More from NZ, Mar/April 2006

Got a thin skin? Then look elsewhere. Post a link to an image that you've made, and invite others to offer their critiques. Honesty is encouraged, but please be positive in your constructive criticism. Flaming and just plain nastiness will not be tolerated. Please note that this is not an area for you to showcase your images, nor is this a place for you to show-off where you have been. This is an area for you to post images so that you may share with us a technique that you have mastered, or are trying to master. Typically, no more than about four images should be posted in any one post or thread, and the maximum size of any side of any image should not exceed 950 px.

Moderators: 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.

More from NZ, Mar/April 2006

Postby Reschsmooth on Wed Apr 18, 2007 11:45 pm

Here are a couple more from our trip a year ago.

I believe the first one is a little too dark, but it is hard to check with our uncalibrated monitor.

Image

Image

Reasonably heavy PP applied, particularly with the last one to get a slightly desaturated look.

C&C appreciated.

Cheers

Patrick
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
User avatar
Reschsmooth
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4164
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 2:16 pm
Location: Just next to S'nives.

Postby Vodka on Thu Apr 19, 2007 12:02 am

I think they're both fantastic. Much better than what I had captured on my trip.

However, I have a question for those with more experience in photography. Which of these two statements makes more sense?

1) My critique is biased because I have fond memories of the subject (in this case, my honeymoon in south island, NZ).

2) My critique is fair because the images are good enough to bring back those fond memories of the subject.

???

Ben
Vodka
Member
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 2:54 pm
Location: CBD, Sydney

Postby wendellt on Thu Apr 19, 2007 12:18 am

well your hard work paid of on the 2nd

iv'e never seen nz so desaturated

however in the 1st one you could put the same effort in to fix the underexposed bottom half especially the trees that would much improve it
User avatar
wendellt
Outstanding Member of the year (Don't try this at home.)
 
Posts: 4078
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2005 10:04 am
Location: Dilettante Outside the City Walls, Sydney

Postby macka on Thu Apr 19, 2007 8:20 am

I really like both of these, Patrick.

The first one is just a touch dark but apart from that I wouldn't change either of them.

Cheers,
Cheers,

macka
a.k.a. Kris
User avatar
macka
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1092
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2005 4:18 pm
Location: North Rocks, Sydney

Postby Alpha_7 on Thu Apr 19, 2007 8:59 am

Love the second one Patrick, absolute standout and screams middle earth to me, there might even be some hobbits in those rolling green hills.
Lovely. As has been said the first is a little dark in places, but I'm sure it's recoverable.
User avatar
Alpha_7
Senior Member
 
Posts: 7259
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2005 6:19 pm
Location: Mortdale - Sydney - Nikon D700, x-D200, Leica, G9

Postby Reschsmooth on Thu Apr 19, 2007 9:59 am

Thanks for the comments, guys.

Vodka - if the shots have brought back fond memories for you, just enjoy it! :D

Wendell, with the desaturated shot, it is only the foreground which shows much difference between this result and the originally saturated photos - the mountains are almost monochrome in the original!

I will try to fix the underexposure in the first one - I am not sure how to go about ensuring that I don't encounter again with the laptop - I am never sure if I am looking at the screen at the right angle to create consistency with the final print. The histogram in PS (however accurate it is) didn't really show much underexposure, but I will double check!

Thanks again.

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
User avatar
Reschsmooth
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4164
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 2:16 pm
Location: Just next to S'nives.

Postby PiroStitch on Thu Apr 19, 2007 10:24 am

Love the second one. Very picturesque and reminds me of LOTR :D :lol:
Hassy, Leica, Nikon, iPhone
Come follow the rabbit hole...
User avatar
PiroStitch
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4669
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2005 1:08 am
Location: Hong Kong

Postby Man Tripod on Thu Apr 19, 2007 10:57 pm

not a big fan of 1 but 2 is awesome. With clouds, mountains and snow you can't go wrong.
Man Tripod
Member
 
Posts: 60
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2006 9:44 am
Location: Sydney City

Postby methd on Thu Apr 19, 2007 11:26 pm

number 2 stands out really well ... i can imagine what it'd look like on a large canvas!.
User avatar
methd
Member
 
Posts: 483
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2007 9:12 pm
Location: Melbourne, VIC.

Postby Reschsmooth on Fri Apr 20, 2007 9:36 am

methd wrote:number 2 stands out really well ... i can imagine what it'd look like on a large canvas!.


So far, I have printed it out on A3 and am really happy with it. I have some special, A3+ textured paper at home which I might give it a go on, but alas, no place to hang it!

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
User avatar
Reschsmooth
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4164
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 2:16 pm
Location: Just next to S'nives.


Return to Image Reviews and Critiques