regas chefas

Really like how you composed this. The character in the Dunes sets it apart.

Drinking? I don't even remember being there :)

I took this on a cold night with a long exposure.

Taken at City Hall during B&W ball.

Shamir,

 

It's better than the average Holiday shot. The thing that would make it a great picture is to bring the main theme (which I think would be the church against the side of the fjord) more into the picture. Either by moving closer or using a longer lens. Or even by just taking it vertically.

Tony,

 

Thanks again for sharing you knowledge and technique in addition to a great image. Over a year ago you shared some info with me that greatly advanced me along the path. Just wanted to let you know I appreciate it, even though I haven't been around much the last year, I've still been making pictures.

 

btw - I purchased pana-vue on your recommendation and it is probably the second-best digital purchase I've made....the first was my Nikon D-70.

 

Cheers,

Regas

I was about to give up and then a hole in the clouds to the west allowed the

last rays of the setting sun through to light up this snowstorm rolling across the

Sand Dunes. Feedback Appreciated!

I really like this concept. I agree that a different choice of glass may have been better. Possibly a series with different glasses. At first glance I thought this was a pint glass instead of a coke glass. This concept in a martini glass would be pretty cool.

I have tried to visualize a good way to get train shots now that I live by the tracks, but haven't found much on my own. I really like this perspective. Were you holding the camera? Was the train moving? If so, you have some courage my friend.

Gerry, That's a good suggestion that I hadn't thought of. I like the texture in the clouds near the top of the picture though.

Feedback appreciated.

Thanks!

Regas

This makes an eerie desktop background...really freaked out a co-worker!

 

Very vivid emotion and strong composition. I like it a lot.

 

Regas

Like Morey, I live in Denver and I visit the desert often. While I've had a few

good shots, I find the challenge to be trying to find something that will both fit

in the frame and at the same time express the vastness of the landscape.

Once you get over the fact that the rocks are red and you can see for miles, it's

difficult to take good pictures in the desert. I think that's why some spots get

heavy traffic. All the photogs run (or drive) arond the desert and find the same

interesting things. I don't think there's harm in that.

 

For the record, I've never seen any other picture of Mesa Arch, so I'm just

judging on the merits of this photo.

 

When I first saw this photo, I felt clausterphobic and acrophobic at the same

time. I think it does a great job of conveying the character of the landscape

while still having an interesting foreground. I think the foreground is a little too

confining though. Almost forces your eye to the left side of the arch and off the

cliff.

 

I really like the texture and tones in the rocks. The warmth really belies the

cool snow to the right. I also like the texture in the air (SMOG, I think someone

called it) it gives a dreaminess and good sense of depth perception to the

rock in the distance.

 

All in all, good shot Morey and keep up the good work!

 

Cheers,

Regas

I think this is amazing and the fact that it's rated lower than several landscape snapshots on this site is mystifying to me...

 

Cheers,

Regas

Thanks again for sharing your thoughts about this subject. I have been facing this quandry since I decided to get serious about photography. I went with 35 mm + scanner as a compromise. It was the highest resolution I could get for a reasonable price. (I've been laid off since just after 9/11, which has given me time to pursue photography, but eventually momma's gonna need some new shoes :)

 

Something that recently happened to me is explained by your pose. I was in Antigua and I had some NPS 160 (negative film), some Velvia (positive film) and a friend of mine's digital camera. I was trying to capture the light blue translucency of the water. Similar to your beach picture in this folder. The NPS didn't really do a very good job when it was scanned in, although the proofs looked pretty good. The scans were a little grainy and the colors were not quite the same as reality. The digital camera did an excellent job of capturing the color, but the velvia slides looked best of all. Then when I scanned them, the blue in the ocean was too dark and I had to try to lighten them up using PS. This adds grain and seems to decrease slight differences in tonality. Almost washing out the color in a way.

 

The Velvia picture is "Pillars in Antigua" in my portfolio if people are interested. I haven't (and probably won't upload the others) but I can email them if anybody wants.

 

Recently there have been some new digital SLR cameras (Nikon D100 for one) on the market in the $2000 USD range with 6 Megapixel CCDs. Reading the reviews on PN, some users have enlarged to 40X60 cm (roughly 16X20) and one up to 1 Meter X 2 Meters. I think the amount of enlargement also depends on the subject matter. A photo as detailed as this one would suffer more from enlargement than photo of a door, for example. But this is better than I can do with my current 35 mm stuff and my existing scanners, so maybe this is the way for me to go instead of MF.

 

You have a lot of experience dealing with digital files and resolution etc...How much resolution do you think a digital camera needs to represent landscapes properly at 16X20 and higher? When you make large prints of your work, do you use your digital files to make lightjet prints or do you use traditional methods?

 

As to your discussion of tonality being impressionistic, I never thought of it in those terms, but I know that in my photos, I generally like harsher contrast and try to get a conflict between soft highlights and harsh shadows. Perhaps this is why I under-expose. I've learned from experience that this produces the result I like. People who like my photographic style love that but when I show my photographs to people who like bright colors and puppy dogs they almost always say the same thing "too dark"...hmmmm....given that, I shouldn't be surprised that when I try to take brighter pictures they come out 'too dark'...:)

 

One of the reasons I'm always poking around through your pictures is that you have mastered many different styles and you're very open about how you executed different shots.

 

Pondering...

I must have started doing it for some other reason (accident maybe?) A lot of my photos are slightly underexposed, and some of them on purpose :) The truth is though, that even the ones that I think are exposed correctly on the slides, appear underexposed when I scan them. Since reading your post, I've been doing some research on scanners and found out that the two scanners I have (primefilm and Nikon coolscan III) both have low DMax numbers...which I think means that they don't have as much ability to discern slight differences in lighting. i.e. detail in shadows and lowlight etc...So it looks like I may have to either go with a digital camera or spend money on a better scanner or have my better photos scanned with a drum scanner...:(

 

Tony,

 

Thanks for sharing the details of rigging your scanner. I usually underexpose my landscape shots as well (probably from reading one of your comments) and really like the results on the slides, but when I scan them the colors and shadow detail are underwhelming. Trying to fix it in photoshop leads to bad results...I'm going to start research on my scanner and try to do something similar.

I agree with the comment about the contrast. Originally I disagreed with the comment about cropping, but then I cropped it and that IS a real improvement.

John,

 

The way you bring out colors in your photos is something I'm striving for. The blue going to green in this one is really nice.

 

Cheers,

Regas

I took the liberty of viewing this POW as a chance to look at the artist's portfolio before passing judgement on this picture. The artist is definitely experimental and enjoying taking pictures and I enjoy the results.

 

This picture is a great exploration into BW with hard lighting and regular/irregular geometry. I think it shows a good eye for putting together a pleasing pattern, whether or not he has previously studied the classic works mentioned above.

I view that similar to cliche landscape shots. Why not take your own picture of el cap? Just because something isn't completely original doesn't mean that we, as photographers, shouldn't try to get our own interpretation of it.

 

Granted, as some of you have mentioned, there might be a 'higher standard' for POW, but this IS a learning website and so I think it is instructive to include illustrative photos even if they happen to be unoriginal.

 

Cheers,

Regas

I love this shot, the contrast between the blue in the sky and the green-blue of the water is very eye-pleasing to me.

Fantastic colors and composition. Is it just me or is the horizon slightly lower towards the left? btw-A remarkable portfolio.

 

Regas

Now this one has potential. I really like the composition. The green door is great.

 

The only negative might be the lens curve pulling in the building and the lighthouse a little....although I can't decide if that's a negative or a positive...

 

btw - welcome to Photo.net...

Technically not as good as most of your photos, but it's a very nice scene. I think the film let you down a little bit on this one.