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!

Get on1's Perfect Effects 9.5 for FREE! (£48 value)

Connect to User

loading

paulbroad's Gallery Comments

paulbroad > paulbroad Recent Activity > paulbroad's Gallery Comments
Hibiscus stem by Coen

Hibiscus stem

Very effective but possibly a little over exposed. Did you shoit a few at different expisures? This is an effwct shot rather than record as, without your title it could be many things.

I think it is actually the stamen. The stem means something rather different to me.

However, well done and has some real strength.

Paul

By: Coen

The "Ludden" Cottage by ArildMoe

The "Ludden" Cottage

I wonder why you were at such a high ISO and used flash? Your EXIF suggests flash was used but it is not apparent. A bit of dodging on rhe heavier shadows, possibly but I think you needed a bit more in frame. The kettle acts as one subject, on a frame edge and pointing outwards. The boots are another centre of interest.

A bit wider view for me to set the scene better.

Paul

By: ArildMoe

Sargent Quackers by ajnaaddict

Sargent Quackers

Willie, as ever, covers most things. You have spot metering set on automatic. Do you fully understand how spot metering works?

It is not wise to use spot metering with licking the reading in. You must spot meter from a tone that equates to an 18% grey or you will under or over expose. It is the most accurate method if used correctly.

UK green grass is very close to that value. Otherwise meter, lock the reafing with half pressure on the release, recompise and shoot.

Paul

Paul

By: ajnaaddict

Sunrise for the soul by MrNature1

Sunrise for the soul

It is a strong image. The sun is a touch bright but the tonal range is beyond that of the sensor, hence the bright sun and very dense shadows. It is a pity the body of the tree on the bank were not visible, even if with a rim light.

It might lift with the dodge tool but could easily loose contrast.

Paul

By: MrNature1

Old Man in Kitchen by missus

Old Man in Kitchen

A fine image making good use of what modern gear can do. You should not be using AdobeRGB for general photography. It is meant solely for professional hard copy printing services. The colour gamut is greater than normal sRGB.

All monitors, TV's and printing services are set up for sRGB. Set that unless you are actually producing the file for a pro printing house

Paul

By: missus

Problems! by paulbroad

Problems!

Interesting point. I stopped sending stuff to local newspapers many years ago. They didn't pay! A bit mercenary I know, but if they want good quality work, they should pay for it and not expect it for free, or, at best with a credit.

Once had a disagreement with a local editor who approached me to act as a stringer for them. Film days, this was. Expected me to go to events when requested, using my film, fuel and time. Work to a deadlune and they would pay me 5 for each image used. About 20 now.

Guess what I said to him!

Paul

By: paulbroad

my reflection by joshuadsilva

my reflection

Could be so good but you are a touch over exposed and the sharpness is off a little. I suspect hand held and probably a big crop. This is not a close up, it is a telephoto shot.

You need camera support for such images if possible, a tripod or monopod and often, manual focus. Failing that, a faster shutter speed to avoid camera movement.

Paul

By: joshuadsilva

Trees!! by MrNature1

Trees!!

Did you intent this huge dramatic level of grain? The effect here is interesting, but you do not say that you intentionally processed this the have grain. Enlarged, the image is actually breaking up considerably and it would npbe interesting to see it at full resolution.

I, to, think you have grossly over sharpened an image that may not have been sharp enough in the first pkace. Degree of sharpening should not be obvious and is different depending on if you are using the image on screen or printing. You always sharoen an image more for a print.

Paul

By: MrNature1

Show us a leg by Hardwicke

Show us a leg

This is a strange one. The basic idea and imafe is very good, but the background looks quite sharp and the right girks stripy leg looks sharp, yet yoy are at 1/1000 sec and there should be no movement blur. Strange!

Not sure why you are at such high ISO in bright sun? Not cindusuve to high quality. 400 should easily be enough with that lens fitted.

Paul

By: Hardwicke

Snake by Nino812

Snake

Nice image. I don't mind the head in thw mispddle but might have cropped in even tighter for added impact. The eye is sharp but, even at f8, depth of field is minimal. I would have liked a touch more depth and the tongue sharper, akthough that could be movement.

Looks like a european grass snake, but not sure.

Good strong image.

Paul

By: Nino812

Face of an Angel by moonbhuyan

Face of an Angel

Very well seen and generally well done. Mono works here too. I would just lIft the eye a tiny bit with the dodge tool to really pull the eye to that point.

Good stuff.

Paul

By: moonbhuyan

Vibrant waterhole in Etosha by pf

Vibrant waterhole in Etosha

For me, a fine general interest shot but just too much going on as a stand alone. There are dozens of subjects, all equally sharp and with nothing specific to focus on. The eye just goes all over the place.

I think you would do rather better having a single animal or group of animals as the subject with the remainder as a foil. This would need perspective and depth of fiekd control as well as, possibly, less animals.

So, in the circumstances, a fine general interest image.

Paul

By: pf

A yellow coloured house by xwang

A yellow coloured house

Not surw what the problem is, Jas. Looks OK to me. A nice image of the house but I would correct verticals on this one. The sky will be out of focus, naturally, and thus the pixel make up will be different to the sharp building.

I think you may be seeing a problem which is not there.

Paul

By: xwang

Art Nouveau staircase in side Le site du Petit Palais created for The exhibition 'Paris 1900' by TornadoTys

Art Nouveau staircase in side Le site du Petit Palais created for The exhibition 'Paris 1900'

Not a bad image at all straight from the camera. You must get the PC sorted. It's like being a craftsman with half your tools missing. You need the software to fnish off the image much as you would in the wet darkroom.

Paul

By: TornadoTys

Touch me not by nishant101

Touch me not

You really must not put a logo in the middle of a frane like that. I just look at the logo and, if I wanted to pinch the image, I would just clone it out.

An initial strong image but I find it a bit symetrical. I woyld have a bit less sky and a bit larger shell, but it is effective.

Paul

By: nishant101

Santorini by jerryiron

Santorini

Very nice and spot on exposure. There are a number of possible crops, all giving different decent images. The sunset is actually quite irdinary in the image, it is the foreground that makes this one, not the sky.

Paul

By: jerryiron

farm field by mogobiker

farm field

Really, mono is the wrong choice. It screams for well exposed colour. Here, I fear, either the conversion has produced a flat heavy image, or you are a long way under exposed, or both!

You are on manual. From what did you meter? It looks rather like the wide area of bright yellow has caused the under expisure, but your LCD should clearly show this.

Stay with colour and brighten it up. Might be a good image for pseudo infra red though.

Paul

By: mogobiker

A New Beginning by yaseen

A New Beginning

Minimalistic you have been. A bit too much for me I fear. I applaud the attempt at something different though but I think it needs a bit more dramatic lighting to add strength.

Paul

By: yaseen

Nicole by markst33

Nicole

Nice. No problem with flash on camera if it is correctly managed. It is often rather more convenient with children. You do what works.

Just might like a rather tighter composition to remove some of the blank space on each side. Leave a bit more space on the right than the left.

Paul

By: markst33

Could be a Screen Saver ! by TornadoTys

Could be a Screen Saver !

Quite nice with a spot on plane of sharpness. Your composition lacks balance with nothing much in the left of the image and everything on the right. That prime bloom would look better on the left third, otherwise very nice.

Paul

By: TornadoTys

White is his color by wpet1

White is his color

A good try because you have retauned feather detail. You really did need to get all that beak in and the eye needs brightening. There is no detail there and it thus looks dead.

You did not need such a high shutter speed. It is usually best to set your own values on shutrer or aperture priority rather than use camera presets.

Paul

By: wpet1

Dangerzoned by nishant101

Dangerzoned

Mono is not a good idea. Colour works better. Effective in many ways but it really does look luke two images. The lighted town and the hills with a definate duvision between. That gives a rather strange effect.

Paul

By: nishant101

MULTIPLE DISASTER by Tish1

MULTIPLE DISASTER

What a lot of comment. A great pity other images don't generate similar!

I'm at a loss, I fear. What is the actual intent? They oook like a series of errors. A bit strong, I kniw, but for multiple exposures you need a format and a plan to assembke a compositionally interesting image. You need to balance exposures between each frame or use black backgrounds to arrive at a final correct exposure.

However, experimentation must be applauded and you are certainly doing that.

Paul

By: Tish1

Trials by CaroleS

Trials

This is an effect image and, as such, works quite well. Not a problem that the flower head dloats as it is hardly meant to be realistic. Just needs a bit more space at the top. A dead central composition would work here.

Paul

By: CaroleS

Morning Light by peterjay78

Morning Light

The cintrast is high, but does give an impact. The problem for me is that she is on entirely the wrong side of the frame. She should be on the left third looking into the right two thirds. The cimposition is unbalanced.

Paul

By: peterjay78

You name it by dusfim

You name it

Not bad at all. There are signs of background replacement as there are jaggies at some joints. Not as good as some previous as it looks very rigid and posed. Eye contact might help.

Paul

By: dusfim

St Nectan's Church Hartland by peterjay78

St Nectan's Church Hartland

This is what HDR is best for but presets are not to be rwcomnendwd and it is slightly over done. The result are slightly unusual tones. You need slightly more brightness abd contrast.

Compositionally, whilst the roof will pull the attebpntion, I would have tilted the camera down a bit to get the isle in giving the shot a base.

Paul

By: peterjay78

Italy. The space #1 by jerryiron

Italy. The space #1

Fine image other than the top left. It is rarely a goid idea to have the brightwst part of an image at an edge or corner. I wonder if the top left might burn in a touch.

Paul

By: jerryiron

Stock Rod 46 by billmyl

Stock Rod 46

I do quite a bit if this. There is a single over riding problem, the out of focus white tires in the foregroynd obscure part of the car and pull the eye. Not an ideal viewpoint.

Otherwise not bad at shiwing sowdd. Just a touch over expised I think.

Paul

By: billmyl

A stroll by the river by milligan1

A stroll by the river

Be so careful with HDR. You realky should not use it unless absolutely necessary and you have not used it correctly here. HDR is to compress tonal range to within that that the sensor can handle yet your sky is too bright and over exposed. It should not be.

HDR is meant for things like dark interiors wirh bright lighting through windows. It often fails outdoors where subjects move. Outdoors, if you must use HDR, then the processing of a single RAW file to 3 exposures helps correct movement.

HDR often produces flat lack lustre results. Do not depend on it.

Having said all that, other than the sky, a nice shot.

PAUL

By: milligan1