Jump to content

stephen.schwartz

Members
  • Posts

    137
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Image Comments posted by stephen.schwartz

    The Stare

          32

    I think what is troubling you about the ridges is that they could lead the eye into the out of focus space around the fox. The secondary ridge in the left background nicely provides a parallel diagonal which is helpful but there is a fairly large percentage of the photo that might take away from the fox. However some of the background is necessary because part of what makes this photo is that it includes the fox's environment.

     

    Bottom line is you might try a couple versions, perhaps cropping the left edge near the S in your last name and the top to just above or where the secondary background ridge on left meets the skyline or thereabouts.

     

    You should also be able to punch up the luminance in the fox to make it stand out from the background a touch more.

     

    Anyway it is already an outstanding photo and I don't mean to be critical of it at all.

     

     

    Horseshoe falls

          35

    I agree that this is an outstanding shot - the detail in the moss and overall composition is excellent. There is something odd going on with perspective though. When I first looked at it it seemed to me that the line through the middle of the frame which is made of the surface of the pool of water at the bottom of the upper falls should have been horizontal. On the other hand, it makes sense that the longer waterfalls are vertical which they are.

     

    I have the same 16-35mm lens this was shot with and find that it distorts a bit more than my very old nikon 15mm used to do but I'm not sure that is it.

     

    Lovely shot either way.

  1. Nice feeling of motion in the image, and some nice frozen motion in the water at foreground left yielding good overall composition. I agree with comments above about the sticky tape. If the tape was used to hold it in place for scanning, find a better way. If it was added as an "effect" it doesn't work with this subject in my view. Overall colour tint to the image doesn't do a lot for me - you might try it as a black and white as an experiment.
  2. I spent a fair while watching these bears. Unfortunately they were

    far away and I was forced to use the 600mm + a 1.4 TC. The light was

    flat and it was raining lightly. Worse yet, the bears spent most of

    the time with their rear ends toward me or their heads down eating

    salmon. I finally resorted to making a grunt (remember - I said they

    were a long way off) and they lifted their heads and looked around.

     

    This views better in "larger"

    Eiffel Tower

          4

    Thanks for the comments.

     

    I don't know if they are clouds or noise (doesn't look like noise to me) but it would be easy to remove them. As for the watermark, I realize that it isn't particularly attractive and I also realize that it doesn't offer much protection but there have been a number of piracy issues from this website so for the legal reasons I'm keeping the copyright logo even if it costs me some ratings. I will go back and look at the original and if it is noise I'll zap it and possibly repost.

  3. This was a difficult exposure. The interior light was dim and very

    yellow because of all of the gold leaf used inside. No tripods were

    allowed, and the only light source was of course the stained glass

    windows themselves. I used Lightroom and CS3 to try to get the mood

    of the place . . .

     

    Comments appreciated.

  4. This lovely church had a magical quality. The gold leaf filled the

    interior with gold light, while the ceiling was a magnificent blue.

    As I played with the image in Lightroom and CS3 it began to take on a

    quality of its own. I'd like to hear whether it works for you or not

    . . .

     

    Thanks for looking.

    Barn Owls

          1

    When I first saw these owls, they were sitting as shown. I returned

    a couple weeks later for this shot, but they were sitting too far

    apart for a single image. I created a photo-merge using two

    vertical images and left out about 5 feet of rafter that separated

    them to bring them into the positions they were in when I first saw

    them.

     

    Please view in "larger" and thanks for looking.

  5. This little guy's parents chose to relocate their nest, as they

    sometimes do. They called to the chicks, and lead them through our

    campsite to a new nest in the grass right on the edge of our camp.

     

    Taken from almost exactly the same spot as my photo of the moose and

    calf.

     

    Please view "larger" and thanks for looking.

×
×
  • Create New...