greglyon

Oops, should have said it's either a) a fisheye lens or b) he did a pan and stitch, using stitching software to morph the photos together...which nets a fisheye-like image.

So, which is it, Dan? Now I'm curious.

First off: Nice shot Dan.

c'mon guys! This is a nice example of an action sequence. With the right equipment, PLANNING the shot, and some stitching afterward it's very doable, and it'd take a LOT more effort to fake this then it's worth...

1) It's a fisheye lens, here are some clues: a) People can't jump around corners! b) notice the tilt of the mountains at horizon. c) shadows on right of frame are coming straight at lens, those on left are at right angle to lens.

2) If you've ever shot on snow you know that you get amazing fill light, especially if there's a snowbank behind you. In fact one of the tricks of shooting on snow is to make sure you don't underexpose because so much light (and white surfaces) trick even some of the best meters out there.

3) while he may have cloned out some shadows, I bet the low sun angle had most of the shadows off-frame.

Again, Nice shot.

Do you find the out-of-focus highlights on the tree branch to be

distracting in this photo? Any other comments welcomed too.

Thanks, Greg.

Would you crop this more? I've played with bottom and top cropping

which I didn't like. I sometimes think that cropping a bit off the

right and left makes it stronger, but I do like the long

format...What would you do?

Huh, not sure whether to put this under 'architecture', but anyway.

I'm still searching for the 'perfect' evening photo vantage point for

the Minneapolis skyline. This is close but I feel that the brick

building in front is too prominent.

It's also a 14 panel stitch so it's quite large. What do you think?

Raymond, glad you found the details section. Unfortunately many photos here on photo.net don't have much in the way of technical details listed. I try to always put something in there as I like to see the details of other people's work!

David, I have to find one of the slides where I can see more of the leaf to be sure what it was. Thanks for the potential ID!

Thank you both for the compliments!

I believe that a professional scan of this slide would bring out a

bit more of the details in the trees across the lake, but would it be

worth it? I Really like the cloud formation and the rays, not so

sure about the dark area just cutting a swath across the image.

Do you know the species? This is a very small beetle, about 1/2"

body length. Thanks for your comments!

Well...they may be common, but it's not common (at least for me) to

see them down by the water and so close to me! Thanks for your

comments!

Plain and simple, no distractions, watery background. Thanks for

your comments!

I cloned out a couple branches to simplify the composition of this

photo, but is it still too busy? Or, is it a strong composition?

This is a two image composite. Both the Mourning dove and moon were

in the frame but couldn't both be in focus at the same time, so I

focused on the bird for one, the moon for the other and blended in

photoshop...what do you think of it?

I 'burned' through nearly 100 shots to get 2 good ones and a couple

heartbreaker near misses. Yet I consider it quite successful at that

low ratio. These guys are FAST!

I'm thinking of trying flash too next time, what do you think?

I've been drawn to photograph these serene scenics for the past

couple years. The fact that I now live in Minnesota may play a

part...

Do you find that there's enough photographic interest here for YOU?

Also of note, this is 4 shots stitched together in photoshop.

Does this photo look over-sharpened to you?

I just got a new monitor...didn't quite realize how BAD my old one

was. It turns out that I've been over-sharpening waaay too

often, and sometimes boosting color inappropriately too.

Any other comments welcomed too.

Thanks for your comments!

I'm still getting used to the tighter crop provided by DSLR...I'm not used to being 'too tight' when photographing birds!

I agree, left and bottom are a bit too closely framed. Thankfully this guy seems to hang out in one place so I can go back and shoot again. I'm really hoping to catch him over in the 'burned' area again...he looks quite striking walking through blackened grasses and weeds.

This sandhill crane's legs were hidden in the foliage, so I opted

for a tight crop of body and head. Is the crop successful?

Is it distracting that the tail and leading wing are the area of

sharpest focus, moreso than the head? What do you think?

Thanks Bryan. The more I look at it, the less it bugs me too.

Oh, incidentally, if you look closely there is what appears to be a horizontal 'scratch' on the left side of the picture. It is in fact a spider web that is attached to the bird's wingtip.