary again this week - it is less than 5 minutes from my home so I can get back there for sunset easily. The landscape scene was immediately looking 90 degrees to the left from the sidelit trees.
It is hard in my neighborhood to see sunsets, because we are surrounded on all sides by 50 feet high oaks and maples, so I was pleased to find this little cemetary up on a ridge line overlooking the Wabash River Valley.
Great subject, great composition. I think the B&W conversion could probably be better. Do you really want this much contrast and this much loss of shadow detail? Is there more detail in the origiinal?
Thanks rutt . I made this lighter version after taking your advice.
The original is quite dark so I cannot lighten it to much.
Lot's going on around here so I haven't posted much, but this, I thought was a classic.
Sandy,
This is funny. It's not Halloween yet. The only possible problem I see is the centered composition. Could be there were major distractions on the sides. Neat catch though, Batman in August.
Ginger,
Oh, this is wonderful. It's, as you say, a photographers photo. I like the deep colors. I like that the women have simple hair styles and clothes that makes it sort of timeless. Yes, I can see where they are coming from on the black and white. But, I'd have to see them side by side to decide. Marilyn Monroe is so high up there, that she may fade into the background in B&W. This way, she stands out, and Marilyn in B&W reminds us of the different time period. I don't know. There is a lot to see here. A lot to think about. Isn't that what makes a really good photo. Great catch here.
I too, am sorry for your other photos. They are also good. Maybe I can "borrow" one and enter it as mine. Then they would all have a chance to be in the finals. Ah yes, you are so prolific that you end up competing with yourself. But, look at how it produces better and better work product.
Great goin' girl.
PS/CS shadow/highlight to the rescue here. I used 23/70/30 on your B&W image. I'll bet if you do this before you convert to B&W you can get much better quality. What did you do to make the conversion? Perhaps there is some improvement available there as well. Have you read the old Photoshop forum assignment about B&W conversions? I learned a lot from that assignment. There is a lot more to it than you might think. If you can get it, read the chapter "Friend and Foe in Black and White" in Dan Margulis' Professional Photoshop book.
Eric,
Thanks, appreciate the input. I tried it wide, with the lake. The tree got lost. I like the composition of this one best. I tried to show the barren hills and loneliness of the place. Funny, there was not even a bird in the sky. No cover for them, no habitat. So sad.
Three of a USAF C5 Transport.
18mm (guess: 28mm in 35mm)
Hey - another local! I wasn't able to make it to the show this weekend, but I had several spies there. this is a cool shot, but since this is a photoshop-ok challenge, i'd give it a little pop with some color enhancement. Good clarity and contrast already - nice!
And you all need to be treated to this. I shot a volley ball game at 18 mm on my D Rebel, conversion factor 1.6, leaving the math to others. But a volley ball game on wide. I sat as close as I could.
Ginger, i would love to see you work this shot a little more! I read somewhere, and have come to find out myself, that good wide angle shots really need something very close to the foreground to lead you into the rest of the shot. The bottom of the net does this perfectly! I like the 2 ladies, but give this one another thought.
I'm told this kind of tiny sailboat is called an "Optimist". It's sort of the mini of sailboats, at least in terms of size. Probably not in terms of performance. This family towed theirs across the harbor with a Zodiac.
21mm:
Rutt, I really like this one! have you already bumped it with your usual methods? I bet with some more drama in the sky, this shot is a winner. That water is just fabulous, and the lady awaiting the arrival of the boat really adds extra movement to the shot!
Rutt, I really like this one! have you already bumped it with your usual methods? I bet with some more drama in the sky, this shot is a winner. That water is just fabulous, and the lady awaiting the arrival of the boat really adds extra movement to the shot!
Thanks. The usual LAB games brought out the detail in the water and if there had been any in the sky, I would have found it. This one shot really had no drama in the sky to bring up. I'd have to do something more artifical than I ususally do to make that happen, but certainly I'm not above that.
I keep looking at Penelope's shot that Andy posted at the start of the challenge and thinking that I'm still on page 1 as far as wide angle goes.
Thanks. The usual LAB games brought out the detail in the water and if there had been any in the sky, I would have found it. This one shot really had no drama in the sky to bring up. I'd have to do something more artifical than I ususally do to make that happen, but certainly I'm not above that.
Thanks. The usual LAB games brought out the detail in the water and if there had been any in the sky, I would have found it. This one shot really had no drama in the sky to bring up. I'd have to do something more artifical than I ususally do to make that happen, but certainly I'm not above that.
I keep looking at Penelope's shot that Andy posted at the start of the challenge and thinking that I'm still on page 1 as far as wide angle goes.
I notice that Penleope's shot is after dark with artificial light and lots of deep black spaces ....... It, also, is a wide angle shot. Which do you think is more important for impact on the viewer, John? I know what I think...:D
Ginger, i would love to see you work this shot a little more! I read somewhere, and have come to find out myself, that good wide angle shots really need something very close to the foreground to lead you into the rest of the shot. The bottom of the net does this perfectly! I like the 2 ladies, but give this one another thought.
Erik, I agree that this is a good shot, hate to not use it. This has been a problem shot from the beginning, though. There are the two volleyball shots, here there is division over which is preferred. This one needs a ball, doesn't need a ball.
In my dog group, there is agreement on no need for a ball, but they are split down the middle, also, on which shot.
In my family, my two daughters, on ho hum, but if pushed likes the jumper, the other daughter has strong reasons to like the people looking up. And my son .............can't remember.
It is strong, I will agree on that, stronger than I gave it credit for, probably would have used it, if the 3 women hadn't come along. MM is considered a woman in my opinion, as far as that photo goes.
I have a week, but my eyes are now on the women. Unless everyone writes, tells me definitely that that particular volleyball shot is the best thing they have seen ever. Don't think that will happen. Some like it, some don't. No ball. Doesn't need a ball. Personally, the sand bothers me.
I was thinking of going out to try to get shots of the bridge tonight.
Don't know.
ginger (Dollars to Donuts, the Women Dining is my entry, but I still want to shoot. Read a bunch of photo books at Barnes and Noble, all fired up. Hungry right now.)
Rutt, I really like this one! have you already bumped it with your usual methods? I bet with some more drama in the sky, this shot is a winner. That water is just fabulous, and the lady awaiting the arrival of the boat really adds extra movement to the shot!
I like Rutt's boat, with the person walking towards it, I like it small like that, smile.
ginger
Might be better than I thought. But I still like the window.
Comments
I have to disagree with Ginger. Sunsets are nice, but, hey, we all shoot them. They are not "photographer's pictures" as Ginger says. But this one is. Jim, the images of yours I like best are like this one. They convey a sense of place, of history, and rightness. The scale is smallish, but everything is so peaceful and right. It's your style.
As with so many of the images posted here, I'd play with shadow/highlight and LAB curves here a little to open the shadows a bit and make it pop.
But I am with the group, the woman on that torture thing, by far!
ginger
That is my question??? It has occurred to me, why in the world anyone rides those things. I almost broke my nedk on one years ago. I won't get on them. And if you scream that you want off, they think you are having fun!
I think they are dangerous, smile.
So, a photo like that would be about the only good reason I can think of to be on one,
Rutt, this is my favorite of the shots posted this AM. I happen to be a strong fan, though, of well done center placement.
This shot and the shot of the window are my two favorites. I think this is strong as a scenic, but the window is "different", so it has a stronger chance of being liked, or not. I think these are kind of "just shots", kind of middle ish, and I don't think they have as strong a chance at much of anything.
Sorry, that didn't come out very well.
I would say that if I were doing a coffee table book on good photography, August 2004, I would pick your window shot.
ginger
(And my shot, too. Gonna be tough. Oh, yes, Cletus shot, and that is just what I am thinking of at this moment.)
TML Photography
tmlphoto.com
What I really thought was that we have a week left, and I would keep shooting.
That would be my emphasis. And I could be completely wrong about the photos, as you have pointed out about the sunset. I was impressed by the flat wide open ness of the country with the small bldgs on the left. Wide open............ Most impressive sunsets do need a hook and a "sky" (clouds or something like that).
ginger
Rutt: I like your small boat in a big ocean shot
Ginger: Would love to see your dining ladies in B&W, great shot
Snapapple: Your tree shot looks great to me.
Cletus: I really like the spinning girl shot, I think the framing is fine. Nice shot.
Mitchell: the lighting is really cool on your beach shot, love the shoes.
Rutt I think your comments about a pure wide open shot versus foreground interest is interesting. I think a pure wide shot can look great, but I think that the shots that include foreground and even fore, middle, background can be very interesting, but I think are much more difficult to pull off. Playing around with perspective is interesting too, but it seems to be difficult to get a shot that doesn't look gimmicky.
I still can't find anything of mine that I like, but its been educational just walking around with a 27mm lens. Its a different world.
TML Photography
tmlphoto.com
ginger
I know that street shots are usually blk and white. I am a big fan of blk and white, but I see this as a color shot.
Why do you all see it as a blk and white shot?
ginger
(made this post short and sweet
Think Edward Hopper here, too.
I know it has not been mentioned here, but it has been mentioned elsewhere.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
Your second image with him on the path, centered, I find less compelling. Too much greenery, and fine detail, but no center of interest except your son, but ( in my humble opinion) he is depicted as too small.
I think that is one reason why WAs are hard to use - they minify images UNLESS you are very close to the subject.
I almost did not post my image of the sidelit tree in the cemetary for this reason - lovely lighting in person - but the image has nice lovely detail in the file but when cut back to 800x600 pixels it loses a lot of its fine detail on the monitor. You have discussed the difference between great images and images that win Challenges - I think some images are better viewed on a monitor verses as a large fine art print. The monitor favors brighter colors, large graphical simple images - Imagine trying to present a lovely 8x10 view camera slide of a WA landscape scene as an 800x600 pixel image.
I plan to re shoot in that cemetary again this week - it is less than 5 minutes from my home so I can get back there for sunset easily. The landscape scene was immediately looking 90 degrees to the left from the sidelit trees.
It is hard in my neighborhood to see sunsets, because we are surrounded on all sides by 50 feet high oaks and maples, so I was pleased to find this little cemetary up on a ridge line overlooking the Wabash River Valley.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
The original is quite dark so I cannot lighten it to much.
Tim
Sandy,
This is funny. It's not Halloween yet. The only possible problem I see is the centered composition. Could be there were major distractions on the sides. Neat catch though, Batman in August.
Susan Appel Photography My Blog
Tim,
I love this guy. What a smile, and the wide angle really gives it a special look. I think it looks better now with a little more light.
Susan Appel Photography My Blog
Ginger,
Oh, this is wonderful. It's, as you say, a photographers photo. I like the deep colors. I like that the women have simple hair styles and clothes that makes it sort of timeless. Yes, I can see where they are coming from on the black and white. But, I'd have to see them side by side to decide. Marilyn Monroe is so high up there, that she may fade into the background in B&W. This way, she stands out, and Marilyn in B&W reminds us of the different time period. I don't know. There is a lot to see here. A lot to think about. Isn't that what makes a really good photo. Great catch here.
I too, am sorry for your other photos. They are also good. Maybe I can "borrow" one and enter it as mine. Then they would all have a chance to be in the finals.
Great goin' girl.
Susan Appel Photography My Blog
PS/CS shadow/highlight to the rescue here. I used 23/70/30 on your B&W image. I'll bet if you do this before you convert to B&W you can get much better quality. What did you do to make the conversion? Perhaps there is some improvement available there as well. Have you read the old Photoshop forum assignment about B&W conversions? I learned a lot from that assignment. There is a lot more to it than you might think. If you can get it, read the chapter "Friend and Foe in Black and White" in Dan Margulis' Professional Photoshop book.
Tim[/QUOTE]
Susan Appel Photography My Blog
Eric,
Thanks, appreciate the input. I tried it wide, with the lake. The tree got lost. I like the composition of this one best. I tried to show the barren hills and loneliness of the place. Funny, there was not even a bird in the sky. No cover for them, no habitat. So sad.
Susan Appel Photography My Blog
moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]
moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]
moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]
I keep looking at Penelope's shot that Andy posted at the start of the challenge and thinking that I'm still on page 1 as far as wide angle goes.
moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
nice work, guys. keep it up!
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
In my dog group, there is agreement on no need for a ball, but they are split down the middle, also, on which shot.
In my family, my two daughters, on ho hum, but if pushed likes the jumper, the other daughter has strong reasons to like the people looking up. And my son .............can't remember.
It is strong, I will agree on that, stronger than I gave it credit for, probably would have used it, if the 3 women hadn't come along. MM is considered a woman in my opinion, as far as that photo goes.
I have a week, but my eyes are now on the women. Unless everyone writes, tells me definitely that that particular volleyball shot is the best thing they have seen ever. Don't think that will happen. Some like it, some don't. No ball. Doesn't need a ball. Personally, the sand bothers me.
I was thinking of going out to try to get shots of the bridge tonight.
Don't know.
ginger (Dollars to Donuts, the Women Dining is my entry, but I still want to shoot. Read a bunch of photo books at Barnes and Noble, all fired up. Hungry right now.)
ginger
Might be better than I thought. But I still like the window.