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

Sooty_1

...Read More
Profile

A quick view of Sooty_1's recent activity.

  • Gilberts Mount

    It would be interesting to see a context shot, ie one without stitching or over processing. One reason is that I'd prefer a little separation between the bench and the base of the monument, and it would be interesting to see what was actually in the scene without cloning anything out.

    I think this might be better shot with a single image, in better light. Shooting numerous times in poor light will still yield a poorly lit image, so maybe it would be better to wait for the light. Shooting early or late in the day (depending on the orientation of the obelisk) with good sidelight would work better and bring out the textures of the stone and bench, without having to resort to aggressive sharpening.

    This place has potential for a great shot, but over complicating things reduces your chances. A simple wide angle shot, with better light might well be a surer bet.

    Nick
    • 7 Jan 2016 7:32PM
  • Old playground

    Caffenol is capable of great results, as with any other developer, it's best with experimentation to standardise your film/exposure/development. Adding scanning into the mix just complicates matters, and I suspect that is the culprit for the muddiness.
    Willie has demonstrated how easy it is to correct, and at least a low contrast scan contains detail to bring out, though it looks like the original may be slightly underexposed too.

    I like the abandoned feel of the empty fairground, but I think there are better angles here, and my eyes are drawn to the figure on the left. The tree has a bit too much prominence, and it's darkness makes it competitive with the rest. Without seeing around the scene, it's hard to know what else you could have shot, but I can't help feel there was more to explore.

    Nick
    • 26 Dec 2015 11:45PM
  • BATTLEFIELD (GAGE) BACK GARDEN & HOUSE

    I'm sure this has significance in Ontario, but as presented, it's just a record shot of a house, and a pretty dull photograph in dull light.

    I'm afraid it needs more dramatic lighting to make it a better picture, and more info to make it more interesting. Maybe a more dynamic angle, include more of the garden, get closer with a wide angle. And make it 1000 pixels wide!!

    Nick
    • 25 Dec 2015 2:47AM
  • tumble for ya

    As above, re the flat processing. The real problem with these images, for me anyway, is that they just don't "pop".
    The tumblers don't stand out from the muddy muted colours of the crowd, and the best way to do that here is to use as wide an aperture as you can to try to separate the two parts of the image, ie, blur the crowd a little so the sharp performers stand out. A wider aperture would have allowed a faster shutter to freeze all the motion, and here it is the position of the acrobats rather than movement that is incongruous.
    It probably isn't the best view either, perhaps it would have been better to have the acrobats tumbling towards you for more impact, so moving to your left a bit and maybe get closer with a wider angle setting would help. Try different angles to see which works better.
    Perhaps set your cameras jpeg processing to higher contrast and vibrant colour to get rid of the dullness of the output.

    All these street performers you shoot are excellent subjects, happy to be photographed, yet you seem to shoot without really thinking things like which angle would give me most impact? How can I isolate the subject, or make it prominent in its surroundings? How can I bring out the humour or emotion in my subject?
    You keep posting image set after image set, yet still ask basic questions about how to improve. By now, with the amount of help you have had, you should know what you are looking for and how to achieve it. Great street pictures don't come by accident and careful processing, but by planning, reactions and knowledge, you consistently demonstrate none of these. You have to be able to visualise how the image will look and adapt position/composition/exposure to get the best, not just snap away and hope.

    This is another great opportunity that just got away, sorry.

    Nick
    • 25 Dec 2015 2:36AM
  • Vacant Beach

    Whilst I can see where you're going with this, there are a few things that spring to my mind:

    Without the title, I wouldn't know that it wasn't a record shot of the tree, as it's sharp and central in the frame. Perhaps to convey what you're suggesting, using the tree fork to frame more of the beach would help.

    It looks a horrible dull day or it's seriously underexposed. Using a mono preset is one way to try to hide it, but the flatness and lack of shadows belie the poor conditions.

    It isn't really a vacant beach, as I can clearly see a daysack and gear on the table and lounger.

    The horizon has already been mentioned, but there seems to be an out of focus blur, bottom right. Maybe a bit of heavy handed vignetting, but it adds to the dark feel of the image and should be less obvious.

    If you could have isolated the parasols and loungers in the vee of the tree, and included more of the beach, I think it might have been more successful, along with a lighter exposure.

    It's good to try things out, but sometimes when the light conditions are against you, you need to think more about composition, lines, angles and graphic qualities to make the image more successful. Basic things like level horizons and getting the best possible exposure should be a given, and what you want in the image to have predominance. Should the tree be so dominant here?

    Nick
    • 19 Dec 2015 1:29PM
  • White, light blue, grey and orange in a frame

    I'm afraid I'm with Dudler on this one.

    There is virtually no content, the colours aren't enough to hold attention, nor are they abstract to make a pattern. It also looks like you've made a poor selection around the hill to enhance the sky, and left little pale blue lines outlining the rock.

    A person in a red coat, standing on the central hump might elevate this, but otherwise, I'm sorry, it's a bit of a nothing photo, like the half frames you get when winding on a film to frame one.

    Nick
    • 1 Dec 2015 10:56PM
  • Mt. Ruapehu (Exploding hole)

    Shooting in the mountains is much harder than you would think. All that grandeur, yet how to convey that in an image?

    The only way is to include something to give it scale, unless it has an iconic shape, otherwise you lose a little impact.

    The blue is normal for mountainous areas, and the best way is to add a little correction, either a 81 series filter on the camera, dial in a little correction on your camera's white balance, use "cloudy" or "shade" settings, or add a filtration in processing.

    That said, a perfectly acceptable record of a great location.

    Nick
    • 1 Dec 2015 10:49PM

No profile comments.