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
zebra dove by kjteng

zebra dove

Nice effort and something to be proud of. More than adequately sharp at in excess of 500 mm. Blown up, the birds feet are just a touch sharper than the head, so focal point is actually a touch too far back.

Assume manual focusing due to the converter.

Paul

By: kjteng

Dark Side by karlfox

Dark Side

I like the harsh look. It suites better. The Hoodie doesn't matter to me but I would try and tone down the two highlight skin areas just a bit if any detail is left. The face would look better close to the left edge of the frame, moving it away from dead centre.

I,like Willie, use Photoshop. What you cannot do in Photoshop is not worth having in terms of normal photography. Elements is pretty well as good in almost all respects and costs a lot less. I've looked at these additive programs and, much like buying an up market car, you buy lots of bits and pieces to get just one you need, or think you need.

I'm a keen angler. Much of the content of an angling shop is there to catch anglers, not fish. That applies to many sports and pass times.

Paul

By: karlfox

In front of  Retford market square by xwang

In front of Retford market square

Not a good subject for IR, Jas. Not much IR light there to give the usual effect. You need grass, vegetation, a blue sky and so on. The building is sharp enough. You could brighten it up and just smart sharpen a bit, but not the ideal subject.

Paul

By: xwang

Vivaciousness_Mauritius Series 1 by Schweigan

Vivaciousness_Mauritius Series 1

The composition is fine but your processing has some real problems. There is considerable image flare from the lighting which is unfortunate, but the colours are a long long way out. Quite garish.

The camera might be set to vivid, so check your camera settings, but it must be obvious to you on the screen that the colours could not look like this. Have you increased saturation dramatically.

Do you still have the original unprocessed file? We could do to see it.

Paul

By: Schweigan

Bridge&trees by xwang

Bridge&trees

I like it. You will rarely get an outdoor IR shot sharp when using filters due to the long exposure necessary. If the goriillapod was attached to the bridge, you would need to stand still and no one else walk on it. The effect is unusual but IR should not be judged on sharpness and image quality, and I rarely say that, it is effect.

I might prefer this in mono. I think IR usually looks better as a black and white image with a contrast boost, but you have done pretty well.

Paul

By: xwang

Five pedal camellia by 2slow

Five pedal camellia

It is under exposed, but it is also rather unsharp due to the slow shutter speed and, I guess, hand holding. You need to use a tripod and work on the exposure. Shoot several images with different settings and try and get better lighting with a smaller aperture to increase depth of field. f8 or 11.

Paul

By: 2slow

Back in time by laantre

Back in time

The idea is very good and the combination of images well done. The quality is, I fear, not so good. The girl is very unsharp and she should be sharp. Obviously cannot make further comment on that because we have no details. The lighting is too strong, resulting in flare and burn out.

Your idea is excellent but it seems your start images leave something to be desired.

Show us some more conventional images with EXIF details so that we can see if you have a more basic problem.

Paul

By: laantre

window light by justahobby

window light

A right crop to bring the window off centre would improve composition. I realise you are using the window itself as the subject. I think something complimentary like a flower in the window would add a more suitable focal point.

Paul

By: justahobby

My Son by ivonjunaidi

My Son

Nice shot. Comnendably sharp for such a slow shutter speed. Good lighting and suites mono. You could brighten the eyes a touch as Willie suggests.

Paul

By: ivonjunaidi

Dove hangout by unk001

Dove hangout

Frankly, you are going to struggle with this. It's not very sharp at all, so enlargement by cropping will just make things worse. Lighting is heavy and grey so very much against you. You needed a nice bright sunset behind silhouetting the trees and birds, but also a longer lens and a tripod to get the resolution.

Paul

By: unk001

Suramadu Bridge by SayyidFaisal8

Suramadu Bridge

A good shot, but you could do with a bit more in there. Better to shoot in thipose few minutes when the sky still has a deep blue tone and there is some detail in the surroundings. There are very large areas of heavy black here.

F22 is not necessary. You are not getting the best from your lens. It dies get you the star effect, but f16 would too and reduce exposure time dramatically.

Paul

By: SayyidFaisal8

White Camellia, by 2slow

White Camellia,

Good grief, that's a bit drastic and, unless you are shooting critical images then hardly necessary. Shoot RAW + best JPG. You then have the best olf both worlds. A JPG which is likely to be close to correct for most purposes and a RAW file to adjust WB if necessary.

It seems to me that you need to master exposure and focusing first, then progress from there. The cause of many colour balance issues is actually incorrect exposure.


Paul

By: 2slow

Super Supra by karlfox

Super Supra

Very effective indeed. The mono is dramatic, but I'll bet a colour version is at least as good. Probably better for me.

However, this is shot for effect rather than record and I do appreciate that.

Very strong indeed. I shoot car images for my son who owns a garage and does some restoration work. You have given me ideas. I tend to do a lot with very wide angle, close viewpoints, multi flash set up and resulting distortion.

This retains the perspective but adds impact.

Paul

By: karlfox

All in BLUE by Ray12

All in BLUE

Decent holiday record . you do need to get all the chap in, though, or crop at the waste with him in the foreground.

The colour is wrong as Willie explains and, on both, the images are a touch over exposed, especially the background. You need to burn the top part of borpth images in.

Willie will not agree, but I would always leave the camera set to auto white balance. You can then grab a shot with the knowledge that the colours will be close. Then, if there is time, set the white balance manually, shoot the sequence, then set it back to auto to protect against exactly this mistake.

I've been at this game well over 50 years and have been trained to use a colour temperature Meter and correction filters for technical imaging. The correct WB setting is always best, but auto protects against serious error.

Paul

By: Ray12

Egton Bridge Milky Way by relph1975

Egton Bridge Milky Way

Very effective. One if the rare occasions where a degree if slight softness really does not matter.

Paul

By: relph1975

Up the Reds. by francisg

Up the Reds.

You either need the feet in, or ziim in even closer to just torso and expressions. Just cropping the feet doesn't work well.

It is pretty good but has one huge, and regular amateur sports problem. Background. It just pulls my attention.

You need to find a viewpoint with a less demanding background. On oro grounds, its lots of out of focus spectators and stands but building site security fence is a problem.

Look at backgrounds. Consider low viewpoints looking up.

Paul

By: francisg

New Parliament Windows by lucianobianco

New Parliament Windows

There is a strength there for those who like pattern images, but I'm finding it difficult to relate this to a window. Is it close up detail of one window or dozens of them?

Paul

By: lucianobianco

Ray of light by WimpyIskandar

Ray of light

A very nice composition with super lighting. I think I might just increase image density a little. There dies seem to be a problem with ficus, or possibly compression factors as Willie mentions. The whole frame is a little soft?

Paul

By: WimpyIskandar

Portrait by IshanPathak

Portrait

The pose and framing are good. The eyes are a touch dark and could easily be lifted with the dodge took. They are slightly soft because your plane of focus is further back on her head. The hair at the back of her head at each side is very sharp.

Are you focusing manually or on auto. It is often better to use manual focus or, if your kebs allows it, a final manual tweak to autofocus.

Paul

By: IshanPathak

Are you coming in or not? Version 2 by Squirrel

Are you coming in or not? Version 2

Good fun, but you do have a rather over bright image. Willies mod is a much more balanced image in terns of final range. I realise there is no intent to be realistic and the result is interesting.

Paul

By: Squirrel

Wroclaw Statue by karlfox

Wroclaw Statue

You appear to have a very good range of tones. It is a long time since I had anything to do with the Ansel Adams zone system. I'm not really sure how you can employ it with the camera Meyer, or are you using a hand Meyer?

I still have a Weston and, if I remember, it was calibrated to use the zone system. I would think the characterustics of different sensor types would have some effect?

However, whatever you are doing in that respect appears to work here. Might just correct the right vertical. The left is spot on.

Paul

By: karlfox

Wroclaw Church Poland by karlfox

Wroclaw Church Poland

Effective and a good conversion with full range of tones. When blown up the top of the image looks less sharp than rpthe bottom to me. It is acceptable, but I think you have focused lower down and f5 has not quite been enough to give overall sharpness.

A tripod and f11 at least with use of the hyper focal distance would give top to bottom sharpness.

Paul

By: karlfox

Run aground by imaughan

Run aground

I knew it was HDR the second that I saw it. The tonal range is over compressed giving a slightly flat look. I wouldn't have thought HDR was necessary here? An aside is a slight softness overall which I think will be a result of combining images.

Otherwise a nice image with content and composition, just, for me, a pity you used HDR.

Paul

By: imaughan

Jellyfish by TheShankyLens

Jellyfish

Very effective and we'll done. It may be a little under, but not a lot to me. The problem with such images is that they are for effect. If tank lighting is used then the image is no good for natural history record as the colours will be all wrong.

Paul

By: TheShankyLens

Poinsettia by IshanPathak

Poinsettia

Your originals are very flat. V1 is quite a good close up with decent tones and a reasonable plane of focus. The lighting is poor and not really adequate for the job, and I can't even see any aphids. You need at least 1:1 full macro for such subjects.

The answer for tiny insects with any degree of success is full macro, at least f16 and a dedicated macro flash system to get the light where it is needed. I dear that means a considerable cost penalty.

Paul

By: IshanPathak

Casual portrait by Gothic

Casual portrait

Your EXIF surely cannot be right? ISO3200, 130 @5.6. It must have been nearly dark!

Your shutter speed is just too slow resulting in camera movement and a soft image. That is what you should really be looking at. The image may be a tiny bit over, but you shot in RAW so any over exposure at this Kevel is due to incorrect RAW processing.

Slight exposure adjustments are very easy from a RAW file.

Compositionally and setting rather nice but I would prefer eye contact.

Paul

By: Gothic

White Camellia by 2slow

White Camellia

A tighter crop which gives a stronger image. The very bright area at top right is a little unfortunate and there is a degree of softness in part of the flower due to a relatively narrow depth of field. I realise the lighting was low but modern gear will handle ISO 400 with ease.

Your logo, which I would leave off in this section, suggests you have a business name? As such, clone our imperfections in the bloom. There are two here, one a mark, top left, the other possibly an out of ficus fly. Customers will want to see only perfect blooms.

Paul

By: 2slow

Pink Camellia by 2slow

Pink Camellia

This looks over exposed with axwashy flat effect. I think you need to look at your monitor settings! Try brightening your screen image.

This needs to be a but darker with more contrast as Willie says. You also have a burnt out spot on a leaf. Clone that out.

I would tend to get in a bit closer the emphasise the bloom more, or, as suggested cropnsquare.

Paul

By: 2slow

Teagan Lynn and Ernie by CPO1944

Teagan Lynn and Ernie

Very nice and superb family record of an original type. Just a tiny bit over exposed. Easily corrected in software, then a really good 'un.

Not sure why you chose f2.8. I would have been at f4 or 5.6 I think to increase depth of field as an insurance. Not really an issue here.

Paul

Paul

By: CPO1944

3 trees by justahobby

3 trees

Technically very well done. Compositionally, it would be rather better if the trees were running away from you at an angle rather than straight across the centre of the frame.

Three is good, but which is the subject?

Paul

By: justahobby