Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

Connect to User

loading

paulbroad's Gallery Comments

paulbroad > paulbroad Recent Activity > paulbroad's Gallery Comments
drifting by wider

drifting

And you have captured the anouver very well. The only problem for me is aboythalf to one stop nder exposure. The cloud of light dust has effected the meter reading I think. Just brighten things up a bit and you have a fine shot.

You don't need that large logo in this section. Brightest part of the image.

Paul

By: wider

Arnisee_Switzerland by jerryiron

Arnisee_Switzerland

Tecnically very well done and most will like it. I see too many rocks. It is just a personal thing but half therame are foreground rocks which I don't find of interest. I would prefer a lot less rocks and more scene.

Paul

By: jerryiron

Wild Berries by billmyl

Wild Berries

A very fine image and you have the lighting spot on giving aglow. Very nice and worth the effort. I might crop in even tighter to enhance the effect.

Paul

By: billmyl

Stay away... by Sandipan

Stay away...

No EXIF? A decent shot but, I would have thought, very danerous. Having a child that close to strong sas is not a good idea!

Otherwise quite well done with detail retained in the white water. Possibly, juist brighten a touch.

Paul

By: Sandipan

the propellor by stebesty

the propellor

I don't mind your tight crop, but you are either under exposed or your mono conversion is astray, or bothe. There is no true black anywhere resulting in a flat greyish image. you need impact and contrast for a shot like this if you use mono.

In my darkroom days it would be deemed a uddy print.

Are you converting with a channel mixer or just pressing a mono or desatrate button. You must control how each colour is converted to grey.

Either go very contrasty or stay with a bright colour version.

Paul

By: stebesty

Balloon Man by billmyl

Balloon Man

I met Vic Blackman a couple of times and he was a fine photographer. He said it honestly and down to earth. anyone wshing to progress to a sei pro or pro environment MUST master their gear. i fear many don't think it necessary in these days of digital.

Don't mean you, Bill.

This is good. It is a little under exposed on the figure, but you coulddo a lot with the dodge tool.

I would have placd him towards the left of the frame when shooting. He is looking slightly out of frame, so give him lateral room.

Paul

By: billmyl

Hawk by dpr59

Hawk

The blur is a major error. I look at the blurred area rather than the face because it is obviously not natural. The head is sharp and well shown so no need to muck about. I would come in even tighter on the head, correct the magenta cast and get a correct title.

It is a Hawk, but which one? Looks like one of the Buzzard family. Depends what the shot ight be used for but it is a natural history record portrait and the correct title would be required for some purposes.

Paul

By: dpr59

Daddy  don't walk so fast by kuipje

Daddy don't walk so fast

Both John and Willie hit the valid points. You should not be setting such a high ISO in full sun lit daylight and f5.6 would cover focusing errors a little. You are under exposed and the highlights will stand a little more light.

Then adjust highlights with the burning in tool and brighten her eyes with the dodoge tool.

Paul

By: kuipje

Old house by Hdlarsen

Old house

Very effective again. What to say? Not my area, but could you not increase exposure and reduce ISO? Such high ISO is not conducive to quality and I suspect that might be more obvious on a big print. Nothing much is going to move in a minute or so, so why not a lower ISO?

Paul

By: Hdlarsen

Margerie Glacier by LyndonG

Margerie Glacier

An impressive thing but I'm really not sure about mono for such a natural history related subject. Your ono conversion seems very heavy to me. Possibly due to the lack of a wide colour gamut, but I would expect blues and blue greys.

The end product appears tonally flat. Almost HDR, and possibly under exposed.

Brighten things up and I would like to see a colour version.

Paul

By: LyndonG

Elegance by jaysha

Elegance

The basis isgoo but that black line has to go. As John says, for elegant glaour a white background to the point of over exosing it and possibly a No. 1 diffuser on caera. When you finish the selection, remove any blackor white matts within the layer tool.

Now, the hand. Just not elegant at all to me and I look at the hand, not her face. Thre is also about half a frame of shoulder. Cropping this will not correct it. No hand then a bit less shoulder by turning her torso slightly.

Paul

By: jaysha

Childhood Buddies..Amazing Schooldays.. by Aman19291

Childhood Buddies..Amazing Schooldays..

Avery fine image indeed. I might just run the dodge tool very lightly across the right handladeyes, but only a touch. I would also just take a sliver off th bottom to shift that white thing.

Paul

By: Aman19291

Musk in Dovre mountion by Hdlarsen

Musk in Dovre mountion

Potntially a fine record, but that is hat it is, natural history record and the subject must thus be pin sharp. It is quite soft and whilst that is OK for general purpose,it precludes use as a pure record.

Looks like some camera movement to me. You needed a tripod or monopod ideally as 1/400 is not fast enough.

Paul

By: Hdlarsen

Coffee at Carnaby Street by photozinemag

Coffee at Carnaby Street

Mono works here and the conversion, whilst a few possible issues, is not far off. I would e cropping left and top to tighten p somewhat on the main figure. going slightly left of the third is no problem if it works!

Paul

By: photozinemag

Chrystia Freeland, MP at the Mike in the SPICE FACTORY in Hamilton-Centre by TimothyDMorton

Chrystia Freeland, MP at the Mike in the SPICE FACTORY in Hamilton-Centre

This is a little better, but the comment remains the same. You are a little under exposed and there is quite a degree of softness. I suspect both camera movement and subject movement and ambient has intensified that.

If this is the camera gun ,t will just not be powerful enough. I use the Sigma Super guns rated at a GN of about 60 at ISO100.

Paul

By: TimothyDMorton

Fatal attraction in Tilarán by annettep38

Fatal attraction in Tilarán

Depends on your business. Interesting shot of two very old Range Rovers. The price of parts can be astronomical! Quite yellow but the evening lighting is the cause an it isqite acceptable.

If they had been really nose to nose, there would be a story and you could balance the surrounding composition to remove a bit of road and quite a bit of sky. Both of which are not needd.

Or crop to a letterbox as it stands.

Paul

By: annettep38

Did I tell you that......... by kuipje

Did I tell you that.........

One at a time is best. They are all different requiringdifferent comment which can get confusing.

V3 and 4 have quite a few errors in composition and technically which reduce impact. 1 and 2 are both good cndid images. You need a higher viewpoint in v1 to get ri of that bed end and a tighter crop but, given tat and a slight contrast boost, I like it best.

Paul

By: kuipje

Aurora borealis ant the moon by Hdlarsen

Aurora borealis ant the moon

The moon is actually grossly over exposed but it doesn't matter here. The only way you could balance exposure here woul be to add a correctly exposed on over this one.

Otherwise, very nicely done. How could youbetter it?

Paul

By: Hdlarsen

Arizona Sunset by KenMickel

Arizona Sunset

I often want a subject and you gave me one here! Not a bad effort in very difficult cicmstances. HDR would not help. It flattensimags, but only the sun is toobright and you will not put any detail back into that!

The end result would then be very flat. It is a pity the sun were not the deep red ball we often get in the UK, but that is du to pollution in the atmosphee which you will not have. I don't mind the central composition and it is not easy to better it in the conditions existing.

Paul

By: KenMickel

Street Magician by billmyl

Street Magician

Not a bad shot. Nothing t say he is a magician and the title might b better angled to the audience, but not really important. might have tried to get a bit to the right keeping the two mebers of the audience in, but including more of the performers face frontally.

Good though in most respects. Burn in the background a little and just run the dodge tool across the two faces.

Paul

By: billmyl

Gerbera Daisy by KenMickel

Gerbera Daisy

Good shot. Getting in really close improves impact and there is no problem trimin the petals. You would expect under exposure on auto here and you have handled it well.

Live view will have an on/off setting for attempting to show the correct exposre as it will appear in tthe final file. Check in your menu. You may have hatfeature shut offand it isinvaluable.

Paul

By: KenMickel

Anne having a laugh by TimothyDMorton

Anne having a laugh

Her white jacket isn't coming over as white due to under exposure. It looks like your on camera flash has not had the power to illuminate the figure. You needed more light, but you also needed to get her sharp. I suspect you have some shake there.

Paul

By: TimothyDMorton

The joy of yesterday, memories of Tomorrow.. by Aman19291

The joy of yesterday, memories of Tomorrow..

Could be very nice, but I do mind the lack of sharpness. The faces need to be pin sharp and your shutter speed is too low for the focal length. There is o plane of sharpness and you havecamera shake. You could have gone to 400 or even 800 as sharpness is bette thn grain..

I use a monopod regularly for more stability and that gives a couple of extra stops support.

How are you metering? You are on manual but are a good stop over exposed. That would have given you more shutter speed too.

The two absolute basics of photography are , get the exposure right, get it sharp.

Pal

By: Aman19291

Close to you by kuipje

Close to you

There is a fine idea there, but the child's face needs to be visible. Thn the grip and the eyes would rally tell the story. You are a touch over exposed and would benefit from a little more depth of field. Hence I would have been at f5.6

Paul

By: kuipje

Trumpeter Swan by Relic01

Trumpeter Swan

Not a bad effort. The head is slightly soft, but there is much less of a focus issue. The sky makes this very grey and flatand, as Willie explains, you are under exposed.

A you learn more, you will find this an ideal image to replace the sky with something more dramatic. I have a stock file and shoot good skies when I see them, then save them for later.

Paul

By: Relic01

Happy nina by ajnaaddict

Happy nina

Nice enough shot but eye contact would be nice. I would like her to be smiling at me. Lihting was obviously very low and I suspect the eyes may be just a touch soft.

Paul

By: ajnaaddict

Set me free by billmyl

Set me free

Amusing and interestin. The crowd is the problem. Reasonably sharp and thusdistracting. Try some at full aperture, a bit frther away if possible to reduce depth of field by then zooming in, but probably not practical.

Or, go the full 70mm and just shoot upwards at his top half. That's where the picture is.

Paul

By: billmyl

Flower Berries(2) by sparsh845

Flower Berries(2)

A tripod do not prevent subject movement and I suspect that is what we have here as nothin is sharp. You need better lighting and thus a faster shutter speed. Increasing ISO will help, but the lower the etter for quality.

For shots like this they must be sharp and have adequate depth of field. A tripod is half the job. You should also us a 2 or 10 sec shutter delay or an external release. Simply pressing theshutter button can cause shake, even on a tripod.

Paul

By: sparsh845

Golden Day Ending by Disee

Golden Day Ending

Yes, oats or a similar grass. V1 is best. Too much going on in v2 and lighting not suitable in 3. Filling the frae with detail gives impact. I think I would have gone for f4 or even 5.6. The background would have been a tad sharper but the depth of field on the subject a bit better.

Paul

By: Disee

Tom by Relic01

Tom

You hav tocrack this focus issue. You are getting some potentially fine images now but rining them with blur. Sorry to be abrupt, but there is a srious issue. The hair on the right is quite sharp, the hair at the top is reaonable and the zip lookssharp but the face is way off.

I think there is both movement, subject in thiscase and focus issues.Is there a camera fault? Shoot an image of a flat wall with detailed wall paper. Camera on a tripod, focus manually. Is the frame sharp side to side. It should be!

You need to us a fast enough shutter speed to freeze both subject and amera movementand you must relate that to focal length and ISO.

Until you master and/or correct this issue, you cannot progress.

Paul

By: Relic01