Untitled

Excellent capture, dude.. but u have got to tell us how u managed to pull this one off.. u didn't specify the tech. details (exposure/aperture).. it's incredible the details u have managed to capture at such a high-speed with perfect timing.. what did u touch-up in PS ?

congrats again..

This shot is extremely impressive. I wish you could do something about the PS shadow alterations, which look a bit artificial (especially the portion near the wheel on the right).

When I saw this small as POW on the front page it is the first time the POW has REALLY jumped out at me. The colours are great, the image is powerful. I like imagining Richard hanging off the back of the start car hoping he aint gonna fall off and that the shots would work.....I think he definitely got close enough to the action to satisfy Mr Capa anyway....
I would like to see the original unretouched scan of the slide/neg however, as personally I find untouched pictures more beautiful than digitally altered ones. Certainly don't chane anything more...Would certainly make a great DPS opening for an article on trap racing - the title of the piece and opening para would sit beautifully in the dust between the two horses......Lovely shot Richard and I am sure we all look forward to you throwing yourself as close to more dangerous things with your camera soon (have you thought about taking some pictures of the Wildebeest migration ? not sure if they have a start car but......)R.x

Hi Richard!

 

I rarely see images that couldn't be improved... but this is certainly one of those rare images. Everything is fantastic - the composition, the mood, the action, the light - I could never ask for more in a photograph. Thanks for sharing this fantastic image, may you take many more like it!

 

As for digital editing - I couldn't care less - I'm not interested in 'photography', just great images, no matter how they were created and edited!

Another portion that looks quite artificial is also the ground with the motion blur. We don't know if it was done in PS but, regardless, it doesn't look real since the level of motion blur doesn't match that of the legs.

 

I too think it would be good to be able to see the un-retouched original to make more concrete suggestion as to the effectivness of the PS manipulation.

>>As for digital editing - I couldn't care less - I'm not interested in 'photography', just great images, no matter how they were created and edited!<<

 

LOL!

In that case there are a ton of graphics sites, 3D modelling sites and illustration sites on the web that will knock your socks right off.

 

Point being - Photo.net is about photos. And it does matter how and to what level of expertise they were retouched/edited.

Brilliant! You rarely see an action shot pulled of that well! and its such a thinker of a photo, it begs the question, how? also i could look good in fisheye, something to think about. Anyhow it is briilliant.

OF COURSE the motion blur on the ground will differ from that of the legs, because the legs are moving forward and the ground isn't!

>>OF COURSE the motion blur on the ground will differ from that of the legs, because the legs are moving forward and the ground isn't!<<

 

Of course but, that is not what I meant. Given the motion blur of the ground you can assume a certain shutter speed. That speed would produce a different blur on the legs as some legs move forward (toward the camera) and some move backwards (away from the camera and therefore should almost disappear...). Same for the grass...

Woaw. This picture is perfect in my eyes. The whites in the horses eye points out the wildness of the race, perfectly cut/framed. In my eyes this cannot be done better !

SECOND ATTEMPT AT POSTING.

 

Hi Richard. How does this shot compare? For complete story see my posting from last night. Best regards!

This is my third and last attempt at posting. I hope that it works. I've reduced the image size.

Remarkable. Enlarge it to 6' high and put it on a wall so

viewers can immerse themselves in the perspective. WOW is

all I can say. Great planning, great weather, and great

luck. No need for artsy-fartsy rationalizations to give

a 7/7. The first POW that has grabbed me in a long time.

Enjoy this one!

Ignoring the cloning of the shadow for the moment, the consensus is that this image is the BEST 'straight' shot on photo.net. Why is this so popular? For one thing, we can actually put ourselves in the position of the photographer and imagine the effort and excitement of being literally in the middle of an athletic event. Another reason is the perspective and distortion that can not be obtained with any digicam, and with only a handful of lenses on a DSLR.

 

I see this is as a good shot, but not 'great'. Maybe it's because our club just had a workshop with an equine photographer who showed us shots that were more dangerous and exciting than this one. (Try lying on your back just off to the side of a jump with a Sigma 18mm and a Nikon D2H.) Maybe it's because the lighting was better in most of his shots (I like the overcast conditions in the inline image better.) Maybe it's because the the extreme coverage angle creates a huge triangle right in the middle which is quite unattractive wiht or without PS work.

 

I think the 'decisive moment' was not nearly as illusive as many of you think given that the horses are alwyas facing forward and he's right between them. I would have liked to have seen a series of shots ranging from 18mm to 35mm as the vehicle pulled away. I 'm not convinced that the 18mm image would have been the overwhelming favorite.

We are looking much too close and not deep enoughat life. This touches at the heart of the debate on manipulated news photos. Our desire for perfection. The microscopic way people are looking at everything since images have been processed so much by computer. We'd have to throw out the majority of the world's great news photos or "decsive moments" because a post was in the way, another flash went off in the background, whatever. Sure, photographers and photo editors have always selected the "sweetest" images. Aesthetics applies in all kinds of photography, but we need more tolerance of reality, on the one hand, and sleight of hand, on the other. If David Copperield, explained each illusion after it was done, his act would soon loose its appeal, its magic. Great photo. Great effort.

QUOTE: "Point being - Photo.net is about photos. And it does matter how and to what level of expertise they were retouched/edited."

 

Dear Lucas,

There is not ONE way of looking at photos, and there is not ONE way of enjoying photography. Nitpicking has its place and can be valuable feedback for any photographer. On the other hand many of us that sell photographs for a living have audiences to please - they rarely know anything about the technical side of photography. As long as an image works and communicates its a winner in my book. Weather this would be printed in 'Photoshop Professional' or 'Lenswork' doesn't bother me at all - I just know that this image has great commercial potential. In the end, if an image is badly crafted it will be hard to sell, and the photographer will learn a lesson. Happy shooting to ya'!

David F. Stein: I see what you mean. I can only add that, personally, I meant 'artificial' in the sense that the altered portion in question didn't gel with the rest of the image, by virtue of the very alteration performed. Following through with your metaphor, it feels as if the sleight of hand is revealed for what it is, only inadvertedly. Richard: this is however, in my opinion, quite a striking image.

This is a very fine photograph and I am most pleased by the effort and skill

behind this image. To improve: I would add a lot more saturation and increase

contrast. Or use a polarizing plugin filter for Photoshop. You have some

amazing colour combinations here - I really love the blue of the sky with the

green on the grass with the red of the ground and how the colours of the

horses overlap. My advice is to enhance this to its fullest - bring out that

colour! Thanks very much for posting this; it's quite inspiring.

"In the end, if an image is badly crafted it will be hard to sell, and the photographer will learn a lesson."

Which is exactly one of the reasons we have this forum here. Maybe a photographer can get feedback before he misses a sale due to something that he could have fixed. That's the beauty of peer review.

The average joe buying a print for their wall probably wouldn't pick up on the less than stellar Photoshopwork on what is a really bang-up image. The more discerning print buyer/photo collectors that some sell to and the photo editors and art directors that are my clients definitely would - so it's valid perspective to point out what I see as shortcomings with the Photoshop work.

So I think you will agree that what you call 'nitpicks' and many of us here call 'constructive critiques' are definitely in the best interest of the photographer.

I never meant to imply there is only one way to look at photographs. But attention to detail, quality and craftsmanship definitely rank right up there the list of parameters to watch for when shooting, editing and presenting photographs.

Good shooting to you as well!

we need more tolerance of reality, on the one hand, and sleight of hand, on the other. If David Copperield, explained each illusion after it was done, his act would soon loose its appeal, its magic.

Certainly but, this is NOT the case here. In the Photo world (and that's where we are *here*) this would be either a sport, reportage or commercial shot of sort. With the PS manipulation being as it is it wouldn't work in any of those categories or even as a poster. Not with a discriminating publisher/pulic.

The very fact that we are talking about the PS work is obvious proof that in this case (the way it was performed) it does take away from an otherwise good image. That brings us to the "magic" point: the use of the blur, motion and cloning tools is very obvious and not as transparent (or practiced) as a David Copperfield trick ;-)

The reason some of us had requested an unretouched scan of the original was not to reveal any "tricks" but, rather to suggest an alternative to the poorly executed PS editing. I guess the photographer has chosen not to post the original to further the discussion.

Even if it is a PS fabricationg or composition I still regard it as art, providing everything was done by the photographer. As for sugesstions,what really hurts this shot is the blur on the ground and between and behind the horses.I think that's also where all these "fabricating" buzz is coming from. I would take it back to PS and retouch it from the original, if there is any, that is.

This is an excellent photograph in my opinion. The expressions of both horses are what makes this work for me. If they were expressionless so to speak, this would be much less dramatic in my book. Currently this is the third highest rated image on Photo.Net of all time. Does it warrant that high a rating?? I do not think so. In fact there is another magnificent capture of horse racing that I believe is even better than this one, as attached. Both are excellent, and this one here is indeed a special capture, but only ONE is a once in a lifetime...and it's not this weeks version!

I have never offered any critique on anyone's photos here, maybe I'm just in a salty mood, but I had to offer something to this one.

 

Yeah, the photo's impressive in a very basic manor: 1) wide angle action shots are always impressive 2) who has seen a shot like this before?

 

But I'm feeling that this photo lacks a lot. For me, the biggest problem is that it's pretty undescernable from a film still. (I can see an IMAX movie with a similar scene in it.) Beyond that, the image is too fuzzy; I'm not referring to the action blur--I happen to like that and feel that the image would be totally wasted had you come closer to "freezing the image"--but rather the fact that nothing seems to be sharp. Is that just the digital aspect of the image? Is it the size? Further, I'm gonna say that the image is a tad too magenta--on an enlarger I would've added maybe 5 points of magenta and two to three of yellow. Finally, I think to focus the eye a bit more the center dusty area should be burned slightly. The light dustyness distracts me too much.

 

My 2 cents worth. From an art based photo major.

 

cheers.

tommie

Never in my life have I seen a photograph that really seemed to MOVE as much as this one. The statement that "the action seems to explode" doesn't even do it justice. This picture really does look like it is in motion. incredible

While it's easy to make things look interesting with a wide angle,it's also easy to make mistakes,make them look lopsided or lose parts out of the sides of the frame.Here you have done it exceptionally well!A Very good picture.The only things holding it back from greatness are a slight lack of sharpness and too much fake looking saturation