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 Body Out Now! Extra 10% off code EPHZ1016!




Hope you like the variety I have tried to bring in my portfolio. Most of the images have been put here for comment and that is always appreciated. I spend quite a bit of time in the Critique section and I know many visit my portfolio because I have passed comment on their work. Hope you think my work is of a reasonable standard.

I know that, even with 50 years experience there are still things to learn and that technology changes quickly.
...Read More

A quick view of paulbroad's recent activity.

  • blue pictures

    Well, it is different and I applaud the attempt.

    I fear I find it very confusing and also feel a detail shot might have been better. The very bright bits in the foreground clash with the grey/blue pattern effect. It is rarely good to have brightest highlights on an edge.

    • 21 Oct 2016 8:16AM
  • Pink

    The idea is good. Crop the top a bit and the right to remove the dark strip. You are slightly under exposed giving that dullness. Brighten up and add a touch of contrast. Just needs that bit of impact.

    • 21 Oct 2016 8:13AM
  • Lenticular Clouds - B&W Version

    This is a natural history record, and really should be in colour these days. The quality is not good. Rather mushy and unsharp. I suspect the phone camera struggled to find anything to focus on. The tonal range makes the mountains look like lumps of coal. I think you tried too hard.

    • 21 Oct 2016 8:10AM
  • Attempts at Portraiture

    There is nothing wrong with the basic image. The background is subdued and what would be expected outside a pub and the expression is good. The only problem to me is the tonal range. a bit flat and almost a weak HDR. The problem with not quite getting the RAW conversion correct. If you have the JPG, have a look at it. Does it have a better tonal range, Is the contrast more lively.

    The great problem with RAW is processing. It does give thebest results but only if correctly processed. Shoot RAW + Best JPG and take note of the JPG. They are usually not that far off.

    • 21 Oct 2016 8:07AM
  • blue gate

    a perfectly good image of it's type but a touch under exposed and thus appears flat, lacking that sunlit brightness I would expect. Auto exposure and no compensation? You are lucky it's not more under exposed!

    Brighten things up a bit.

    Wonder why you HAD to upgrade your Sigma? Old one faulty or just a need for the new model? i'm a great believer in staying with the gear I know unless there is a real change in spec that I can make use of.

    • 20 Oct 2016 3:49PM
  • Port De St Goustan, Auray

    The composition is good and the content interesting. The light was obviously very low and it shows in a rather flat image. Just lift the brightness a bit until it looks right, increasing the contrast a touch if necessary to further boost impact.

    A nice image.

    • 20 Oct 2016 3:44PM
  • Traditional Market in Indonesia.

    Willie sums it up in a short statement. Wrong technique. The contrasts are too much and the chap is not very sharp. you have first class gear, but you don't really seem to consider the subject and techniques available before wading in.

    I would have been at ISO 1600 or 3200 here. Little light and and flash not the ideal answer.

    • 20 Oct 2016 3:39PM

No profile comments.