Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Treelight (re-resized!)

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

Add Comment

A beautiful view of a sheltered wooded area. The sunlight coming through the canopy had a brilliant soft golden quality.

This is the same as my first uploaded version (Treelight), but has been resized with a different piece of software. Not only is the file size smaller, but the image is also sharper and less obviously compressed.

Camera:Nikon D40X Check out Nikon Nation!
Lens:Nikkor kit 18-55mm lens Check out Nikon Nation!
Recording media:JPEG (digital)
Title:Treelight (re-resized!)
Username:whiteheadj whiteheadj
Uploaded:19 Aug 2007 - 12:20 PM
Tags:Dappled, Flowers & plants, Green, Hathersage, Landscape / travel, Peak district, Rocks, Sunlight, Trees
VS Mode Rating Unrated
These stats show the percentage of wins and the rating score that your photo has achieved. You can go to the VS Mode by clicking on this icon.

Signup to e2

Signup to e2 to see which photo this has won or lost against in the vs mode
Votes:3
JuniorJunior Member

Comments

fauxtography
19 Aug 2007 - 1:22 PM

No it's not sharp i'm afraid. Yes, it's had sharpening applied, but the image is still blurred, from what looks like motion blur and incorrect focussing.

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

whiteheadj
19 Aug 2007 - 6:03 PM

I accept your point on motion blur, but I resent your suggestion about sharpening. I've quite clearly stated what has been done to make this image different from the other. Sharpening was not part of it.

I chose to focus on the rock: the trees came through better in a slightly blurred impressionistic style, which shows off the effect of the light on the trees. The motion blur was not intended, but is present. I did not have my tripod with me on this occasion and I don't have very steady hands.

Feel free to disagree with my opinions on the success of the piece, but please at least follow the guidelines about being respectful, constructive and helpful.

Last Modified By Dave at 19 Aug 2007 - 6:04 PM

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

fauxtography
19 Aug 2007 - 6:24 PM

The out of focus trees aren't the issue, and yes, they do work out of focus.

Don't resent it, you quite clearly state in your description that it is a sharper version of the same image you uploaded previously, that kinda suggests it's been sharpened Wink

If you didn't actively sharpen it yourself it probably happened through your resizing process.

Looking at the previous image and this one I can see that nothing is truly in focus, the rock should be, but has motion blur and, comparing the previous image and this one, it also appears that your focusing on the rock is off, hence the incorrectly focused comment.

What I said was neither intended to be disrespectful nor unhelpful... it was perhaps a little blunt, so for that I'm sorry if it offended you.

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

whiteheadj
19 Aug 2007 - 6:50 PM

That's OK. Thanks for the apology.

I didn't sharpen it myself - if you look at the other image it had some noticeable problems which (I think) were down to the software used to resize it. The "sharper" comment was meant simply to refer to the difference that using a different program to resize the original made, but I can see how it was ambiguous.

Out of interest, what do you mean by "your focusing on the rock is off". It looks OK to me, apart from the motion blur.

I can see now that it wasn't intended as disrespectful or unhelpful - originally the "No it's not sharp i'm afraid" looked just like perfectionist criticism, but now I can see it's a reply to my description.

Thanks for taking the time to comment and apologise for your original bluntness Wink.

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

fauxtography
19 Aug 2007 - 6:58 PM

motion blur often gives a sort of double image effect, (you can see that on the rock) whereas being out of focus makes things just look soft (like the trees). The first image is badly compressed and looks like it isn't focused correctly (on the rock), that's could quite easily be down to the compression. If the rock is sharp on your original then yeah it's down to the compression.

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

whiteheadj
20 Aug 2007 - 2:14 PM

Yeah. I can see the motion blur, which is also present on the original. The rock's sharp in the original apart from the motion blue, so it is probably the compression in the first submission.

Thanks again for taking the time to comment and reply Wink.

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

iajacks
iajacks  9
21 Aug 2007 - 1:43 PM

a good green tone in all the picture holds the image together nicely.

well done ian

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

MrsS
MrsS  84527 forum posts England18 Constructive Critique Points
23 Aug 2007 - 4:28 PM

Think this IS an improvement, James, keep trying and I'm sure you'll get there Smile

Cheers!

Fran x

PS - - I do know Mark knows what he's talking about and is only trying to help Smile

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

whiteheadj
23 Aug 2007 - 10:08 PM

Thanks for all the nice comments.

James

PS - Thanks Fran, I know now he was only trying to help but, not knowing him before, the first post was a bit curt Smile

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

- Original Poster Comments
- Your Posts

Add a Comment

You must be a member to leave a comment

Username:
Password:
Remember me:
Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.