ilkka_nissila

February 10, 2004

Photo? Where?

February 8, 2004

A lower contrast film would probably improve the shot. Also, it would be nice to see it in twilight.

February 7, 2004

The tower is a few degrees off vertical, consider rotating the image to fix it. The bushes on the left obstruct the main subject (you might shoot from a clearer viewpoing) and the light is not flattering. I would try to shoot a more close-up of the tower surface on a sunny day in side lighting to bring out the texture of the facade.

February 7, 2004

The main subject is blurry. This could be a focus problem or due to the subject's motion. Use 1/500 s to stop motion, and try to focus on the eyes.

February 7, 2004

This layout stresses the legs, if the head were against a white background it would work better as an animal portrait.

February 7, 2004

A little too dark for my taste.

February 7, 2004

I think it needs a focus of interest.

February 6, 2004

Doesn't appear to be in focus except for the nose, maybe.

February 1, 2004

I think the photo has good composition but excessively garish colours. The sky seems grainy.

January 18, 2004

Nice image, makes me dizzy. I suppose that's intentional ...? The colours in the rocks are beautiful.

November 17, 2003

Only on weekends are the moderators sleeping like in this case. Good bye, Mohamed, Monday is coming.

November 10, 2003

I think the converging (and unbalanced) verticals are disturbing. The backdrop is just a tourist snapshot, and the light just isn't magical enough to make the picture worth it. Please take the shift lens or view camera and a t-r-i-p-o-d next time.

October 12, 2003

This is very very beautiful.

August 18, 2003

Fascinating. Nice choice of tone, fits the subject.

August 17, 2003

I think the scene is overly complicated. As if by magic, you've managed to get all the areas of the image to fit in the dynamic range. A mountain, blue sky with clouds, falls, creek, rocks, and a rainbow ... too much for one image.

July 27, 2003

Nice shot. You can sort of imagine the stretching movement of the forepaws. :-)

June 28, 2003

It's nice compositionally but the lighting could be better. It's too contrasty and the shot is overexposed. Slide film is better suited for flower photography as then you have control over exposure.

May 24, 2003

Having seen some of your slides in real life, they're top quality. These scans don't do justice to your originals at all. What kind of JPEG settings do you use, and do you set the focus point manually in the scanner software? I think the scans could be a lot sharper - and subsequent prints, too.

January 4, 2003

I like those leaves with the raindrops a lot. Maybe you could have moved the camera a bit forward and concentrate the picture on those plants; the foreground is like a different subject.

January 4, 2003

I think the colours are great. The depth of field could be a bit better. A tripod is something to use in every flower shot !

I think you could also leave some (empty) space around the main subject, otherwise the picture looks a bit "crowded".

November 5, 2002

I think the shot has excellent composition and use of colour. Only thing that I'd change is I'd like to have a smaller person on the right (and perhaps move him slightly to the left). Btw., I think the proposed competing shots would be binned at the light table. The boy is dead center, and there is no light to speak of. The shot with the pointing finger is just too obvious "advertising to people with IQ < 80". Nothing personal.

October 26, 2002

I like this view, although I would also have cropped out 1/3 from the bottom.

October 16, 2002

The light on the child's hair, the colors in the clothes and tight cropping all fit very well.

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Events

Downloads

Gallery

Store

Image Comments posted by ilkka_nissila