jay belton

Hey PT! Just stopped in to see what's up.

 

Got a couple comments on this great image. The "overexposed" area does not bother me. I don't need to see the detail on the tables to know that there is food there. I like how there is a corridor of light that is shining only on the tables for the most part. It keeps me interested on the focus of the image.

 

Point of annoyance for myself is what I feel is, more or less, negative space on the left. That, plus, the reflection in the glass is demanding my attention. When I give it, I notice that doof staring at the camera underneath the Mahoney Galleries store front.

 

I took the liberty of cropping the image some to what I feel could be an even stronger composition. I removed the left doofus and cropped just enough to give the feel of motion in and out from the left side of the image. I also clipped a little on the right to create a strong line using the cobbled pavement that runs up on the right side of the tables.

 

Overall, I like the anonymity of the crowd moving to and fro in the shadows in contrast to the stationary focal point subjects at the table. This, in my opinion, is what makes this a very cool image.

 

Jay-bo

I also am not getting the connection with the keyword of one. I don't know if the foot in the bottom left corner is substanstial or not. However, throwing out the keyword and critiquing on the merits on just the photograph itself I really like the image.

 

I find the tonalities in the image strong. Are you a zone system fanatic? The contrast is great. It looks as if you either took this in shaded lighting or perceived the zone of the wood down one zone darker than someone else would do. It's really pleasant to look at...

 

As for composition, lose the foot and trim some off of the bottom as well. The lines are very strong and add an interesting layer when the distraction is removed. See my cropped opinion.

 

All in all. Very nice. =)

I feel the green is a bit too overpowering. I comes across to me as having a lack of substance per say. I too have to give a thumbs up to Dominique's version. B&W adds emphasis on the "one" along with the tighter cropping.

 

Good eye though for the trigger word. =)

Well I like the overall abstract quality. Not so sure about the suggestion of convex vs. concave. Makes me want to see all the pieces show that way. My mind only lets me see the shadow areas that way. Maybe that's all I'm supposed to see. Well I'm confused. Then again, I'm always like that... :)

And I know that this is a trigger word so I suppose I'm not supposed to see a "confusion" tie in?

Did I mention I really like this shot?

Hmmm... I've been sitting here pondering over this... The only thing that comes to mind is she's been blinded and confused. She can't see anything. Stupid flash.

Getting back into the swing here (my comments may be a little weak at first)...

 

Just pulled the left over ribbon from last year out of the box. OK, which strand is which? Where are the ends? At least that's what I see as the idea behind this image. Not so sure if it's all that confusing. Just seems like another task. :)

 

I really like the abstract quality to it. Then again, I've become a fan of them lately. I like how the lines lead in and out, constantly moving my eyes about. The gold strand breaks it up and rounds it out nicely. But instinct is telling me that, without it, maybe I would sense more confusion. Hmmm...a mental quagmire.

Quaint and charming little vintage teapot. Just after the end of a

major cloud burst in Arizona, I saw that this was wet and it added

even more interest. It was still raining when I captured this

image.

Your comments are appreciated.

I'm undecided if I should crop at the bottom band or not. I think it would frame it well but then again I like the suggested continuation of the barrel going out of view.

Ah... This is what the "originality" is for... :) This is a wonderful composition. It gives me an interesting mood. Almost as if the flower has been personified and this is street photography.

 

You've captured nice textures and detail in the white and the dew drops have a nice added effect. And the backlighting as well.

 

Really nice work Geoff.

This has become very popular almost overnight for me here in

San Francisco. Looking for feedback from the rest of the world

now. :)

Thanks for the feedback. The wall itself was an adobe red color (close to brick red). It would have been even darker if I hadn't used a red filter. I could try a shorter print time and then burn in the wheel but what a pain! :)

 

I'm surprised there's even a shadow at all. I took this in the shade. It must be from some deflected light. I didn't notice it until you just pointed it out. Cropping it square sounds interesting. I think I'd miss that spoke in the bottom right corner though.

 

I have lots more of Arizona. Just have to print them all! About 30 of them came out good. :) The cow skull is to die for!

Here's what I'm talking about Jeroen. I composed this so perfectly that I had no where to crop for 8x10. (Stupid US sizes). I printed it on an 8x10 sheet at around 6.5 x 9.75. BUT I just found out that Ilford has European sizes. I've ordered some 9.44 x 12" sheets. That solves my full-frame problem AND I have extra border on the sheet to use for mounting without risk of damaging any of the print's exposed emulsion. :)

Then again, on 8x10 it makes a very very interesting border. :) I'm undecided, I may use 11 x 14 and print at 9 x 13.5 instead. Too many choices. Can't think. Must go. :)

I really like the lines in this, they almost make it feel like the

wheel is moving to me. I don't usually request critiques

anymore, however, I'm curious on where the site is leading.

Interesting that you should mention this because I've recently come up with issues with my viewfinder. Problem is, I know it too well. After cafeful compositions I get exactly what I want. What ends up happening is that I suddenly have no mounting room and/or no way to fill 8x10 requests. Somehow people think they are being cheated if you make it 6.5" x 9.75".

Mine is 95% so I do get surprises from time to time. Especially with my wide angle lens.

As for the shot itself, the open window makes it. That's what caught my interest. But I really dislike the green foliage. Me wonders if B&W would balance the tones enough so my eye doesn't keep going to the green.

Well Peter, I've always heard but don't know if it's true that printing a f/16 increases the print's sharpness and details.

 

I then scanned at 300dpi/Color (grayscale throws out the beautiful toning of the paper imo).

 

Sized down to 72dpi in PS and instead of using Unsharp Masking I used one level of general sharpening.

 

Then I saved it as a JPEG with the Maximum (12) setting.

 

Then uploaded. Nothing really special as far as I can tell but that's what I did.

 

Besides of course having a really good and sharply focused negative. :)

 

I haven't been able to get the same texture to show with my Self-Portrait #1. I think it has to do with the high contrast in that shot.

WOW! I didn't realize that the new museum was designed with such gorgeous and intricate architectural details. If I'd had taken this shot I would have framed it exactly the same. Personally I prefer your B&W view camera work but the color shows its beauty. Nice job.

One of the portraits of my grandmother that I gave to my dad for his 60th birthday. Scan came out a little funky. Some artifacts.

I agree Doug. I plan on going back when there are not so many distractions. I took this in the middle of a street event. My kids were with me and soap bubbles kept flying towards my camera lens. It came out better than I thought however. I really like the subject matter and the composition. I'll have to go back twice. Once right after the building is shadowed by another near sunset and another when it's about say 4pm. I want some shadow for depth but not so much dramatic lighting.

Gracious. Gracious. :)

 

Now dumb it down for me. :)

 

Such detail and texture! Damn. I've never been able to get this with FP4+. Heck. I don't even get this with PanF. I'm assuming Diafine is supposed decrease grain? Thus "fine." Makes me realize how far I have to go.

What lens did you use for this? I like it. 24mm?

I really like the composition and contrast. And the perspective created by the lens is nice and original.

Must not take shots at tourist spots. Must not take shots at tourist spots. Must not take shots at tourist spots. Must not take shots at tourist spots. Or at least present them the same way. :)

OK, updated the shot with the sharpened version. Sure looks grainy now though...

The XXXX things are metal braces holding it up. Ya know, I forgot to sharpen it now that you mention it. I was more upset with the lab's scanning of this more than anything. All details in the building were lost because they scanned with too much contrast. It looks perfect on the proof sheet.

But I will have to agree. I don't really like the harsh lighting that much either. I like the composition and the ivy adds a nice tonal balance. I'm thinking of going back and doing it again right after the sun sets. But it's in a not so nice neighborhood so I need someone to watch my equipment and back. Or just pray for overcast or clouds. It's San Francisco for corn's sake. But we've had clear days for a while. It's usually foggy as hell in the summer.

This was shot with 100-200mm. I couldn't get any closer because there's barbed wire fence. So I had to compromise by stepping back and leaning the camera upwards. The building's only about 8 stories tall.