philgeusebroek

Thanks for your time,

 

Phil

There seem to be two luminous green bands of colour across the top of the photo. Is this natural or an artifact of scanning?

Please rate.

 

Thanks,

I really like the majestic look of the full wingspread. However I do find that parts of the main goose are disappearing into the dark background, and this is distracting to me.

 

I think this photo would look really good with a lighter background, cropping the main goose to portrait.

 

Geese can be very skittish. So I know all this would be pretty hard to do, considering that they are so tough just to get close to. But I hope these opinions help you anyway.

 

Regards,

Thanks for your time.

Pwease wate/cwitique.

 

Thanks,

 

Phil

This goose was awake when I was settling in next to it! The shots were taken at around minimum focusing distance with a 200mm f4. I was literally laying within 4 feet of two tired geese that didn't much care if I was there or not!

 

We sat together for awhile and I began to take photos. The geese would open their eyes when the shutter clicked, then go back to sleep.

 

My cell phone began ringing in my camera case. One goose raised its head and looked at me with kind of an annoyed expression. I slowly reached into the case and answered the phone in a low voice. Wrong number. Of all the stupid things that could happen! I quietly apologised for the intrusion and it began to nod off - kind of humourous to watch...

 

After a few more pictures they both got up, stretched and walked away. None of the other birds I tried to photograph that day allowed me to get so close.

 

Sharing a half-hour nap with a pair of Canada geese is one of the reasons I love this hobby so much.

Quality loss likely due to 2 factors:

 

1. Shot handheld. However, shutter speed was likely good enough to prevent camera shake, given that I was shooting into the light.

 

2. Shot with a do-it-all 28-200mm lense which I have since sold. The lense was wonderfully light and convenient to have around, but definitely wasn't up to the quality of my FD stuff. It wasn't soft(at most focal lengths) but it wasn't sharp either. Wide angle distortion also gave me a couple of curved horizons. I was carrying the Elan + 28-200 around when weight was an issue and taking pictures was a secondary effort.

 

Could someone tell me if the 28-135mm IS lense is much better than the typical wide-telephoto zoom? I am looking to build an AF travel kit again. Seems like 3 primes(24,50,100macro or 200f2.8) might be the way to go...

Please rate/critique.

 

Thanks,

Phil

Please rate/critique,

 

Thanks,

Phil

Please rate,

 

Thanks,

Phil

Your B&W variant appeals to me more than my original. To me it accentuates the textures and lines in the photo. I will follow your suggestions and repost the image.

 

Phil

Somewhat frenetic, but still has visual impact.

The thing that I never thought sideways about was to rearrange the elements in the picture to make them more pleasing.

 

It always seemed to me that Landscape Photography was purely observational and that one was not supposed to 'mess with mother nature'. I have only ever photographed things as I found them. Rearranging elements for a more pleasing composition was like destroying how nature had put things. So I always simply tried to put my interpretation into what was already there.

 

Also, really thinking about it, I now realise my understanding has read too much into the photo:

 

On the right is a rock that originated in a magma which may have sat under explosive continental volcanos. The deep red of potassium feldspar gives the rock away. On the left is a rock which was likely deposited into layers of sediment, then buried miles deep, squeezing like toothpaste under the pressure. Once exposed by water and wind, all of the rocks in this scene were then rounded off into boulders by flowing water in some riverine environment.

 

Water that made those ancient sediments in the rock on the left also gave the boulders their shape. It nourished the driftwood before its death and likely killed the wood when the dam was built. This same water now nourishes the grass which grows between the cracks and sprinkles the rocks and driftwood. Grass which now grows in sediments made by water and wind.

 

In short, I see the rise and fall of mountains, magmas and volcanic eruptions, quiet shores and mighty rivers. I see the endless circle of life and the role of water in it; the co-dependent dichotomy of creation and destruction.

 

But looking at it objectively, it still comes down to 2 rocks and 3 sticks in boring light, doesn't it? :)

 

Thank you all for your comments. I have learned a good lesson today.

 

Phil

Unfortunately the rater did not comment, so I don't know why it is so

bad.

 

I thought it was an interesting combination of lines and textures,

with the rain adding a twist to the driftwood. Perhaps being a

Geologist has left me biased to shooting rocks. :)

 

Please rate and comment on this so I can do better next time.

 

Thanks in advance,

 

Phil

Please rate/comment.

 

Thanks,

 

Phil

No filtration was used. Please rate/comment.

I like the feeling I get that she is inside her own head within the context of a social setting. It is good that the crowd in the background is distant and out of focus. They would probably appear that way to her too.

This image is cropped out of landscape format, full height but not

width.

 

Would it look better in a standard 6Hx4W crop?

 

Any other praise/criticism is much appreciated.

 

Phil

This was a freak rain in early spring in Nunavut.

 

Did I capture it well enough?

 

Please rate it and my other photos.

 

Thanks again,

 

Phil

I too find the colours unnatural. But that's what makes it so good!! If the colors were true to life the photo would not be half as much like a work of art.

 

Congratulations on a well executed image.

I have just joined photo.net about two weeks ago. Please

critique/rate/ let me know what you think.

 

Thanks,

Phil

I think this is the best way this could have been shot! Turned another boring macro bug shot into a tongue-in-cheek image of one that perhaps didn't want its picture taken. It is a satirical slap in the face of convention.

 

I chuckled when I first saw it as well. The best a photographer could hope for is to evoke an emotional response from the viewer. Isn't that what art is all about? This one put a smile on my face!

 

An excellent image. Thank you for sharing it.

inuksuk (ee-NOOK-sook) "like a human"

 

Inuksuit (ee-NOOK-soo-eet), meaning three or more of these, are the rock cairns once used by hunters as navigational guides on the treeless tundra. The inuksuk is a dominant feature of Nunavut's new flag.

 

They are typically set up by residents of Canada's far North as they move around on the Land. Inuksuks most often take the likeness of people but I have seen them in other forms as well.

 

By the shadow he seems rather well endowed. :)

 

I agree though. It is kind of creepy in sort of a cold, twisted way. Reminds me of that Tool video of their song 'Sober'.