Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here

PortraitPro 17 with Background Editing Out Now! EXTRA 10% OFF code EPZRS17



Welcome to my offerings which I will try to make as interesting and as ununusal as possible.
...Read More

A quick view of Barney64's recent activity.

  • fledgling woodpecker

    Nice image desperately in need of croppping.
    • 23 May 2012 1:28PM
  • Common Ant Sipping Sweet Sap from a Camelia Bud

    This was entered into a local competition and the idiotic judge (who really should know better) commented that he would have liked to see the legs all in focus. Perhaps the laws of optics are different on his planet!
    • 23 May 2012 11:37AM
  • 3D Synthetic Cross Eye Stereogram

    I'd be very interested to learn about your focus stacking set-up. I use a travelling microscope that cost me pennies on eBay and the results are absolutely stunning. Cleaning the little critters is a pain, do you have a special brew that you use? I have some RMS lenses for swapping, how about you? Etc., etc..
    • 26 Apr 2012 12:23AM
  • 3D Synthetic Cross Eye Stereogram

    Excellent work, especially the clean-up of the fly and the inevitble focus-stacking "mush". The 3D is parallel view and maybe a bit too much separation as it extends out of the window. Nonetheless, excellent.
    • 26 Apr 2012 12:00AM
  • Saline Sweep

    I think this is a case of the Emperor's new clothes.

    I've looked at this several times now and I still have problems with it. Yes, it's fundamentally a terrific image but, my-oh-my, you have been so wickedly heavy-handed with the saturation, contrast and vignetting. My guess is that you are using Lightroom and you've over-cooked it somewhat. This now looks more like a scene from Alpha Centauri than Cornwall. If that was your intention then I am sorry, but you have missed the very essence of what you have so successfully captured here.

    Technically there are some quite serious faults. The yellow in the clouds is completely burnt out in places, always a problem colour with digital and, it seems, especially for Canon hardware. Similarly the sweeping water in the near foreground is burnt pure white whereas the laws of reflection optics state that it should have some of the colour of the sky. But the main fault that really makes this look "odd" though, is the fact that the reflections in the water are the same brightness or brighter than the sky itself which is impossible (unless the laws of physics were suspended for the day) and flags-up overly zealous post-processing.

    Perhaps I am getting old - I hate loud music unless it is my own choice, yet everyone else seems to think that cranking up the volume compensates for poor quality. I think the same is now creeping into photography courtesy of Adobe at al. The trend is very much veering towards "more is good". Well it ain't! Behind this garish presentation is a truly lovely, subtle, well -composed image quietly weeping to itself and desperate to be released.

    Turn down the volume - let's hear the music.
    • 28 Feb 2012 12:30PM
  • blackbird

    A nice image and potentially a great one. Three elements could usefully be attended to:

    Eliminate the light rectangle in the background at the tip of the tail. A light area at the edge tends to draw the eye away and even out of the pricture. In this case it is also a major distraction.

    Dodge the dark lower left hand corner of the blurred background. The background in the lower third of the frame provides an excellent foundation for the whole composition but this dark area unbalances it a bit and subtracts impact from the bird.

    If possible dodge the bird's shoulder and belly just enough to bring out some of the detail lurking in there. My screen is set a bit bright but is otherwise calibrated and I can see no detail there at present, which is a great shame.

    A lovely eye - don't you dare touch that! I think this is a female or is it just a trick of the light? We have a shortage of blackbirds but masses of bluetits, goldfinches and chaffiinchs. If you are local - fancy swapping a couple? Smile
    • 23 Feb 2012 1:35AM
  • GOLDIE 2

    Excellent shot, but, in spite of all the foregoing comments, I feel it is not as sharp as it could be with this camera-lens combination.

    May I suggest that you ditch the teleconverter, they do nothing at all for image quality - just give you a bigger image that is probably not as good a one taken without, enlarged to the same size and cropped. You've got 18Mpx to play with so there's no shortage of resolution.

    ISO 1000, f5.6 and 1/640th - are you sure about that? Must have been a very dark day.

    How about dropping the ISO, your camera's noise rises quite noticeably beyond ISO400, and if the light will allow stopping down to f8 or f11 - this lens can take it. That'll bring you down to around 1/250th which should be fast enough for a goldfinch as they tend to stay reasonably still when perched or eating. Using RAW you can always crank the exposure back up again later in post processing without any of the grim penatlies of a high ISO.

    This should give you a very much improved image with needle sharp focus from the tip of the tail to tip of the beak. It would also resolve a little more of the background which is a bit amorphous at the moment.

    In short, a fine image that deserves a little more detail.
    • 6 Feb 2012 3:57PM

No profile comments.