areaman

Quack quack, quack-quack. Quack? Quack!

Actually, this picture isn't cropped at all.

 

EDIT: Actually, I looked at the original, and it has been cropped a little bit.

HA! I took a photo of sea lions in San Francisco, probably from the same pier:

 

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=787373.

Thank you! My friend Michal was about 50 yards ahead of me, and this being a crowded park, I couldn't just yell at him, so I called him on my cell phone and got him walk out to the pier, then to hold his pose while I talked to him on the phone. "Okay, you can go now," I said on the cell, after taking this shot. :)

The flash bounced off the dirty mirror behind Mikey and backlit his

profile. The streaks came out looking like a painting. Aside from

minor cropping, this picture is untouched. What do you think?

I've gotten many compliments on this photo, and I was wondering what

the photo.net community thought about it.

Despite the fact that I am a confirmed Angeleno, I do mean it when I wear my "I <3 NY" t-shirt.

 

Great picture.

Cropping was my main concern with the picture. It was a spontaneous, candid shot which happened to turn out much more picturesque than normal.

 

Here's another shot taken around the same time; is it better/worse?

 

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=809661

I'd appreciate tips on any improvements I could've made to this

picture. I used a fill flash, but it wasn't strong enough to get rid

of the shadows.

This is a picture I took off Pier 41 in San Francisco. I was aiming

at the sea lion, and didn't realize the sea gull had gotten in the

picture until I uploaded the pic to my computer. I'd love to take

credit for capturing the moment, but truthfully, it was a lucky

accident. :)

You can see harsh, squarish borders around the bicyclist where you blurred the picture. I'd pull the border closer to the cyclist.

I'm pretty new to photography, but I wonder if increased depth-of-field would enhance this picture. Easily done in photoshop.