bcunha

What's to say, Paulo? You are a wonderful photographer, doing every aspect well, but I still think that this type of portrait/photojournalism is what you do best. Keep it up.

I've seen the series of pictures in your home page and the result was quite shocking, I must admit. Glad to hear that you did not lose your child after all...

The composition seems good, but there could be more emphasis on the absence in the cradle. As it is it's covering less than half of the frame. Maybe tight crop on an empty dress and the hands lower, perhaps scattering the flowers. Just an idea.

P.S.: Off to Helsinki on Monday. Let's see if I can make something work out.

Superb

Excellent!

Excellent control of light and composition. Doesn't get any better than this.

Igual a um Lírio d'água de Monet. Boa!

Paulo has found himself in photo.net. I'm glad to see that finally photo.net found Paulo. He's a self taught and natural photojournalist. In his folder you will see some excellent, and some not so excellent, but you will always see truth. His vision, not something staged or created. Photography.

 

It's obvious why this one was picked, they even say it in the POW caption. Representation. I'd say it's time we go over these concepts. Paulo has obviously images with universal appeal. At least now he's got sufficient exposure so everyone can enjoy them.

 

Paulo, parabéns! Estou contente de ver como tua vida melhorou desde que entraste para o photo.net. Fico feliz em saber que finalmente estás bem contigo e tua profissão. O teu talento está patente nestas poucas fotos que tive a felicidade de ver. Sucesso, cara!

Foto rara mostrando o coto do Lula...

 

Essa pose deve ser para seduzir a ala evangélica do PL... Deus NOS ajude :-)

I like the contrast, -- it could work equally well with more shadow detail but it wouldn't carry the same message -- the composition, which is flat but not dull, and the textures in the bushes. The photographer may have blurred the other sitting birds in PS, but then again, this is "darkroom technique" and not exactly digital manipulation. I have to say that I like the original picture better, though. Just a little tilting and some dodging in the bottom part and we're there.

 

I think that Yuri extracted all the message the scene could convey, and I congratulate him for that. The downside is that message is not particularly interesting (personally.) As usual, the elves should pick an otherwise indifferent picture from a *very impressive indeed* portfolio (stress in the "very impressive indeed" in Yuri's case) to stir discussion.

Nice darkroom work. Knowing how TMZ reacts this sucess in capturing shadow detail may be due to an unusual flat lightning, but nevertheless good printing. The composition seems very confused and unbalanced, though.

They don't have the "atmospheric indoors" category, so there :-)

Please comment, but bear in mind that my scanner cannot cut into the

shadows of Kodachrome! Thanks in advance.

K64 is wonderful. K64 has a unique dye cast -- assuming that you have a capable lab to develop it -- that is simply not equalled by any of the newer super-saturated films. The only one which comes a little close in behavior is provia. K64 is also so dense that until recently no desktop scanner could do a good job with it. This is mainly due to the non-substantive nature of the film, meaning that the dyes are added *during development*. I looks wonderful when projected, believe me.

To scan it, I prepare two cups of coffee -- my usual dose -- blow air on the chrome (dyes are also added in layers, the end result is then thicker and more opaque to infrared, so no ICE). Set number of passes to 16 in vuescan and check the "high exposure pass" box. The scanner will then multisample over 16 times (4min), and then repeat the whole process with 4 times the CCD exposure (16min).

I could actually do the whole thing using Minolta's driver (I'm using the old scan elite) and photoshop -- the film holder does hold the film accurately enough, but vuescan does the Kodachrome color correction (did I mention that there is an obtrusive blue cast on the film when scanned normally?) and the high exposure pass automatically, so there. The whole idea is to use multisampling to reduce the CCD noise and the high-exposure pass to increase the dynamic range available -- of course the latter would be worthless in itself if no mechanism of noise reduction was used.

That's basically why I stopped using K64. K25 is another matter, I have nothing but good experiences with it. Try it by all means if you can -- Kodak is taking it out of production. I've got another K64 pic here. It was as hard to scan as this one.

Very pleased with your nice words. I don't want to break the spell, and Astia is a fabulous film, but as far as I remember, this one was taken with provia -- which is pretty much all I use for color today.

 

Like your work too, esp. the B&W and the photojournalism pics.

So much better than my own take on the subject.

Heavily overcast. I took this one thinking "Ok, people will pick on

me because of the bland sky." When I developed it, the idea came

to "print" it as a chrome. I'm not sure the picture works, especially

the bottom third, but would love to hear some comments!

The question on my mind when I saw this one was "what attracted him into taking this shot?" Then I thought of the textures in the grass and tree trunks, little flowers sparkling and the delicate foliage. Unfortunately all of it was only in my thoughts, because there is no way I can see them in the picture. The same thing about Bradley's photo, which I guess is what frustates people when seeing a panoramic picture.

 

In my opinion, the small-medium-large size policy would need to be revisioned, especially the latter two. This is the perfect example where an original of about 2000-3000 pixels would be needed, along with a resized version of about 1000 like yours, so people can see the picture as a whole.

 

And that's it! I'm off to take some pictures myself :-)

I've got this impression that it would work much better if it was larger.

 

I've got to say it here: you are one of the few photographers in this forum who still induces in me this urge to grab my gear and go outdoors shooting away. Nice to see that you still find time to post some pictures!

I really can't pick. The photo was not that good to begin with, and both versions have problems and advantages. To me the biggest difference lies in the damn glare in the original version. It was a relief to crop it out.

 

"I hate people!!!" refer to my own feelings when I was cloning the poor couple away. Rest assured it had nothing to do with you.

Bom balanço. Composição meio estática, e ajudaria que a silhueta dos pássaros estivessem maiores, mas muito bem executado.

 

Nice balance. A little static and it would help that the sillouettes were bigger, but well-done anyway.

Very well done. I'd say that the background needed to be moved back. Light is too uneven there and it draws some attention. Subject is very well lit and printed. Nice composition.

This must be the first print *smaller* than the chrome I've ever seen in my life :-)

Beautiful contrast and composition!

Erótico *e* original!

I'm not sure, Hanna. I guess I was so happy that the couple in front of me didn't move for the 2-3s of exposure that I decided not to crop them out. For the sake of argument, let us have it :-)

Yes! Thanks for the comment.