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

Activity : Photo Comments


...Read More
  • Relaxing

    Something strange going on with the colours here and not, I suspect, just because of the glass.

    Using CaptureOne, I couldn't seem to adjust the white balance as I'd like to be able to and reverting to using Lightroom simply made it worse.

    I finally adjusted the colours manually using the saturation tool, then some added vibrance and although I still think I ought to be able to do better, it is, I hope, a bit of an improvement.

    I've uploaded a mod.

    Hope this helps.

    • 8 Nov 2017 9:20PM
  • Attentive observation

    I rather like this, as it is.
    It has a surreal, somehow, "other worldly" feel about it.
    For me, the thing that really makes this shot work is the inclusion of the shoes at the RHS.
    As for its composition, I'm probably the last person that you should be asking for advice as I follow no guidelines at all but I'm sure others will be happy to advise.
    • 28 Oct 2017 8:38PM
  • Carefully censored...

    Quote: I realised that jumping up before submerging gets me lower and less likely to float away!

    Try exhaling (instead of the more traditional, inhaling) before you submerge.

    You won't be down there for long enough that it will affect your health but you'll be a lot less buoyant.
    • 15 Oct 2017 6:54PM
  • Nocturnal Migration

    Quote:When everyone agrees with everyone, everyone fails to learn anything.

    Hi Richard,
    I'll pinch just one line to quote but you've said much more there that makes perfect sense.
    I'm a huge advocate of disregarding the (so-called) rules and it's refreshing to meet a kindred spirit.
    I won't post any critique of your image because I'd have nothing to add to what's already been said.
    Good luck!
    • 8 Oct 2017 7:48PM
  • Apple Blossom

    Just a quick point re. auto WB.
    I know I'm in the minority here but I (deliberately) use it all the time.
    I find that it does a sufficiently good job that most of the time, that I don't need to correct anything and if I do, it's a simple task. Even Jpegs., back in the days when I shot them, usually respond well.
    My reason for this preference is that if you're continually fiddling with the settings; I know it's not always necessary but it does occur, one day (and it will happen!) you're going to forget to unfiddle them and you'll end up with an unrepeatable shot in garishly awful colours.
    I'm not for a moment suggesting that my way's better than anyone else's but it's food for thought.
    • 1 Oct 2017 7:07PM
  • Messerschmitt BF/ME-109

    That's a "real" Bf. too.
    Not one of the Spanish "Buchon" lookalikes.
    • 1 Oct 2017 6:55PM
  • Butterfly

    A somewhat intriguing image, sadly, without any explanation or EXIF. details.

    "Dragonfly" is a pretty generic term for flies like these and I wonder if this one, a genuine Dragonfly or a similar species, was standing on water; hence the refection?
    As an image, it benefits from a touch more exposure although doing so globally does degrade the reflection of the wings a little. To do it properly would require a bit more time. An increase in vibrance boosts the yellow body parts too.
    It's very tight on the LHS and there's an abundance of space at the bottom, which can easily be adjusted.
    Also, it really lacks critical sharpness. Something that's essential in shots like these.
    Overall, not a bad shot but to be able to help, we really need to know more about it.

    Hope this helps.
    • 1 Oct 2017 6:42PM
  • rabbit Canyon

    This works well for what it is but the biggest problem that I have with it isn't one of technicalities or image quality but the fact that, without some description, I'd never have known what it's a shot of.

    If the sandy bit at the bottom; I assume that it's a path, was to be cropped off, this would make a wonderful abstract.
    • 1 Oct 2017 5:36PM
  • I love my snuggie

    I know nothing about that lens, so I'm afraid I can't help you there.
    However, whatever its provenance, it's done a good job here!
    The histogram confirms that the image is under exposed and it could do with a slight rotation; both addressed in my mod.
    Apart from that, it's a wonderful capture of a smiling young lady!
    • 1 Oct 2017 5:29PM
  • plane

    Curtis P40 Warhawk to the Americans; Curtis P40 Tomahawk to just about everybody else.

    Later versions became the Curtis P40 Kittyhawk.

    The large one here's an Avro Lancaster.
    • 27 Sep 2017 9:11PM
  • Harbour of Rotterdam

    There really is an excellent image in there, just trying to get out.
    It desperately needs an increase in contrast; select black and white thresholds and see the difference!
    This would be very well received in the Critique gallery.
    • 16 Sep 2017 9:29PM
  • Internet danger!

    As Paul has said, a well thought out and completed image.
    There's a colour cast to it, which is easily removed in software but what really lets it down is the curtain hook in the background.
    Also, there's a small triangular "hole" in the curtain which, I imagine, shouldn't be there.
    Hope this helps.
    • 16 Sep 2017 7:18PM
  • DH Vampire.

    Quote:the variable weather, which prevented the BBMF memorial flight attending

    As an aside and nothing to do with your shot Paul; the loss of the BBMF was probably not as great as you might have thought as all their Merlin engined aircraft are currently grounded.
    They're still flying a later, Griffon engined Spitfire and most of their other aircraft are airworthy but sadly the real crowd pleasers; the Merlin powered Spitfires, Hurricanes and Lancaster are all out of commission.
    • 14 Sep 2017 9:42PM
  • Morris

    Hi Si,
    I went through a phase of capturing these half-in-half-out of the light shots and I've got quite a few.
    The face here's a little bright and might benefit from a touch more contrast. The darker parts will darken accordingly but that won't matter.
    I'd also be inclined to get rid of the area of shirt; his right shoulder, in the shadows. That patch of black negative space works well.
    It does need to be a little sharper too but sometimes that's more easily said than done. I suspect that this was one of those occasions!
    Hope this helps.
    • 9 Sep 2017 12:28PM
  • Soft image 2

    It's hard to know what to suggest.

    Certainly, using those settings, my D90 would have produced a better result than this.
    • 31 Aug 2017 10:09PM
  • ww1 plane

    Quote:ww1 plane

    Not quite.
    It's a "DeHavilland Tiger Moth".
    First flown in, I believe, 1931.
    • 24 Aug 2017 10:22PM
  • Flames in the Dark.

    I rather like this and I'm finding it hard to suggest ways in which to improve it.
    It's crooked by a fair degree and straightening it also removes some of the top of the blown area at the top of the flames.
    Doing so does leave it looking as if I've chopped off too much though. Given time, I might modify the remainder of the flame to a believable "tip".
    I've also cropped it to 9x16 which also removes some of the (fairly) negative space at the bottom, focusing attention on the burning torches.
    Other than that . . . !
    Hope this helps.
    • 16 Aug 2017 7:07PM
  • Tiger 2

    I've arrived late here, having spent a little while producing a mod. and everyone's turned up and beaten me to it!
    As has already been suggested, I've cropped it, partly to push the tiger over a bit and partly to lose some of the background.
    My feedback re. the colouring simply echoes Willie's and Dudler's, although I think my mod's a different colour altogether.
    I simply used "auto tone" and "auto colour" in CS6 with a curves adjustment, then an application of a sunny filter, at low opacity.
    The biggest alteration that I've made was to remove the branch.
    To get rid of the it I used the spot healing tool.
    Then, to repair the damage, the whiskers and the bit beneath the chin, on the right, are actually the same bits as on the left, lifted, and flipped, and cloned (etc.) to fit.
    Finally, I turned up the brightness a little.
    Hope this helps.

    • 12 Aug 2017 9:45PM
  • Zebras

    Quote:Ps I don't see a John here nor any mods by him

    Dudler's name is "John".
    And I have to agree with he, Paul and Willie have said.
    The histogram tells us that the image is underexposed and we can see that there are issues with focus.
    The reason that the lashes on the farthest eye and the hairs on the RHS look sharper is that that is where the plane of focus lies. Everything in front of that area isn't focused correctly. I can barely see the lashes on the closest eye.
    • 8 Aug 2017 9:33PM
  • Pushing The Boundries

    If you don't have unlimited access to dozens of racing cyclists; no, neither do I (!), try to find a spot near the exit to a busy roundabout and practice on the traffic as it moves past you.
    It shouldn't be travelling so quickly that you'll struggle to keep up but will be moving quickly enough to provide you with the movement and the blurred background that you're looking for.
    Alternatively, cross the road, or go around the corner and shoot the traffic as it's braking on the entry to the roundabout.
    Moving cars look much the same, going in or coming out but on the approach side, look out for motorcyclists arriving at speed, braking hard and counter steering.
    Sunday mornings are a favourite time for that!
    Good luck.
    • 8 Aug 2017 8:40PM
  • Arundel Castle

    A pleasant, serene scene, well captured and a place that I know fairly well
    There's something very odd about the colour though.
    You don't tell us how you processed this, or what you were aiming to achieve but I'm guessing that you've used a pre-set (or two) and perhaps a software filter of some kind to apply a painted effect (?) but that very green cast is, to my mind, just too much.
    I've uploaded a mod. in which I've used the colour balance tool, in CS6, to reduce it but there's still a somewhat surreal look to the result.
    Hope this helps.
    • 7 Aug 2017 7:58PM
  • on top of the world

    What's that in his right hand . . . ?
    • 6 Aug 2017 9:13PM
  • "Sally B" B17 Flying Fortress

    That's "Flying Fortress".

    The Boeing B29 was the "Superfortress".
    • 29 Jul 2017 8:38PM
  • Duxford 2016 - Spitfire Mk 5b

    Everyone's favourite aircraft . . . !

    I've added a mod. in which I've simply used curves to increase contrast and liven up the colours somewhat, then smart sharpened it.

    And that's it!
    • 24 Jul 2017 5:10PM
  • Bushuisslvis

    What's the bridge called . . . ?
    • 2 Jul 2017 9:06PM
  • TYRA

    I don't bother to comment very often these days but this really caught my eye.
    As for critique, I think it's all been said.
    I do, however, agree with Paul. I too prefer the warmer version.
    • 28 Jun 2017 8:26PM
  • she wanted magic, i gave her magic!

    I'd just like to reaffirm what's been said already and congratulations on a job well done!

    With regard to the joint between the trees and the sky, it can be a tedious, seemingly, thankless task and Pamelajean's advice above, is sound but given that your background is almost completely; deliberately, out of focus the blurred join on the right hand side looks normal.
    If you'd removed those two or so trees that reach above the horizon on the left, before you added the new sky, you'd have had a much smoother join to work with and coincidentally would have avoided that hot spot. I guess that's the sun.

    I've tried varying adjusting the warmth by varying degrees and I reckon that the effect will always be subjective. Try as I might, I can't say that any of my attempts look any better than your original.

    There's a tiny halo around your daughter's head which can be easily dealt with but overall I think this is an excellent attempt at taking an idea and turning it into something, well, magical!.

    Hope this helps.

    • 2 Jun 2017 9:43PM

    Overdoing the noiseware gives that effect.
    • 11 May 2017 8:07PM
  • Peek a Bo

    Good to "see" you; it's been a long time.
    How are you?
    • 3 May 2017 9:38PM
  • Daffodil White Daffodil Yellow

    That "save for web" tool is quite destructive.
    The theory that images displayed on websites should only be of low resolution and merely adequate quality works a lot of the time but I fear that Photoshop sometimes takes it too far.
    • 17 Apr 2017 10:54AM