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!

Seamuscamp

Connect to User

loading
03/01/2013 - 6:39 PM

Roker Pier Panorama

Roker Pier PanoramaPaul,

What a good eye you have! I've uploaded a version with adjusted contrast, to add drama to the long wall and more detail to lighthouse. Just a matter of personal taste.

Seamus
01/02/2012 - 8:25 PM

corn stooks

corn stooksThree points to consider:

1 There is a blue cast that shows up in the gable ends and distorts colour values in sky, grass etc
2 The "bits" in the sky are dreadful. Is this a composite?
3 The roof of the car! Should be cropped or cloned out - or ideally composed out originally
23/10/2011 - 5:29 PM

Al Azhar Mosque

Al Azhar MosqueVery interesting perspective, let down by the processing but also by your settings. Looking at the Exif, ISO is very low (80), shutter speed is fast (1/800) and an exposure compensation of -2/3 is extraordinary. I think this must mean you exposed for the sky rather than for the shadow and so had problems extracting the shadow details - so the colour problems and the eccentric halo.

For photos with such a huge potential dynamic range, you should either compromise in favour of the shadow; or resort to exposure bracketing and software merging.

I also agree with Frank - branding should always lie outside the image - even more important with an image with religious significance.

Seamus
24/08/2009 - 3:29 PM

On the run

On the runThough I like the implied movement in the background, and the blurred feet and body, I think the blurred head spoils this. A sharp profile and the rest of the body motion blurred would have been great, but as it is, it looks out-of-focus. But then wild animals aren't biddable. I wouldn't delete it - it represents a memory

Seamus
04/07/2009 - 10:27 PM

Time for a Munch

Time for a MunchI think you have done a reasonable job with the equipment at hand - the critique may seem over the top, particularly as I myself try not to use flash other than as infill. There will be many more expert on this site

Two main problems:
1 The throw of your flash didn't illuminate the badgers' bodies
2 Undiffused on-camera flash tends to produce undetailed highlights

Supposing the flash output is fixed, to increase its effectiveness you might use a bigger aperture than F8; you might consider a reflector(s) of some sort (hoping the badgers are accommodating) - even a piece of cardboard cover ed in cooking foil can do a job outdoors; you should consider getting the light source closer to the subject. Diffusion could be achieved as simple as a piece of translucent white plastic (eg a milk bottle) over the flash head, or even a piece of greaseproof paper. Unfortunately diffusion is likely to reduce flash performance.

An alternative aid would be to locate a diffused flash off-camera - perhaps remotely activated. If on-camera, get as close as you can and set your camera appropriately

You've done all the hard work to get them there and gain trust; so if you continue with the feeding, they'll probably come back. So you'll be able to experiment.

I'm lucky that my animal photography is largely confined to horses, dogs and cats which operate in daylight. Even then white hair and black hair provide challenges. It took me a long time to work out that it was (natural) light that was causing my problems

Some useful sites:
http://www.gentleye.com/photo/photoart/advflash/index.html http://www.sederquist.com/claflash.html

Keep working at it
09/06/2009 - 6:59 PM

Habour stillness

Habour stillnessI think there's the guts of something very good here but I find the bottom element somehow at odds with the dominant blue tone. Moreover the bottom element does little to enhance either the story or the composition. Interesting command of technique.

Seamus
26/05/2009 - 9:09 PM

Hello there

Hello thereInteresting how different people see different things. I don't like the cloned-out version - too little of interest in all that grass. I do like Willie's portrait view; and I agree with him that sharpening is needed and that the colour is a bit off. Some software (eg Paint Shop Pro using bicubic) can lose sharpness when resized - how does your uploaded version compare with the original. I find that my own head-on shots of horses always seem proportionally "wrong" so I try to get a bit of profile to give better definition of head and body
shape.

Seamus
20/04/2009 - 10:30 AM

Spring has Sprung

Spring has SprungTwo adverse points.
The two isolated blooms are a distraction.
The balance between the two subjects could be better - lower and closer, making it a portrait of the flowers with church and sky as background would (for me) have been more interesting.

Despite that, the mono church/sky and coloured blooms is a good idea, well executed.

I always find that towers with butresses never look quite vertical.