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

USA Landscape Photographer of the Year 2016 open to entries NOW!




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.

  • Sunrise

    Such images always look good to the eye, but often do not photograph well. this has no subject and a lot of water. It lacks a strong composition to give longevity. Many sunsets need to be considered a background with something in the foreground to act as compositional anchor.

    • 30 Aug 2016 7:55AM
  • Port Of Liverpool Building, one of the "Three Graces" Waterfront Landmark

    The building really does need it's base. If you are going to cut it off, get in close and look up with a wide angle. Emphasise the effect. Tones look like a saturated polarised image with deep blue and a few areas almost burnt out? A bit strange and I assume it is processing.

    • 30 Aug 2016 7:53AM
  • Sing Gompa

    Whilst Willie answers the question, but you are somewhat over exposed in the first place and that is the real problem. How are you metering to arrive at your manual exposure, because the camera is telling you wrongly. Expose for the bright areas, then lighten the shadows later with the dodge tool.

    • 30 Aug 2016 7:49AM
  • Lake District

    Anyone can make suggestions. Opinion is personal and valid. Lack of experience does not effect taste. For me, atmospheric haze is part of such images, but there is a degree of over exposure and flare here with a resulting magenta colour cast. Quite honestly, I think the subject lighting at the time was not going to help and you are stuck with that.

    • 30 Aug 2016 7:45AM
  • The Clown

    Willie covers everything. Slightly under, slightly soft and some background adjustment. The subject is good, but the technical detail needs work. I would take a bit off the top, too.

    • 30 Aug 2016 7:40AM
  • Charne

    Quite nice. Should you remove skin blemishes? Depends on the purpose of the image. If those blemishes are permanent, then the image is no longer a true likeness in terms of identification, but in terms of beautification, it can work wonders.

    Depends. If the subject is happy. So be it.

    Sharpness is on that near eye as it should be, but is not critically so. Again, the very slight softness may well be an advantage and suite the image.

    • 29 Aug 2016 7:54AM
  • Common whitetail

    I* do wish people would stop[ putting 'great shot' and actually look at the image! This is a reasonable effort in comparison to some, but it suffers from both over exposure and some camera movement. The white tail is almost completely burnt out, so there is the over exposure. best to expose for that area then lighten the rest during processing if necessary.

    the edge is off the sharpness right across the frame. This is pure natural history record, and as such at least something must be pin sharp. Usually the head. Macro magnifies and 1/80 sec is just not fast enough for a 200mm setting even with image stabilisation. Image stabilisers do not guarantee sharpness, they help reduce shake.

    You should have been at ISO 400 or even greater. Whilst low ISO gives the best quality, that is not the case when it results in a lack of resolution due to movement.

    • 29 Aug 2016 7:48AM

No profile comments.