oswegophoto

My sympathies. I use my 50mm f/1.2 fairly often, but I learned, after taking shots of a band on stage with the light in the club, that if the sax player's nose is in focus, his eyes aren't sharp. The sharp DOF at f/1.2 seems to be about the thickness of a pencil, and the change in the viewfinder between sharp nose and sharp eye is hard to see. Especially on the newer cameras. I use a Nikon D200 because it has a great viewfinder for a modern camera, but I still miss my F3's full array of focusing aids; someday maybe I'll replace the VF glass with one with a split image. Are such things available for your Canon? Just a thought. Anyway, yeah, when there's plenty of light, I've found for me that even going to f/1.4 makes a good difference here, and f/2 is usually fine, without focusing the BG too much.

Sci-fi is right: very other-worldly or dystopian. Light is indeed the subject here.

Beauty, beautifully presented. I only wish for a sharper focus on the near eye.

Lovely, there at the edge of the world. Shame the fog prevents you from seeing the turtle underneath. ;-)

Seriously? A beautiful, dramatic image.

Nice. Love the sticky blur. ;-)

I do think George's crop (which eliminates that crooked seam in the wall on the left) is better. Cheers!

Magically beautiful. I really like the way you've cropped it.

In my opinion (though it's a minor thing) the heavy black border is wrong and detracts. How about several thin lines (to echo the lines in the ice) instead?

Why are they all going to the same place, and where is it?

Made me smile: man-made crepuscular rays! And you caught 'em.

Truly outstanding (read: 7/excellent). I find the color choice for your background surprising and perfect. Stunning and wonderful. My only quibble is it somehow seems to lack depth. On the other hand, that makes it a lovely "pressed" flower. Kudos.

... shoots! Nicely done indeed! An enviable capture.

Rajat is right; very fine indeed. Evocative and lovely. Puts me in mind of the scenery details in Myst (old but wonderful computer game). Not sure I'd like seeing this at my local apothecary, though.

Yes, lovely geometries here. I especially like how the texture of the water gets more interesting the closer you are to the bottom of the frame. My eye is inexorably drawn into the foreground, instead of the more-usual reverse.

"Come . . . joinnn usss . . . ."

Seriously, I like this. Is that Edward James Olmos on his shirt?

Pnina, thanks for the kind words. Nope, no plans to leave. I'm sporadic with photography; other things keep crowding my time. I'm more active on that other site, but I don't want to leave PhotoNet; it's too good a site, with too many good folks. Cheers!

Don't really see the stress, m'self. Alternative title? Aurora.

Do see the loveliness of the image.

Very dramatic, appropriately. I agree the square light is a cool detail, although it highlights (sorry...) the slight tilt to the photo. I want to reach behind and fix the wire. Chaplin was a very remarkable fellow, with a long and fascinating life, so this production sounds interesting indeed. Nice shot.

Lex, I agree with Pnina; I much prefer this one. The bowl and vase are, I feel, uninteresting (read: plain) enough to be mere background objects, framing, supplying context, etc. I'm glad you didn't crop 'em out entirely, as I think they are needed, just less than in no. 7. I really enjoy the DOF: the way the stem winds back away and around and loses focus adds depth and a dash of mystery. Yep, I like it.

You really must view at full size to appreciate the baroque quality of this dash — nearly every control is unique. Made me think of the TARDIS.

Pnina, "the other side"?

You make it sound like I'm contacting you from beyond the grave. :-D

Hey, I'm ready for Hallowe'en!