
or

And the overexposed highlights in the lake are a pain in the ask.
Dayleford Lake CritModerators: Greg B, Nnnnsic, Geoff, Glen, gstark, Moderators
Forum rules
Please note that image critiquing is a matter of give and take: if you post images for critique, and you then expect to receive criticism, then it is also reasonable, fair and appropriate that, in return, you post your critique of the images of other members here as a matter of courtesy. So please do offer your critique of the images of others; your opinion is important, and will help everyone here enjoy their visit to far greater extent. Also please note that, unless you state something to the contrary, other members might attempt to repost your image with their own post processing applied. We see this as an acceptable form of critique, but should you prefer that others not modify your work, this is perfectly ok, and you should state this, either within your post, or within your signature. Images posted here should conform with the general forum guidelines. Image sizes should not exceed 950 pixels along the largest side (height or width) and typically no more than four images per post or thread. Please also ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is.
Previous topic • Next topic
4 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Dayleford Lake CritC&C invited. Comments from my family and others are too diverse.
![]() or ![]() And the overexposed highlights in the lake are a pain in the ask.
To me the colour version works better, although I think a little more saturation may work well in this image. I think the B&W conversion loses too much detail on the couple on the bench.
I agree. I prefer the colour version. I didn't even notices the blown out lake until I re-read your post. My focus was on the bench and the people and then the trees and the water to the left.
Nikon D7000
Previous topic • Next topic
4 posts
• Page 1 of 1
|