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

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


Activity : Photo Comments

paulbroad

Hello,

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
Profile
  • Bathtime!

    I have cropped slightly at both sides. Didn't really think the tails were necessary?

    Paul
    • 27 Jun 2017 2:01PM
  • Robyn at Gylly

    Very nice indeed. I'm intrigued in that you have the technique spot on here so obviously fully recognise the technical quality. For me, this is streets in front of the nudist shots in almost every respect and is a great soft glamour shot for general viewing.

    Nice one. Now, lets keep seeing this quality!

    paul
    • 25 Jun 2017 8:07PM
  • Pretty flowers at kew gardens

    A strong image due to initial impact, but there is too much there with no obvious focal point. Ideally, you need one bloom or a small group that you can isolate and have pin sharp as the main subject. Not easy, I know, and it may have been impossible, but to the third party viewer, that is the problem - where to look.

    I would concentrate on the right hand group.

    paul
    • 23 Jun 2017 8:08AM
  • Rough Nature, a split of a second later

    As before, but this is sharper, so what does that tell you? Heat haze a bit variable?

    A very good image which would make most people very happy. A touch of sharpening and a bit of burning in on the goose and dodging on the fox just to finish off. It is very rare for an image to be perfect out of the camera and a bit of processing often finishes things off.

    I do repeat that if you can manage to work with a lower ISO, your images will benefit.

    Paul
    • 22 Jun 2017 2:00PM
  • Leaf cutter Bee.

    Yes, John. One of about 40 exposures. Only a quarter sharp enough. Not easy.

    Paul
    • 22 Jun 2017 1:54PM
  • The King at Marazion

    The timing and content are excellent but the image is very flat and under exposed. You get some excellent content, but you do need to give serious thought to getting the exposure right. You are on manual,so how did you decide on the values to set? You must be able to see on the LCD that the tones are a touch adrift.

    I suspect the bottom line is that the lighting is just coming from the wrong direction and that is going to be a problem. In that case, you will struggle.

    Paul
    • 21 Jun 2017 3:14PM
  • Purple Sandpiper

    Another good one that just misses the excellent due to slight quality issues. Slightly flat and slightly soft. I am becoming convinced you are having these minor issues due to your continued use of very high ISO.

    Do you really need them? Anything about 1000 is going to start and show some effect, usually as slight softening and contrast loss. I try and keep at 800 as a maximum unless absolutely necessary. Try and find something to rest the camera on or use a monopod.

    I use fence tops, posts, trees, seat backs, anything to steady the camera. I then try and keep to 400 or 800 ISO to get some decent contrast and resolution.

    Paul
    • 21 Jun 2017 3:07PM
  • Street Food And Life

    As above. What a modern smart phone can be very good at. A quick grab shot. Well composed and quality is quite adequate.

    Paul
    • 21 Jun 2017 2:57PM
  • Crematoria Kathmandhu

    Difficult. I would have thought your gear was hardly unobtrusive, but no one seems to be looking. How do you comment? The smoke makes quality difficult to assess and I think I might have included a little more on the left although including all of the actual cremation may be difficult.

    paul
    • 21 Jun 2017 2:54PM
  • Disjointed

    Obviously not presented as a record. The effect is, to say the leas, interesting. It makes you look and think, Thus it is a success! The chopped off head is slightly macabre!

    paul
    • 21 Jun 2017 2:50PM
  • Rough Nature

    Superb content and a great opportunity. It seems curlish to critique but for a perfect image there are a couple of issues. I suspect quite a crop resulting in a slightly flat and washy image - also due to the high ISO.

    Could be a touch sharper and I would suspect the full aperture there.

    however, nice to see.

    Paul
    • 21 Jun 2017 2:47PM
  • Summer fun

    A happy shot but the tilt is not to my liking. I'm a bit old fashioned so purely a personal thing.

    Nothing wrong with bridge cameras. I have a Canon SX40 for occasional use. Great video quality and more than adequate stills although the tiny sensor can restrict use for libraries and very big enlargements.

    Paul
    • 21 Jun 2017 2:38PM
  • Light and Shade

    Single colour flowers can be a problem. In bright light there is little variation in tone and whilst you have xposed perfectly well, the bloom has little detail. It needs cross light or back light to give a range of shades within the bloom and thus add interest.

    For me the background is perfectly OK. Not cluttered and natural.

    Paul
    • 21 Jun 2017 2:25PM
  • Fun!

    Nurse, what nurse? Unfortunately I havn't had a glamour session for many many years, but you are making me think

    Paul
    • 21 Jun 2017 2:20PM
  • DOWNTOWN TAKE 2

    A reasonable effort. The bland bright sky has tended to cause flare and contrast loss which you might well be able to put back.

    Paul
    • 19 Jun 2017 2:29PM
  • Bubble whale

    Ideally a less cluttered background and a touch of cross or back light to lift the bubble. Not easy to get a stand alone shot of such a subject and here, keeping the bloke in might have been better.

    Paul
    • 19 Jun 2017 2:27PM
  • Happy Spring In The Arctic

    It is a nice shot in most respects. I would stay with the landscape format, but might reverse the image unless absolute accuracy is required. Just a touch of sharpening needed and that might be due to the high ISO which will soften things.

    You have done very well to keep the eyes visible. I know, only too well, how difficult this is and the gear will be fairly heavy.

    Paul
    • 19 Jun 2017 2:22PM
  • Silly Sunday - sunblinded shot

    Well done, John. This section should, in my opinion, be used for instruction as well as critique. same thing really. I almost always use a lens hood, but tend to use my hand as a shade if needed. The problem, always, is carrying extra gear when not on a planned shoot, where everything should be available.

    Paul
    • 19 Jun 2017 8:24AM
  • Bean-curd maker.

    I rather like this - one of your best efforts. A bit of toning down of one or two highlights and the sepia is very yellow indeed. I would have gone for a true brown sepia.

    Remind me to not eat any bean curd!

    paul
    • 18 Jun 2017 7:07PM
  • Windy day in Tenby

    Small aperture equals slower shutter speed and it is that which gives the blurred water - subject movement. I'm not a great fan of milky water and here you need a rather brighter image and back light through the spray can look very good.

    i would have stayed with colour and, frankly, gone for a crisp image showing the spray.. that is just personal, though.

    paul
    • 18 Jun 2017 7:04PM
  • This is a wonderful fruit art, which is not made by nature by man.

    I agree totally with the above, however, pictures considered to be natural history record, or pure record often does need a full title and/or explanation. A record often needs to be fully and CORRECTLY titled.

    A picture of a Red Admiral Butterfly should say that, not just butterfly.

    Paul
    • 17 Jun 2017 4:55PM
  • Brimham Rocks

    As above. My problem with such shots is purely subjective and personal. I struggle to see a satisfying image in terms of content and composition. What, here is the subject? The eye goes straight between the rocks to some grey soft trees in the background.

    I stress, this is purely personal and a matter of preference.

    paul
    • 17 Jun 2017 4:51PM
  • At Arthurs Beach

    Not bad at all. The hands are a problem and it is very symmetrical. I would offset her a bit and include fingers with fingers spread. I don't mind the foot. it is there and quite natural.

    One thing, compositionally, is a number of focal points, if you see what I man.

    Paul
    • 17 Jun 2017 4:44PM
  • Candle Light

    You have actually done quite well hee. Very difficult to shoot well without proper consideration. It is very slightly soft which maybe slight shake, high ISO or both. The full EXIF is needed to analyse properly - don't use 'save for net', just do a standard JPG save.

    Ideally, a tripod and low ISO with manual focusing.

    Paul
    • 17 Jun 2017 4:40PM
  • Octopus!

    I know a chap with almost exactly this gear and a lot more besides. I once asked him what he did with his images. He posted them on his website. I said," what else?" And he said nothing else. So why spend all that money and struggle to put images on a web site that will be viewed at screen size on the net? Beats me.

    Wish I was that rich. Looks good though?

    Paul
    • 17 Jun 2017 10:11AM
  • Saltwick Bay (original)

    I prefer your worked version shown previously. This has the problem of bright sky and under exposed foreground as is often the case with such shots. Otherwise my comments remain the same - it needs some dramatic lighting to lift it. I've seen Saltwick and Black Nab many times in reality and as photographs.

    I don't find it a particularly attractive area, although many do, so, for me it needs something to make me look.

    Paul
    • 15 Jun 2017 3:54PM
  • Power with age!

    There were several older chaps. I positioned myself at the top of a steep hill where I knew they would slow down and even fall off? None did though!

    Paul
    • 15 Jun 2017 3:48PM
  • The Quey

    As above. One simple fact - you simply cannot hand hold at 1/6 sec. I have two basic rules - get the exposure right, get it sharp where it needs to be. This needs a support for the camera, ideally a tripod, but a wall top or something stable.

    Remember, though, the wind can more a tripod on long exposures. Traffic can cause shake. High ISO does not always help as it can introduce it's own degree of unsharpnss.

    Paul
    • 14 Jun 2017 1:44PM
  • Hiding from the rock monster

    I struggle with content I fear. As with John, this needs something to make a picture. Lighting, with impact or something.

    Paul
    • 14 Jun 2017 1:39PM
  • Expresso pls

    As John says. You are using a soft box, so flash? If so, why 1/30 sec? For this type of subject you need a very fast shutter speed which a burst of flash can, in effect,give you. You also need the lighting more towards the back coming forward to add sparkle to the liquid and add impact.

    In short, you need a bit more contrast and impact to lift the image.

    Paul
    • 14 Jun 2017 1:37PM