jonah_cheung
-
Posts
96 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Image Comments posted by jonah_cheung
-
-
This was taken on a hazy day, and thus the sky does not come up
dark like in your typical infrared scene. Do you think a dark sky
would have improved this photo?
-
-
What do you guys think? Should I have burned in the out of focus
background even more? I was afraid that the print would loose a
certain sense of "sparkle" if I did. Can it be improved? Thanks.
-
I wanted to show the anguish of a musician's version of
"writer's block." It was printed with high contrast in mind.
Ignoring the poorly cropped borders ( I was new to scanning ), how
could I improve this shot?
-
This is a pretty picture, but why do you call it art? What are you trying to say with it? I don't get any real feeling from it. It looks more like a good, but typical stock photograph that you could sell to a calender company.
-
This photo works because it takes advantage of "closure." In the mental recognition process, our minds automatically fill in missing pieces of objects. This usually happens with things that lie partly off the frame, but in this case, it is the subject and is in the middle of the picture. It works.
-
I don't see any artistic merit here. It's just a gimmicky use of a fish-eye lens.
-
There are two schools of photographic thought. One says that a negative should be printed so that it contain a full range of tones from light to dark. The second says that a print is successful if it comes out the way it was intended. I subscribe to the second. I wanted to caputure the rawness of the environment in which this shot was taken, and I used this naturally contrasty subject, along with selenium intensification of the shadows, to represent that.
-
It was a contrasty scene to begin with, but some shadow detail was lost in scanning.
Disillusionment
in Uncategorized
Posted