A discussion forum - and more - for users of Digital Single Lens Reflex cameras.
Stubbsy in NZ - Pt 8Moderators: 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
6 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Stubbsy in NZ - Pt 8
Two posts of NZ pics in the same night
 I've chastised myself, but wanted to share these for some feedback.
#1 - taken from a plane. Good image or does it just look like something from Google maps? 
#2 - Too dark on the right or dramatic? 
#3 - Too dark? 
#4 - is there enough foreground interest here from the ducks or is this just another orange sunset?  Peter
Disclaimer: I know nothing about anything. *** smugmug galleries: http://www.stubbsy.smugmug.com ***
Peter, of these, the second one is very well balanced, neither too dramatic or dark. The shore frames the light/cloud structure very well.
To be honest, the others don't do much for me (they are good photos, but from your normal standards they are not your best). P Regards, Patrick
Two or three lights, any lens on a light-tight box are sufficient for the realisation of the most convincing image. Man Ray 1935. Our mug is smug
I like them all, but the weakest for me is #3, its below your usual standards.
#1 - I actually thought it was a shot of a miniature, rathen then a shot from the plane.. pretty cool #2 and #4 are lovely.. particularly like the ones in the last one.
Peter,
I like the way you have the layers in the last one and the colours are very nice. Second one is also pretty nice but the other two don't do much for me. Cheers, André Photography, as a powerful medium of expression and communications, offers an infinite variety of perception, interpretation and execution. Ansel Adams
(misc Nikon stuff)
Some wild colour in those pics! Have you pumped up the saturation of the water in pic #1? It looks unaturally blue. The image has some very interesting elements but the water just keeps demanding attention.
Regards
Matt. K
#1 - pretty cool, its quite scale there
#2 - The framing is bit too tight or too wide, i mean it should contain a bit more detail or just a much tighter crop. #3 - Pretty lovely, I dont mind the dark areas on the side. #4 - Maybe cropping the ducks out and make it feel wider... its a lovely image anyway.
Previous topic • Next topic
6 posts
• Page 1 of 1
|
