arlo_midgett

You can also see

a portrait version of the same scene.

I didn't get much feedback when I posted a

href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?

topic_id=1481&msg_id=004RSy&photo_id=1262055&photo_sel_index=0">landsc

ape

version

of this same statue, but I was hoping to get some

feedback on which

composition people like better...

I'd like to get some feedback on this photo. Specifically, is the yellow cast of the original capture too much, or should I experiment with color correction? (I.e, Do you think the color tone helps or hinders the photo?) Also, do you think the fact that it was a handheld shot (and thus, blurry outside the flash's range) hurts?

 

adTHANKSvance

Looking at this picture now, I don't quite think it works as well as

I'd hoped when I made it. I wish I could put my finger on what the

problem is, though, and then maybe I could correct it. Is it a color

thing? Lighting? What more can I work on to "sell" this comp?

After spending a lot of time down at the pixel level on composites

like this, it's often hard to step back and see the whole picture

again. Does this picture work for you? If not, what's wrong with it?

I don't consider myself very good at "people pictures," but I think

this one came out rather well. Please, pick it apart, though! What

could I have done to make it better? Fill flash? Different

composition?

Statues and sunsets are cliche subjects in photography and are hard

to do well. I like this one, but I'd still like some constructive

criticism. What would make this better?

My girlfriend and I go 'round and 'round about whether or not to pose

for pictures. She wants all her vacation pictures to be "perfect."

Personally, I like the candid moments because they seem more real (to

me.) What do you think?

Comments on this and other pictures in my portfolio are appreciated!

Okay, what's the big deal? When people are going over my photo

albums, almost everyone invariably remarks that this is a "great

picture." Okay, yeah, I like it, too. But I'm curious: What makes

it good? The color? The composition? The content? None of those

seem to stand out on their own... Perhaps the sum of its parts is

greater than the whole.

 

Comments appreciated.

Comments and ratings are invited (comments especially).

 

-A.

FYI, here is a link to the older submission: Original scan

I'm interested in the perceived quality issues between two scans I've

done of the same picture. One is with a Nikon slide scanner and the

other is with a fairly cheap, flatbed scanner. Comments anyone?

 

-A.

I definitely like the sillouetted lamp in the window -- makes me think of a B-grade sci-fi movie in it's UFO-ness! What bothers me, though, is the soft focus on the foreground elements. I'd rather see the sky softened in this case...

Okay, so tell! Is it a Barbie doll? A close examination reveals too many gravity-defying inconsistencies... :)

Slam it or praise it -- I learn either way!

Charles, thanks for the comment. I can't tell you for sure whether I used the Rebel's autofocus or not -- it was a long time ago. I'd say that -- knowing me -- it was probably auto, though. Back then I didn't trust my eye enough to try out manual focusing more than, say, 10% of the time...

 

Note, too, that I have an EOS Rebel G. I know the 2000 is very similar, but I don't know if it uses the EXACT same focusing system.

 

 

.

.

Nope. I'm sure some colors were altered a tiny bit in the scan I did (1350 dpi Nikon LS-2000 negative filmstrip scan), but it's very close to what came back from the lab (Costco photo processing.) Thanks for the comment, btw.

 

-A.

.