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 Gallery Comments

paulbroad > paulbroad Recent Activity > paulbroad's Gallery Comments
spring by philip007

spring

Unfortnately, I must be a purist, then. I do applaud trying something different, but a bit too different for me.

Paul

By: philip007

September in the Cairngorms by missmoz

September in the Cairngorms

A nice shog in many ways. The problem, for me, is that it's just a nice day. Ideally you need mist, divrse lighting, contrast. Something to add some impact and thus to lift it. Nothing to really give it a zing.

Paul

By: missmoz

Elephants enjoying some precious water by pierreapienaar

Elephants enjoying some precious water

You are aware, I think, that the quality here, negative or positive, is not going to make an acceptable image. Is the original negative fully sharp? If not, forget it. There is no point scanning, or rephotographing an image, unless it has historical value, unless it is of paramount quality. Scanning will usually reduce quality.

You might get reasonable results copying a print, providing the lighting is soft and the print is excellent. To rephotograph slides and negatives you need a macro lens and light diffusing screen behind the film. Ideally you need a decent scanner. Mine cost over 400 years ago and is a high end flatbed with scanning hood.

Not easy, but technique and equipment is all, I fear. You will struggle badly without the right gear.

Natural history record needs to be clear, sharp and, in this day and age, full colour.

Paul

By: pierreapienaar

The Path by apriorphoto

The Path

You have done well to get it this sharp at such a liw shutter speed and the exposure is about right, but I would have gone for f5.6 to get a faster shutter speed. Decent composition, but, for me, needs a focal point. A figure part way down that path to lock the composition.

Paul

By: apriorphoto

From a different Angl-ia by treesman

From a different Angl-ia

My first car was a 1962 Anglia. Very basic compared to the current crop. A good angle and that bit different, but you are a bit under exposed I think. I suspect the yelliw was rather brighter than this looking at the sky. This is a mustard colour.

You are on auto with no correction, thus, on a sunny day and with this much bright colour, the camera meter will almost always under expose. Check on the LCD after shooting. You may have wished this effect, but you should try a few different settings when you get a decent idea and work on them later.

Steer clear of preset modes if you want to learn. Setting aperture znd/or shutter speed yourself gives much greater control of the final image.

Paul

By: treesman

Only you ... by Sone

Only you ...

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

By: Sone

Curves by Merasl

Curves

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

By: Merasl

Houses of Parliament from Hungerford Bridge by photozinemag

Houses of Parliament from Hungerford Bridge

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

By: photozinemag

my back yard revisited by unk001

my back yard revisited

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

By: unk001

Dress 1 by Sone

Dress 1

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

By: Sone

MAKE OR BREAK by youmightlikethis

MAKE OR BREAK

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

By: youmightlikethis

ONE FRAME ONE CROP by youmightlikethis

ONE FRAME ONE CROP

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

By: youmightlikethis

EXPLETIVE DELETED by youmightlikethis

EXPLETIVE DELETED

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

By: youmightlikethis

Pretty Common by Animator

Pretty Common

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

By: Animator

The Library by Merasl

The Library

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

By: Merasl

Bridal Flowers * by Sone

Bridal Flowers *

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

By: Sone

A Piercing Gaze by Min463

A Piercing Gaze

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

By: Min463

Mystic Falls by dpenman

Mystic Falls

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

By: dpenman

Grilled Corn Season by anand_lepcha

Grilled Corn Season

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

By: anand_lepcha

First maternity shoot by Pedhar

First maternity shoot

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

By: Pedhar

21st by Sone

21st

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

By: Sone

Brolly in garden by LouiseTopp

Brolly in garden

Not sure what to say, and have been in trouble recently for pointed comment which I thought was quite fair. You have a first class record of a brolly.

Paul

By: LouiseTopp

Waiting for bums by ladigit

Waiting for bums

Not sure about this. The mono conversion is good but the shadows are blocked solid and a little detail would be nice. A little dodging?

I struggke with the composition. Doesn't flow at all to me. For me, a suitable figure in the right hand chair would lift this a great deal.

Paul

By: ladigit

Catch Me If You Can by FUARCE

Catch Me If You Can

It seems curlish to critise this, because I am rather unlikely to ever take anything like it. First rate, brave and strongly composed. I think there is mileage in a bit of judicious dodging and burning to slightly lighten the animal and add extra tone to the far hills.

Paul

By: FUARCE

Artisan by anand_lepcha

Artisan

A fine image in many ways and very mono suitable. You are a bit under exposed. There is nothing like a white anywhere. The old darkroom rule was a pure black, a pure white, then a full range of grey tones between. Low light, I know, but there is very little detail in the deep shadows just where some would be nice, round his hands.

The dodge tool, carefully applied, will help.

For mono, 800 or even 1600 would give a crisp sharp image and more room to increase exposure.

Paul

By: anand_lepcha

Lost City by mmz_khan

Lost City

I like it again. Not quite as much as the horse, though. You have been very lucky with how the flare has worked on these images, but don't rely on it working regularly.

However, good to see them.

Paul

By: mmz_khan

Sone1 by Sone

Sone1

Not sure why a soft blurred image should look better in mono? Your shutter speed has resulted in movement blur and the treatment, I fear, is rather harsh.

Female portraits can look good diffused, but that isn't unsharp, it is a movement of highlights into shadows. You must get the basic technique right.

Higher ISO, tripod, both. Anything to get a sharp image. There seem to be a lot of modern photographers who shun tripods, flash fill and so on. I watch a modern wedding photographer a few weeks ago, no tripod, no flash, bright sun. I've seen the results this week. Pleased I didn't take them.

Paul

By: Sone

Forgotten Knight by mmz_khan

Forgotten Knight

A lot of potential faults, but it is very strong with great impact. I'm not sure if the standard mods would actually improve things or remove some of the power of the umage?

Horizon tilts.
Flare to remove, bottom right.
Highlights on left completely burnt out.

But...
Does it matter here? Not usually me, but I do find this quite strong.

Paul

By: mmz_khan

just for fun "Dog day at the pool" by unk001

just for fun "Dog day at the pool"

Decent shots, but you are meterung incorrectly. They are all significantly under exposed. At least a stop. You need to check on your LCD, the histogram if you have time. Very bright light and reflective water, thus an incorrect meter reading.

Check after shooting, correct and reshoot if necessary.

I have a hand meter. Extra to carry, but always accurate on incident readings. ISO200, 1/800 @ f8 is a standard outdoor bright sun exposure if un doubt.

Paul

By: unk001

Whitby Abbey Steps at Dusk by CanonBenny

Whitby Abbey Steps at Dusk

I have been absent a bit lately. A few issues with the section, but here I go again! I rarely like HDR but this doesn't look HDR, it is far from natural. I rather like it as a strong different image with impact. A talking point.

I know the scene well, will be there tomorrow. As such, it can never be a pictorial record. However, I used to do a lecture for the PAGB called 'A Different Approch', to attempt to get people to try other than standard images, whatever they are. This fits.

Technically strong.

Paul

By: CanonBenny