trevor_hopkins

I haven't a clue with digital cameras, I'm afraid, as I'm still waiting for the quality to go up and the price to come down before I buy one. But so long as you have some manual control over exposure you should be fine. I know waiting to see your pics can test your patience, but receiving 20 boxes of slides in the post after you return from holiday is pretty exciting... And if you want to print any of your stuff, I'd recommend persevering with your Rebel. And I agree, you do have a good eye. (-:

I don't know, it just doesn't quite work for me. It's certainly a subtly lit, graceful composition, but my eye isn't satisfied with the up-down-and-across motion forced by these bars. Perhaps the path my eye takes along those long slender bars is just too long, and boredom sets in somewhere on the journey. Maybe it's the fact that in whatever direction my eye travels it's simply escorted off the image, without feeling it's ever reached a destination. I've attached a crop which benefits from a stronger diagonal composition and greater visual tension, at the expense of those graceful curves and the backgound shadows. What d'ya reckon?

Hi, Jame. I'll try to be constructive. It's a nice sunset, but...it could be better. Firstly, exposure: it's a bit dark. Did you meter with the camera pointing at the sun? It's usually best with sunsets to meter from the sky, but keeping the sun out of the frame, otherwise you get an underexposed result like this. Using a neutral density graduate filter is a good idea, as you'd then retain some detail in the foreground. Silhouettes are great, but it would have been nice to see a hint of the tree's trunk standing out from the ground beneath the line of railings.

 

Secondly, composition. I'd have been tempted to move a little closer to the tree, so that there was more space under it and less above, allowing that long branch to frame a larger area of the sky containing the sun. This would contain our eye within the frame better. At present the long branch virtually dissects the image in two. By moving closer you'd also increase the distance between the tree trunk and sun, ideally placing the two according to the rule of thirds (with the sun further to the right) or place the sun dead centre (which you could do with this image by simply cropping on the left). You might also want to straighten the horizon, which is sloping a little. And as with your previous sunset, if you could get a person to walk or cycle past, or simply stand by the lake gazing admiringly at the sunset, you'd have a useful tertiary focal point to add interest to the image. But as it is, it's still a nice picture... Cheers.

An interesting image, well visualised.

The lake appears to be sloping. Good for water-skiing, I guess.

Thanks to everyone for your comments. I saw this simply as a good action shot, but for others to see dancing grim reapers is a bonus! Birgit, until you mentioned it I hadn't even noticed the railing was tilted. Perhaps I was unconciously influenced by the weight of water on the left when cropping in PS, and so having the right side fractionally higher produced a better balance in my mind's eye. In any case, I'm happy with it and don't feel the need with this particular image to straighten things up perfectly. Thanks for your time.

Spot the retaliatory rating, folks... Here's a clue: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1464082

A great domestic shot, full of fascinating insight and charm. I love the glimpse of the old man in bed.

Excellent capture. It almost looks like a surreal mountain lake scene with a giant eye opening in the rock face. I'd recommend cropping the top of the pic to exclude the highlights as my eye strays there. Also it would be good to balance the amount of space at the top and bottom of the frame. Or you could always follow the current fashion and dump a pasted sky behind the croc's head for a genuinely surreal effect...

An interesting character, but I don't like the digital blurring. It looks distinctly unnatural, especially where the dark edges of his hat and cloak bleed into the background. It would be nice to see the unaltered version, with perhaps a little colour put back into his cheeks. His pallid, almost monochrome complexion here doesn't look too healthy.

She should be shoved off the stage then, and leave the limelight to those with talent...

Yes, a fine shot. I know from experience that finding the perfect viewpoint inside a wood is impossibly difficult, given the infinite number of possible viewpoints in location and direction. I think the photographer has done pretty well here, although I'd like to see a shot using a longer lens to exploit the mist's accentuation of aerial perspective. This would also create a more claustrophobic effect, perhaps appropriate to the slightly creepy atmosphere here. Beautiful as the serpentine green trunks in the foreground are, I'd like to see more of their ghostly counterparts in the distance. Although I realise within the confines of a wood it would be difficult to capture both (unless you shoot outside the edge of the wood, looking in). My only other niggle is the curious pentagonal wound on the central trunk, apparently bleeding sap. I'd be tempted to perform some digital cosmetic surgery on it. I'd also crop out the tree on the far left. But this is certainly an enjoyable and moody landscape, redolently evocative of this country's glorious ancient woodlands. Regards.

Oh yes, I hadn't thought of it like that. It does work rather well at illustrating the mind shattering nature of heavy grief, as well as the petrifying effect it can have on the soul. Great symbolism. Forget about the angel posing with a sword, Jim; this is even better than I first thought!

She definitely has a facial hair problem.

Subtle it ain't, but this is certainly an eye-catching and striking image. A great statue and great effect, but do the two go together? To me this plasma energy rippling all over the scene speaks of power and drama, so perhaps a statue of an angel with wings bearing a sword might work better - illustrating divine power and vengeance? This statue's mournful repose surely calls for a quieter, more sympathetic relief? But as it's got me thinking along supernatural lines, I can see this image illustrating Lot's wife being turned into a pillar of salt by the hand of God. Good stuff. May I ask how you produced this effect?

I'd be interested to know if the photographer intended this image to be a serious commentary on war or just an amusing close-up of a toy. Given the battle-scarred backdrop (including bullet holes in the wall?), I guess some meaningful message may be intended, but to my eyes this is primarily a fun picture of a toy tank.

 

It reminds me of a scene from Doctor Who, in the good old days when Tom 'care for a jelly baby?' Baker was the Doctor: A giant robot is on the rampage, creating all sorts of mischief, so the army send in a tank to confront it. But with the paltry budget for special effects (one of the show's great charms), they used a toy tank and a similar camera angle to this one. The tank gets zapped by the robot and it all looks hilariously naff.

 

Anyway, I digress... I have to admit John's pertinent questions never arose in my mind when I looked at this image. But then I think it's inevitable that kids growing up in a war zone will imitate in their play the actions of the grown-ups around them. I think it's a shame the gun barrel is missing (the turret appears intact to me). But then I destroyed many of my toy cars when I was boy, growing up in peaceful surroundings, so I can't blame the owner of this tank for inflicting some damage. Good shot, I like it.

You make perfect sense, Ilan. I quite agree with you. I actually considered removing the blurred boat altogether, but when I tried covering it with my fingernail at arm's length, I decided an important focal point was lost, upsetting the balance of the image. If I did remove the boat, I'd probably have to remove the smaller, distant one as well (since odd numbers usually work better than even ones unless symmetry is an objective) and crop a bit off the right-hand edge of the picture, so that the remaining boat was 'weighted' in the correct part of the frame. I didn't want to lose any coastline, and to lose two boats was too much digital sleight-of-hand for my taste. The rocking boat has every right to be there, and it adds another dimension to the time-lapse interest of the picture, as well as evoking (for me) the eerie sound of rattling rigging in this quiet, lonely location. So even though this bobbing boat is acting like an attention-seeking naughty child, to remove it would mean a loss of personality in the picture. Although I quite understand how some could find it a bit irritating... Many thanks for your comment.

A striking urban landscape, thanks to the contrasting tones and architectural styles. It's good to see a genuine, dramatic sky rather than one lazily pasted in Photoshop, although the central hotspot is a bit unfortunate.

I rather like it. Originality is a rare bonus in sunset shots, but this displays a different approach. Using minimal depth-of-field often produces interesting results. It might have been good to see the sun in line with the log, highlighting its textures, and it may have been worth waiting for a pedestrian or cyclist in the distance. Cropping out the buildings is another option, as it produces a more ambiguous sense of scale, but as it stands this is still an enjoyable impression of sunset.

A quietly poignant image from an admirable folder. I like this isolation of the mourner's feet, with the rose resting on the gravestone. I think it impersonalises the emotions contained in the image, allowing us to impose our own identity on the mourner. With the dowdy coat and shoes, perhaps this is an elderly lady, remembering her life-long partner? I think the bleached edges work well - they remind me of an old, fading photograph, which perfectly reflects the sentiments of the image. Although I'm not so sure about the grey 'fogged' effect under her coat. Perhaps using a small vertical grave with an almost-discernable name inscribed would improve the composition, but this is still an original and moving image. Regards.

Thanks for breaking my perfect run of 6's, Scott. I guess it was too good to last...

Hi, Laura. My assumption this was a photoshopped image was based on the fact it's in a folder called 'Experimental Digital Pictures'. If you found that assumption irksome, might I suggest you move the image to another folder? With an abstract like this I agree the production method isn't important, but when we see heavily manipulated works posing as authentic, it does become an issue. We all know the movies aren't real, but truth is still valued in photography. Regards.

Excellent treatment of an ordinary photo. The complete absence of any border lends an almost abstract quality, making the building look like a stack of tin cans or a piece of machinery.

At least you've still got your Hasselblad. That's one thing in life that will never let you down...

I also find this image interesting, although aesthetically I think it falls short of being compelling. Perhaps its main strength is the fun involved in guessing how it was done. Since this is evidently a digital picture perhaps the 'shadow' is just a modified, blurred copy of the original gyroscope-type object. Or maybe there really are two of these things, one in front of - and one behind - a backlit translucent screen. Add a bit of grain & toning and Bob's your uncle. However it was done, it's an intriguing result, although not one I'd care to linger over. If the object was more discernable - perhaps a warped pair of glasses - I might be able to make more of a connection with this image. As it is, it reminds me of a child's doodle on a grubby fingerprint-stained bit of paper. Thanks for making us think, though.