richardsnow

Well composed, beautiful light and overall well done.

If I were to critique one thing it is that I would have liked to see where the larger tree is rooted to the ground.  With the two trees being the main subject of the photograph, not being able to see where the tree is rooted to the ground is a bit like cutting off a person's feet in a photo.  The use of a slightly wider lens or taking a few steps back would have remedied this minor flaw in this otherwise beautiful image.

RS

I actually like the f/8 version slightly better if only for the foreground being sharper...but we're splitting hairs here.  It's all a matter of artistic preference and you're the photographer.

Again, wonderful image.  The lighting and composition are supurb.

RS

The lighting and composition are superb, but I agree that the lack of depth leaves more to be desired with this photo.

I'm not sure of your setup, but knowing that you shot this at f/2 explains quite a bit about why you have such a shallow depth of field.  I would have preferred this shot at f/8 - f/11 with a slower shutter to achieve similar lighting.  Likely you would have needed a tripod to make it work and I'm not sure how you were set up for this shot.

Hope this helps

RS

Candle light would have been nice, but if it was my baby, I'm not sure I would have allowed it to be that close to real candles.

Artistically this is a great shot.  The reflection makes the image powerful, as does the contrast of light and dark.  The contrast of light and dark, (along with the fact that you're photographing a baby), is what makes this an exceptionally difficult shot to get technically perfect.

The following is only how to technically make the shot better and in no way takes away from the artistic qualities of this image.  It appears that your EXIF data has bees scrubbed so I will comment without knowing ISO, Shutter Speed, etc.

There is quite a large amount of blur and it's hard to tell if you were focusing on the baby, the lights, or the reflection.  Some of the blur is motion blur from the baby moving and the only way to remedy it is a faster shutter speed.  Not knowing what ISO you were using, I can't say whether or not you would have benefited from increasing your ISO and shutter speed to help the blur from the baby moving.

There doesn't appear to be any blur from camera shake, so I would guess that you have either an exceptionally steady hand or were shooting from a tripod...one or the other is essential for low light photography like this.

The rest of the blur is related to focus.  I'm not sure exactly what you were focusing on, but when really examining the photo it is a bit distracting.  I think part of the issue is that my eyes want to focus on the reflection of the baby, but the focus appears to be on the lights.  It makes the eye wander around the image with little to focus on.  This could have been remedied by shooting at a slightly smaller aperture, (difficult given the conditions), or focusing on something other than the light bulbs, (also difficult given the conditions.)

Overall, a moving shot, although it leaves a bit to be desired technically.

Hope this helps

RS

Had I known you shot this with Velvia I wouldn't have mentioned the greens.

EDIT:  The greens look natural knowing that it was shot with FUJI Velvia :p

RS

Very nice composition.  Looks like a wonderful place for long exposure shots. 

I'm curious to know how long the exposure is.  My tastes are to expose to get a smooth, glassy look without making it look like fog, but the title of this shot leads me to believe that this is the look you were going for.

The only technical issue I have with the shot is that on my (color corrected) monitor, the greens look a bit too green...almost like the green channel has been boosted to the point of clipping in some areas.  I'm not sure if this is an effect of the long exposure, a filter, or post processing.  I'd tone down the greens a tad to make the photo look a bit more natural.

Other than that, great shot 3.75 out of 5

RS

Wonderful color!

My concern with this shot is the focus/DOF.  It appears that the EXIF data has been scrubbed so I can't see what aperture this was shot at.  It appears to me that the number 3 and the O's on the Tic-Tac-Toe board are out of focus along with the vertical bars next to the steering wheel.  Perhaps this is due to shallow depth of field, although the trees behind the playground equipment aren't as out of focus as I'd expect if this is the case.  Otherwise this is an effect of JPEG compression, but I'm not sure.

Either way, the shot has great color and is exposed well, the focus issue is the only distraction IMHO.

Very nice shot.  I like the road to the mountains and the general feel, but...

Personally, I would have cropped a bit tighter...tightening in on the center mountains and getting rid of about half to two-thirds of the sky. 

As it is, the sky loses it's appeal when it becomes mostly flat, white cloud.  The effect you created with the road to the mountains can still be created, but in a much more dynamic photograph.

There's much about this image that I like:

• Sky looks natural
• Building light
• Composition

But there's a few things that stand out that I would do differently:

• tone down the greens...the grass and trees look unnatural
• perhaps bring out a bit more of the shadow area on the right
• selectively tone down the reds on the tree trunks

The minor changes would make the image look more natural, but if that's not the look you're going for then this is a great image.

RS

Portland Headlight in Cape Elizabeth, ME.

One of the most photographed lighthouses in the USA

All critiques welcome

RS

This is just a tree on a farm down the road from my house. The light was

good, so I took a shot.

I decided to put this up for critique. First real nice day in Maine this

spring. This stuck out at me today and thought I'd take a few shots.