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

Activity : Photo Comments



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
  • Robin Red Breast

    This is really rather well done in most respects. It is not easy to get such small birds sharp with a really long lens and this is - mostly - more than adequately sharp. Blown up to 100% the beak is a tiny bit off, but not enough to worry about much and the general quality leaves a lot of such shots we see, standing.

    This should demonstrate to other super zoom users what actually can be done.

    Doesn't look under exposed on my screen, but I would lighten the eye a touch with the dodge tool set very small.

    The weak point is the composition. I can imagine what is below his feet is why you cropped like this, but it leaves a very out of balance shot.

    • 23 Feb 2017 5:21PM
  • Clouds over the Langdales

    It is quite well done.I, too, like to see a specific focal point in most images, although the highlights do act as a strong point for the eye. Possibly just a touch too bright?

    I have some doubt about the road. It is right on an edge and leads nowhere, yet is also a very strong point for the eye. The classical use of roads or tracks is as a lead in, as a lazy 'S' and a compositional lead in. Here, that doesn't occur.

    • 23 Feb 2017 5:14PM
  • Music instumnts

    This is rather nice. Well controlled, if slightly pastel tones which suite. Loose that terrible logo, it really does distract!

    I wonder about your choice of settings. For a set piece like this I would have been at ISO200 for maximum quality, about f11 to get the best results from the lens then a matching shutter speed.

    • 23 Feb 2017 5:06PM
  • Cozy Pint

    I would leave it generally alone. To me, it does not want to be lighter or the deep saturation, which helps to make this, will be diluted. All the above are personal preferences and mine are that it works as it is. I might take a bit of time to clone out the cables on the right.

    • 23 Feb 2017 5:02PM
  • Insta phone ge

    Relatively sharp considering the shutter speed,but that will be the tiny focal length and a phone. I would crop the very bright spotlights as they are eye pulling, then just increase density a bit for richer colours.

    Better than man would produce with an expensive DSLR!

    • 22 Feb 2017 6:50PM
  • Celebration Cake

    Not a bad effort at all. The exposure suggests very little light and a tripod. The result of the wide aperture is that the front corner of the cake is soft. I would have focused a touch further forward - better front sharp and back soft. But, ideally, a bit more light and f5.6 or f8 with careful focusing.

    • 21 Feb 2017 8:46AM
  • lunch time

    A pleasant image with strong lighting. possibly a bit too strong! There is slight burn out on the paw and rock which are both rather too bright. I tend to agree with Willie re-quality. There is a slight softness which may be the high ISO - is this cropped - you imply not.

    I have a 7D and I am slightly disappointed with it's high ISO performance. A friend has the same problem with the Mk. 1 and he is using a 300mm L lens with 1.4 canon convertor. Is your lens new, or is it the old 100/400, new to you? The old version was push/pull zooming, the new twist. There is a performance difference. Try and go down at least one stop. F8 will improve lens performance, especially on the old model 100/400.

    The high ISO performance with my CSC Fuji system is rather better.

    The composition would be better with a little less to the right and a little more on the left. The squirrels head is too near the left side.

    You will need to use post processing. We needed to in the darkroom, and almost every digital image will benefit from a few tweaks of density, contrast, tones and sharpness - particularly the latter. It is part of the workflow.

    • 21 Feb 2017 8:42AM
  • Rose

    As above. A perfectly acceptable pictorial record. It does not need to be darker - I assume the rose is pink? To get more impact, then some directional lighting, preferably partly from the back.

    • 21 Feb 2017 8:01AM
  • First ray of sun on sea beach...

    The content is first rate and the general effect is good. You used spot metering and I'm not sure what you metered from, obviously, but you are under exposed. A brighter image has more impact and you will still retain the silhouettes. The degree of under exposure gives some muddiness to the tones which subdue the effect.

    • 21 Feb 2017 7:58AM
  • Beauty in the Mist

    It is quite attractive in a way, but the weather is just too bad for a really decent shot. It is misty, but also very drab. Mist always looks better in such cases when there is sun and mist. I think I would have gone up in ISO a bit in such a situation. That would improve on the 1/40 shutter speed, the use of which is just apparent, and up the contrast a touch.

    • 21 Feb 2017 7:55AM
  • Stoat in Ambush!

    Those that remember my early problems with funny parallel lines in out of focus areas with this lens will see the filter was definitely the problem. Issue gone! The Fuji 100/400 is quite superb as is the matching 1.4 convertor to the point where a couple of very keen Canon users I know are having serious thoughts!

    My quality is as good as there's, if not better, and my gear is half the size, weight and much cheaper, if still not terribly cheap.

    • 20 Feb 2017 2:27PM
  • The Osprey are coming.

    Not drones, John, Osprey VTO aircraft, much loved by the US military as a cross between a helicopter and conventional transport. Bell Boeing B-22 tilt rotor.

    A good idea, but so obviously the same aircraft several times with propellers that look stationary and a very artificial sky. You need several different aircraft viewpoints and a less processed sky to achieve a realistic shot, if realistic was what you wanted.

    there are a few white marks about from the montage you need to erase.

    • 20 Feb 2017 8:14AM
  • Judge Rinder at Porthleven!

    My comments are much as last time. The content is superb, with excellent composition, but the end product is flat and dull with a general softness. Difficult subject, I know, but this is technique somewhere. You are using spot metering! What are you metering from, because I suspect under exposure.

    The metered area must be equivalent to 18% grey or you will need to correct the reading. If you are really serious about this subject, as you obviously are, I would be investing in a hand meter with incident light attachment. Any through the lens system will struggle with such subjects without compensating.

    The light falling on your subject, depending on sun position, is likely to be blue/green too due to the water and may need a little correction in software. I would up the ISO a bit to get a smaller aperture, too. I have just sold my long Sigma, but the cheaper long zooms, both Sigma and Tamron, are not at there best wide open.

    • 19 Feb 2017 8:40AM
  • Patterns

    Makes my eyes go a bit strange! Interesting in a way, initially, but then not holding attention. There is a very strange effect where it appears sharp on the left and not so on the right? Depth of field - were you at an angle. It does need to be critically sharp right across.

    • 19 Feb 2017 8:31AM
  • thars my dinner

    Well, it is a really good try and, believe me, I know how difficult this type of shot is. However, I see quite a few flying bird shots on other sites, and ideally this just needs to be a bit sharper on the bird. I suspect quite a blow up, which will not help, but I would have been at ISO400 or even 800 and f8 or 11.

    You are asking a lot of the focusing system to get it sharp at full aperture and the 7D will perform perfectly well at higher ISO giving plenty of shutter speed and aperture to freeze movement and give some depth of field back up.

    The bird will not be travelling as fast as it can in these circumstances. You should not really be on spot metering with an auto setting and aerial shots. Far better to shoot a few tests to get the correct exposure, then set manual.

    • 19 Feb 2017 8:28AM
  • Disdain

    Well seen and composed. this works better as the frame is nicely filled with detail. There is slight softness, which could simply be compression effects and there is that very slight pastel effect in your colours again, although increasing contrast would not help detail in highlights, such as his trainers.

    • 19 Feb 2017 8:21AM
  • Queen Victoria Statue in Gore Park

    The lighting is against you on a dark coloured statue like this. There are a few very bright highlights on the right and a lot of dense shadow. The old girl also looks to be falling over backwards. I know you are looking up, but in a case like this, a record, I would correct that.

    Better on a cloudy bright day with lower lighting contrast, or try switching the flash on, even on a compact.

    • 19 Feb 2017 8:19AM
  • The wreck

    Don't assume negative. This is quite interesting, a good viewpoint and worth discussion.

    It is a touch under exposed giving an overall darkness. You could have done with part of the hull nearer a correct tone, with the remainder and surroundings then falling away. More of a spotlight effect. The thing is, once you have taken the trouble to set up, shoot a few dozen frames. Alter flash power and target on each one.


    • 19 Feb 2017 8:15AM
  • Lost In The Mist

    Not many comments? There is an instant strength there, but I don't find it lasts long. The composition is very central and, I know I keep commenting, but a bit soft. I would expect the tree silhouette to be harsh and sharp, even in these conditions, then the softness in the background. It is possible the auto focus had problems with the lack of contrast.

    • 19 Feb 2017 8:12AM
  • Snow Moon over Neath Abbey Ruins

    The idea is good, but the image is very soft indeed. A long way out of focus due, I would think, to camera movement. You are using a compact and a very long shutter speed. You would have needed a firm tripod and remote shutter release to avoid any blur.

    • 18 Feb 2017 5:35PM
  • Bass Rock from Yellowcraig

    The composition and content are interesting, but the image appears very contrasty and harsh? Over saturated to quite a degree I think. Have you done quite a bit of processing?

    • 18 Feb 2017 8:16AM
  • Watching the world go by

    Very interesting and the content makes you look. Central composition but it works here. Might just like a touch more contrast as the tones are all quite pastel with no true black.

    • 18 Feb 2017 8:14AM
  • Sun set..

    It is quite under exposed due to shooting into the sun. The problem with many sunsets and sunrises is that they look great to the eye, but do not record well. Everything is very central and there is no real subject, just the sun orb.

    You need a foreground subject to act as focal point, then the sunset becomes the background, a foil to the image.

    • 17 Feb 2017 6:10PM
  • Shadows

    It's the front fork that looks wrong and an odd one out. Three perfect forks needed, then straighten up the shadows to vertical and come in much tighter. Despite the light, you need much less above.

    • 17 Feb 2017 6:07PM
  • Grey Squirrel.

    No, Tosh, my back garden! We have a stand of firs across the back about 60 feet from the house and they live in there and aid the bird feeders.

    How are you?

    • 17 Feb 2017 6:03PM
  • Glenveagh Winter Sunset

    Quite strong but the logo is the strongest thing - you must loose that, or make it MUCH smaller. No EXIF, so very difficult to comment.

    The part tree, middle bottom is unfortunate, compositionally and pulls my eye and the overall quality is a bit strange? Rather heavy and gritty with very blocked shadows. The EXIF would have helped understand this. I suspect very heavy processing, possibly on a rather under exposed image?

    • 17 Feb 2017 8:32AM
  • Veiw finder

    A very good idea, but as above, the view is not very inspiring. The window leads in nicely, but there is nothing much to look at. Just up the contrast a touch, too.

    • 17 Feb 2017 8:28AM
  • Dozmary Pool, Bodmin Moor

    Not normally my kind of thing, but this is pretty good, although I. too, prefer John's interpretation, so this might be telling you something. there is a sort of white curve, bottom left. Has to go.

    • 17 Feb 2017 8:27AM
  • Female House Sparrow.

    This is actually not quite pin sharp compared to my other stuff of the same type. However, look at the shutter speed at 840mm - 1/27 sec. Marvellous thing, stabilisation.

    • 17 Feb 2017 8:22AM
  • Aloft

    A very difficult subject well done. I've tried to shoot kids with kites many times and getting both in frame with both sharp and decent composition is virtually impossible without trickery. This has two subjects in totally opposite corners, which breaks all the rules, but how else do you do it?

    • 16 Feb 2017 7:50AM