Jump to content

fabriziogiudici

PhotoNet Pro
  • Posts

    196
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Image Comments posted by fabriziogiudici

    Ducks

          7

    Tal,

     

    I looked at the cropped version. Simply I can't decide which is better :-) I still think that the lights are somewhat disturbing, but in the cropped version ducks are somewhat too big...

     

    Anyway, very nice photo!

    Ducks

          7
    It is really an interesting shot. I'm puzzled if the light reflection to the left side adds something or if it is distracting. Have you tried cropping it? Probably the two ducks would be ok as the subject of the photo, thanks to the deep blue and the nice reflection.

    Blue RED

          123
    I'm really happy for your POW, I saw your shot a couple of days ago and it impressed me. I also suggest to visitors to take a look at Paulo's portfolio, there are many other interesting photos.
  1. I like it _very_ much! The more I look at it the more i like it, specially for the space partition given by the vertical staircases edges.

     

    Just a question: while the two central edges of the staircase are perfectly rectilinear, the ones to the left are slighty curved. Is it barrel distortion? Which lens did you use? This won't reduce my rating, anyway.

  2. IMHO the sky is not consistent with sunset: shouldn't the light turn red? Besides, where stars are? I recently shot a photo during the afterglow (http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=363648), and the sky is filled with stars. Of course I could be wrong, I've never been in New Hampshire and there sunsets could be different.

     

    That said, I consider it as a photo. I don't know if the photo was photoshopped or if was just underexposed; but I feel that colors are consistent with the latter technique.

     

    If the real scenario was different than the look of the photo, this is not enough for considering this a piece of 'graphics' rather than a photo. After all I saw some stunning photos, here on photo.net, depicting moonlight scenarios with very long exposures, turning to daylight-like illumination. Don't we consider them as photos, even if the 'real thing' looks different (unless you have cat's eyes :-) ?

     

    PS I forgot to say... I like it :-)

  3. Stephen is right for what concerns the ND filter; but it would induce a (less important) new problem: the top of the trees would be darker and the filter presence would be noticeable.

    It is "just" a very difficult situation to catch.

     

  4. Sometimes you don't expect how much a photo changes after cropping it a little bit... In a first moment I preferred the first version (the sight of the harbour and the sea gave me the impression of space), but I must agree that the cropped version is much better balanced. I like it very much.

    No gravity

          3

    Amusing! Perhaps there's a bit of simmetry break between the two glasses... otherwise 10/10 (I gave 8/10).

     

    How did you do it? Double exposure or a quick trip on the Shuttle? ;-)

  5. Pretty cool. The dirt is probably from the scanner and not from the photo. I would suggest removing them with Photoshop - and probably you'd better upload a new version with higher JPEG quality, it's a pity that JPEG fringing on such a photo.
×
×
  • Create New...