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!

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

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

Connect to User

loading

paulbroad's Activity

paulbroad > paulbroad's Activity

Quick Stats

Stats are refreshed every 24 hours
Photos:337
Forum Topics:10
Forum Comments:87
Photo Comments:12146
Competition Entries: 70
Modification Uploaded: 127
Only you ...

Only you ... by Sone

The original is close to the correct exposure with the right colours. The lighting contrast isd to great and you needed flash fill. That is why all good wedding photographers have a flash fitted. All the other images, including yours displayed, have the wrong colours. What are you doing in processing?

If you were a wedding pro, and presented me with images so contrasty and saturated, I would not be terribly happy. You need to sit down and look at your processing. The original that you show could be worked on mainly by dodging and burning, to achieve a much better result than you are presenting.

Paul

Curves

Curves by Merasl

Use Mono can often be a standard comment here, and you were right not to. Too many similar colours will translate to a rather mid tone grey mono. Not a good idea. Technically OK other han needing that bit of mentioned brightening.

The escalator spoils it, though.

Paul

Houses of Parliament from Hungerford Bridge

Houses of Parliament from Hungerford Bridge by photozinemag

A good idea, an interesting view, but this looks very HDR. Rather heavy and flat with an over compressed tonal range. The buildings look a bit soft too? Is it HDR?

I would have stuck to a standard full tonal range mono using the channel mixer. Lots of comment on composition, not much on the technical side.

Paul

my back yard revisited

my back yard revisited by unk001

V4 is the best, but very flat and heavy. Are you using the meter correctly because you are under exposed. The lighting contrast is very high, but you are still under.

Fit the invercone, make sure the ISO is the same on the camera and meter. Point the invercone directly at the light source, the sun here. That gives you the correct amount of light falling on your subject and thus a suitable shutter speed and aperture.

I would check the meters against each other. Weston meters are Selenium, so have no batteries, but can have inaccuracies if dropped.

Paul

Dress 1

Dress 1 by Sone

Your colours and tones remain wrong. Bridal work does not need this high contrast and saturation. The subject may appeal to some, but my wedding photography is a bit standard I fear. Standard groups and a tripod, but with some candid work from a second body.

Paul

MAKE OR BREAK

MAKE OR BREAK by youmightlikethis

Mono for me, here. Reduces the distractions of the background a lot. Your technique is nearly perfect for this one, nearly. Could be good, but you really should touch the eye sockets with the dodge tool. A few seconds for a great improvement. Your technique seems to do this to shadows.

Compositionally, you need to shout 'HERE' as you shoot. You would then have all three looking at you, hopefully. All looking at you, or all away, not as is.

Paul

ONE FRAME ONE CROP

ONE FRAME ONE CROP by youmightlikethis

The quality of the colour image is far better here and , in this case, rather better in all ways than the mono. The figure looks a bit blurred in the mono. V2 for me.

Never keen on the titled presentation though. Just me.

Paul

EXPLETIVE DELETED

EXPLETIVE DELETED by youmightlikethis

Your mono processing technique causes issues. In this case, I rather like the effect of v1, other than his Glasgow Kiss in the eye. That should not be there and you should have dealt with it. That's what the dodge tool is for.

V2 is a bit flat, as is the standard mono. Whilst your technique is effective here, I might have gone for a standard mono conversion but with a higher contrast to give a harder effect.

Paul

Pretty Common

Pretty Common by Animator

Not bad at all. It is just a touch, over exposed, lacking image density. Amazing sharpness at 1/10 sec.

ISO 1250 is not normally a good idea for technical recording, which is what this is. Natural history record. The 5D is good at high ISO but would this look as clean on an A2 print? It might well viewed at the optimum distance.

Paul

The Library

The Library by Merasl

I rather like the effect here. An interesting and balanced composition. A bit more info will help.

I think the top brighter bit is still just a tiny bit too bright. I wonder if a touch more burning inin that area might help, providing that didn't cause any greying of the area.

Paul

Bridal Flowers *

Bridal Flowers * by Sone

A series of technical errors with high contrast, a degree of under exposure. Flash fill would have helped balance tones but you mustcrack that basic technique.

Compositionally, the flowers need to be towards the camera, not away from it. The bridal flowers are a standard image, but positioned to show the blooms with some detail. Don't be afraidcto pose people.

Paul

A Piercing Gaze

A Piercing Gaze by Min463

For me, the head and beak are rather too dark. It's a young bird and they are a very agressive type. I don't dark and brooding, I see a bit too dark. The main point, that piercing eye, should be very sharp, clear and bright. That iscthe creepy bit, the eye.

Paul

Mystic Falls

Mystic Falls by dpenman

Interesting and different. Mixed feelings on what I would do with it. Not for the wall as it's a bit dark and forboding but a good talking point.

Don't do Facebook!

Paul

Grilled Corn Season

Grilled Corn Season by anand_lepcha

Good content, well taken, but you have a heavy cyan cast. Not sure if it is ambient lighting or something you have done in processing. Increased saturation? Brightening up a bit wil reduce the cyan and it is over the whole image so I would think you had the WB set at the wrong position? In my experience, auto WB is usually pretty good when there is an overall lighting effect. Much closer than this.

I would always leave white balance set to Auto, thus giving the best chance for grab shooting. Adjust the white balance manually if you have time and know the approximate setting required. After the session, set back to auto.

I carry all my cameras in 'P' mode and auto everything else except, usually, ISO. That gives me an excellent chance of a good image if I have to shoot quickly.


Try putting the flash on to fill in these shots. If the subjects don't mind, that little burst f light can add wonders.

Paul

First maternity shoot

First maternity shoot by Pedhar

You cannot shoot digital without mastering sharpening. Digital images are inherently soft and almost all need an element of sharpening. Here, the girls face is sharper than the man, so we have a depth of field issue. If you want them both sharp, and you do, you need f8 or 11 and focus slightly back from her eyes to use the third/two thirds depth rule.

One third in front and two thirds behind the focal point are sufficiently sharp. How deep is the full depth depends on distance to subject and aperture used. You should always be on manual focus in this type of studio shot, not auto. It will get it wrong, often!

You should have enough power in the guns to use a smaller aperture, but you could have gone to ISO400 and detected little, if any, problems.

For me, the background is just too black. There are heavy shadows loosing subject outline. A dark or dark varigated background rather than black to retain some separation. Dark can become black, should you wish, by lighting position.

Paul

21st

21st by Sone

Yes, don't do that! I fear the depth of field is just nowhere near enough and the only bit passably sharp is the bit of wire, top left. You have good gear, capable of top class results. You must stop shooting impulsively and think through what you intend.

impulsive is OK for a bit of fun, but technique is critical for results for the wider world.

Tripod, smaller aperture, careful focusing.

Paul

TopicDate Made
Epson paper transport.30/12/2013 - 1:59 PM
Fine Art14/12/2012 - 7:34 PM
Street photography. Is it intrusive and unethical.27/10/2012 - 9:52 AM
auto lighting optimiser.07/10/2012 - 4:54 PM
Epson ink pad replacement.03/03/2012 - 4:15 PM
Are you professional?09/01/2011 - 11:59 AM
Judging and constructive comments.16/03/2009 - 5:27 PM
Changing studio flash tubes.24/12/2007 - 10:52 AM
Using RAW23/08/2007 - 3:47 PM
Judging images18/08/2007 - 5:02 PM
TopicDate Contibuted
Bridge Camera Lenses (14X+)21/01/2014 - 10:18 AM
Epson paper transport.21/01/2014 - 10:08 AM
DPI woes, how do I sort this please?12/12/2013 - 5:07 PM
Well it had to happen11/12/2013 - 9:35 PM
Electrical socket wiring11/12/2013 - 9:23 PM
Epson 1400 printer won't feed paper10/10/2013 - 9:17 AM
Judging and constructive comments.31/08/2013 - 7:35 AM
Help needed please31/08/2013 - 7:20 AM
Do camera clubs cramp a photographer's style?15/08/2013 - 10:10 AM
Lens upgrade25/02/2013 - 4:35 PM
Critique Team25/02/2013 - 4:09 PM
Fine Art29/01/2013 - 9:20 PM
Street photography. Is it intrusive and unethical.28/10/2012 - 10:21 AM
Cheapest 500mm10/10/2012 - 1:55 PM
auto lighting optimiser.08/10/2012 - 7:20 PM

No portfolios comments on yet.