Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Photo Critique | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2012 · Wood You Vote For This ???
  
 
RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #1 · Wood You Vote For This ???


Weekly Assignment for "Trees & Wood" ... tried to represent both with some "dead wood" and living trees.







Feb 26, 2012 at 04:22 AM
AuntiPode
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #2 · Wood You Vote For This ???


It's OK, but I believe you can do better. No technical complaints, but it doesn't move me. Then again, a nasty cold virus means my head isn't at it's best.


Feb 26, 2012 at 07:22 AM
RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #3 · Wood You Vote For This ???


Thanks Karen ... I think there is a "left-handed" compliment buried in there.






Feb 26, 2012 at 12:02 PM
cgardner
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · Wood You Vote For This ???


I doesn't do much for me in terms of subject matter and composition. The shape of the dead wood in the foreground is interesting but the chopped off tree truck in the background is a strong vertical leading line straight up and out the top of the frame.

The image has a full tonal range in that there isn't much clipping on either end, but the 3/4 tones are "blocked" meaning that the normal progression of gray scale steps you'd see in person are missing. The tonal range jumps from black and nearly black (Zone 0 and 1) to middletones (Zones 5 -6) with very little in the Zone 2-4 range.

I would suspect you could coax more detail out of the RAW will Fill, Blacks, Brightness and Contrast adjustments in ACR but even then content- / message it would fall short for me. The white mat is also distracting, fighting the shadow detail in the image for attention. Try a black one and compare the difference you'll perceive more detail in the shadows.



Feb 26, 2012 at 01:17 PM
Kaden K.
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · Wood You Vote For This ???


Kent, I think that a little less definition between the sharp tree trunk and the background would actually improve the overall look of it.


Feb 26, 2012 at 02:43 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



Bob Jarman
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #6 · Wood You Vote For This ???


I agree with Kaden, on this monitor, as opposed to a laptop, it looks awfully dark (imagine me saying that! ).

Here is where we digress from DeWolfe - he would have a much finer tonal gradation on lighted side of dead wood and reduced contrast. How to get there? Do not know, and perhaps not possible from basic image?

Bob



Feb 26, 2012 at 04:08 PM
AuntiPode
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #7 · Wood You Vote For This ???


Nope.... Not left-handed or buried. I'd say implicit. I believe you can and often do make strong images. That one is pleasant, but last I looked there was at least one entered in the WA I though was much stronger. Of course, I rarely agree with the WA winner picked, so take any of my WA advice with a large grain of salt.


Feb 26, 2012 at 07:45 PM
RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #8 · Wood You Vote For This ???


Karen ... Thanks

I agree at a stronger image in the WA.

Kaden ... +1 @ transition.

I ran into a bit of a problem in that the foreground was shot with the lens hood literally touching the subject (out of frame). From a working distance of about 2-3 inches, the few feet to the ground is a "country mile" in terms of the difference. The gap from the foreground subject to everything else is just a rather large one from the working distance I shot from.

I never did find a good way (PP) to make that transition a little more gentle without degrading the detail in the foreground subject in what would be an unnatural way for the eye ... I tried more than once, but never came up with anything better than this. I was a bit concerned that it might come across as a "cut & paste" composite, while it is just extreme forshortening. However, without more in the transition area, it seems like the foreshortening effect is totally lost ... i.e point of diminishing return with that much gap.

Here's the original RAW capture for reference, so you can get a sense of both the magnitude of crop and the distance relationships involved for the DOF / transitions. Ideas for a different crop are very welcome.







Feb 26, 2012 at 08:07 PM
sbeme
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #9 · Wood You Vote For This ???


Kent,
I agree with the feedback you have already received.
You did a beautiful job with a tight crop and beautiful use of shallow DOF. But the overall image is just not strong enough compositionally.
Scott



Feb 27, 2012 at 04:17 AM





FM Forums | Photo Critique | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Retrive password