lizs

Nice idea, David. But (there's always a "but," right...) I've tried to shoot Christmas lights around homes and learned through trial and error (and some good advice): Try to shoot when there is still some late daylight available. It gives more depth to buildings and to photo, while the lights are still readily viewable.

Just wondering if it works for you.

I am wondering if this photo works. Do you like the small amount of

ground presented? It is obviously breaking the "Rule of Thirds." Any

other thoughts also welcome. Thanks.

No red rocks in the Sierras? Heck, I've gotten red rocks in a hardwood forest sitting above the upper Mississippi at sunset. They're not normally red, but they sure were during one specific sunset and, yes, with Velvia. The film was able to capture it. God bless Velvia. ;-)

I'd rather see more direct interaction between the two.

Nice stuff! I see in your portfolio that you were at Zion. Am curious as to WHEN you were there. I was at Zion around Oct. 24 or 25 of 2000 and the cottonwoods on the Virgin River had not changed much yet -- although they were very much in yellow color two days later on the Escalante River. Just wondering for future planning. A great portfolio!!

I coulda sworn I already posted to this thread!!! (are the elves removing the gals' comments and that's why they appear lacking??)

 

I LIKE THE SHOT!! Of course, I have shot motorcycle sports, mostly motocross... and the much slower mountain bike racing.

 

I like the tight crop. It's perfect, conveying that bike coming right at ya.

 

Why does everything have to be artsy-fartsy here? It might be nice to try some off-the-wall stuff, but does it mean you can't appreciate a regular, good photo?

 

This place is getting a bit stuffy. Perhaps the "artsy-fartsy" gods fear an invasion -- and that's why they pelt the rest of us from what they view as their lofty chairs.

 

If you ain't shooting the "high brow" stuff you ain't shit at Photo.net

 

I agree with Bruce Wilson. While it's a nice shot, I want to see something of WHERE the owl lives, of its ENVIRONMENT. It may not have been possible given technical requirements, but we're critiquing for what would be the "perfect" shot, right? >>> Natural environment and perhaps not so symetrically placed in the middle.

Nice shot, but my immediate thought -- like others, I see -- was, "oh my god, the kid is taking a crap!" The out-of-focus is nice, but makes it very hard to see that pants are on yet. It's a wide-eyed, yet devilish look like, "Hehhee.... I'm taking a crap right here. This is what happens when you won't take me into a restroom right away when I ask." Or something like that. Yeah, that is what I see.

OK, I like this photo and its use of shadows. But one thing that bugged me right away and seems to continue to bug me -- where is the form for the strong triangle shadow? It just doesn't seem right, given the slant of the rest of the shadows and their points of origination.

Glad to hear about the link...with the second broken link in about 10 minutes, I was starting to wonder about my new computer setup.

 

As I shot motocross and mountain bike races for a number of years, I can tell you getting any shot to turn out --and then to turn out as you envision-- takes talent (and oh yes, a little luck) So congrats there Z!

 

As far as aesthetics, the picture is pretty much split in half... the image of the rider and the area without. I like that ratio and the way the space intertwines.

 

As to the amount of blur, which is slight, I would have liked either a lot more blur, or clearer. That's me. (And I'm not even sure how clear I'm seeing the image here, so I may be speaking out of turn.)

 

So, Z, are "crash and burn" shots next? lol. At my college newspaper, I worked with the guy who went on to be editor of that magazine. That's a whole 'nuther area... morbid, but with spectacular potential. Catch ya in the whoop-de-doos.

 

 

 

Hi, I'm just a newbie here,but thought I'd enter the discussion. Great shot -- no doubt. Could it be cleaned up -- yeah. (Fight amongst yourselves as to whether it should be done here, for all to view.)

 

Here's what I see with this shot. It's journalism, pure and simple. Is that allowed here? No, it's not a landscape. If you want it to be an artistic image of the vengeance of God, then edit that poor sign out. And it is no longer journalism then.

 

When you shoot a tornado, you can spend very little time selecting a spot to shoot from. I would imagine mostly you're just praying it doesn't turn your way. Last summer I took off into an approaching storm (after the tornado sirens went off) with my photography equipment. As soon as the wind really picked up and the sky turned green immediately to my right, I just got out of there as fast as I could (expletives deleted).

 

So... yes, those colors could definitely be real. I say take it into Photoshop, clean it up and be done with it. Great shot.