dude steve

Hi Irene - if you really want to take decent pictures, you really need to turn off that date stamp on your camera.

It's a fine shot an all, but that's really killing the image.

IMO, the creativity is in the idea, not the difficulty of action. Regardless of how long or short this took to do, it was the idea - or at least the intuition - that it would be effective that marks this as creative.

Yeah, clicking randomly until an interesting result is achieved is not very creative, but that's not the case here.

I have a hard time figuring out how a heron would have improved this image, but then, I'm not a birder...

There is much to like about this, but it is the composition that made me click through and the color that made me comment.

Postprocessed in PS to match original pre-shot visualization (ie: it

was shot with the intention of being postprocessed to this effect).

How you enjoy it...comments, suggestions appreciated.

Pretty nice - not a great scan, but the picture is nice. I'm not a fan of tankers, personally.

My main nit is the tilted horizon.

Two-stop ND grad darkened sky and background hill. I further burned

in the far hill a bit.

This was somewhat counterintuitive - instead of trying to make it

look as "normal" as possible by keeping the back lighting farily

original to the scene, I thought it might keep the viewer more

focused on the rocks and surf. Do you think this works or is it just

too dark in the back?

Thanks for viewing.

A second look at a field of poles. Comments or ratings appreciated,

particularly any specific improvements or flaws worth pointing out.

One of my best photos from my recent vacation. Comments, ratings

greatly appreciated, but really, I just feel like sharing it.

Just interested in hearing what you all think of this one. What, if

anything, this conveys to you.

Thanks for the comments!

(In response to a comment by someone who later deleted his comment)

Yes, it is digital, and the images print out quite well at various sizes. Once you go beyond 8x10 or so, it depends greatly on the quality of the image and the camera, the subject matter, the post-processing, and the output device.

I bet you can gather enough interest to get a thread going on digital image output quality.

Regarding the crop comment (which I will do), do you all think the real problem is that there is too much space on the right or not enough space on the left?

Your comments are greatly appreciated (yours too, Jeff and Tadd!), and your critical points are fantastically insightful (thanks!).

The blues on the poles may have been altered slightly when I moved the RGB levels endpoints inward a bit in PS, but not by much. Unfortunately, reality is irrelevant in comparison to perception - if it looks unreal, it might as well not be. :(

I shot this thinking color (I don't think in b/w, yet), and initially thought b/w in postprocess, but I eventually kept it in color because I thought it added another level.

The blues are so relaxing and works well with the foreground browns. Just as importantly, I thought the blue/brown-mixed poles worked as a color bridge between the blue sky and brown grass. Perhaps that's too complex? Does that concept not come across or does it take away from the other, stronger concepts? If it does, then I'll have to reconsider b&w again (using Tadd's example as a guideline).

Thanks, guys!

I'm interested in hearing what others think of this photo. I took it

recently and think it's one of my best (I've only been shooting for a

few months). Thanks!