«

Since I'm commenting late, I'll just comment on certain images.
However, I disagree with the person who felt that this series wasn't
particularly noteworthy. I feel that there was some real imagination
used in meeting the mandate by many of the posters.

Bowser2 - My first thought was that Bowser staged this for us, and I
was terribly impressed that he'd go to all that trouble just to meet a
Lines & Intersection mandate. I am suspicious, though, that he
decided on the mandate with this photo already in hand.

Bowser3 - I like the composition of this with the one road positioned
as a strong diagonal from lower-left to upper-right, and the center
loops offset to the right. I also like the non-standard crop. I see
too many photographs where the presenter thinks he has to stay with a
standard ratio and the photo loses strength because of it.

SavageDuck01 - Good catch. Not something I think anyone would bother
photographing normally, but when you're driving around thinking of
Lines & Intersections you would. This kind of proves that mandates
expand your photographic thinking.

SavageDuck03 - About the same comments as above. Trite subject matter
normally, but it fits the mandate. That green thing in the right
quarter bothers me a bit. A spot of color is good, but when we don't
know what the object is it becomes a distraction.

RichardS (hand) - Once again, application of imagination to a mandate.
I am just as impressed by someone who seeks out and finds something to
fit as I am by someone who takes a great photo.

Sid-1 - Kind of a postcardy look, but well done for what it is. I
have a personal bias against shots that are too balanced. I like the
center of attention to be offset. The top line being at an angle
instead of level saves this, though. Sid makes good use of color in
all three images.

Alan Browne - I don't think there's anyone here that does a better job
of focusing for detail the way Alan does. I think he could find hair
on my scalp. He's also the master of depth-of-field transitions. The
subjects are not all that interesting to me, though.

CodyHouston - 4000 x 3000?

NM5K - I really want to encourage new participants in this exercise,
but these photos have been on view in the newsgroup for weeks.
They're well-done, but we've already discussed them.

As to the ones I didn't comment on...any critique I provide is based
on my own prejudices, biases, and favoritisms. I like strong
object-oriented photographs and people photographs. I'm not big on
patterns, abstracts, landscape distance shots, and arty stuff.
(Unless I take the picture) I withhold comment on these because I
don't relate to them.

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

On Mon, 8 Mar 2010 22:50:38 -0800, Savageduck
<savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

>On 2010-03-08 22:20:56 -0800, tony cooper <(E-Mail Removed)> said:
>

>> SavageDuck03 - About the same comments as above. Trite subject matter
>> normally, but it fits the mandate. That green thing in the right
>> quarter bothers me a bit. A spot of color is good, but when we don't
>> know what the object is it becomes a distraction.
>
>OK, I got the message some are distracted by the yellow sign, some by
>the grass, consider it fixed.
>http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechut...geduck-03B.jpg

The thing I was referring to is still there. The yellow sign didn't
bother me because I knew what it was.

>The next two mandates should be interesting.

They all are if they produce expanded thinking and new perspectives on
what we already see. Whenever I drive around I'm looking for an
interesting photo op. When there's a mandate involved, I look at the
usual things with new eyes.

I participate in an online forum on "Street" photography. It kills me
when I see the stuff that people in NYC and other major urban areas
have to work with when I'm sitting here in a city that is primarily
strip malls, hotels/motels, no downtown to speak of, and a population
that looks like the gallery at a minor golf tournament at a public
course. But I still find shots because I look for them.


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

tony cooper wrote:
> I'm not big on patterns, abstracts, landscape distance shots, and arty stuff.
> (Unless I take the picture)

lol <smack!>

Your shots turned out nice. At first I was sure you did something
ghastly to the white balance on the bike shot but on closer inspection
it does look real. The whites are white, or close...

I like Russel's snowy cliff, stark as it is, there is life to it
somehow. The colorful facade is stunning. So crisp.

Solomon's jungle shots really catch the mood of the place.

On Tue, 09 Mar 2010 08:42:07 -0800, Paul Furman <paul-@-edgehill.net>
wrote:

>tony cooper wrote:
>> I'm not big on patterns, abstracts, landscape distance shots, and arty stuff.
>> (Unless I take the picture)
>
>lol <smack!>
>
>Your shots turned out nice. At first I was sure you did something
>ghastly to the white balance on the bike shot but on closer inspection
>it does look real. The whites are white, or close...

Thank you. There really are no white areas in the photograph. The
whitewall tires are not really white. I tried using them as the white
point in curves, but that did something strange with the whole image.
The closest real white is the teardrop-shaped area on the fork.

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

"tony cooper" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Since I'm commenting late, I'll just comment on certain images.
> However, I disagree with the person who felt that this series wasn't
> particularly noteworthy. I feel that there was some real imagination
> used in meeting the mandate by many of the posters.
>
> Bowser2 - My first thought was that Bowser staged this for us, and I
> was terribly impressed that he'd go to all that trouble just to meet a
> Lines & Intersection mandate. I am suspicious, though, that he
> decided on the mandate with this photo already in hand.
>
> Bowser3 - I like the composition of this with the one road positioned
> as a strong diagonal from lower-left to upper-right, and the center
> loops offset to the right. I also like the non-standard crop. I see
> too many photographs where the presenter thinks he has to stay with a
> standard ratio and the photo loses strength because of it.
>
> SavageDuck01 - Good catch. Not something I think anyone would bother
> photographing normally, but when you're driving around thinking of
> Lines & Intersections you would. This kind of proves that mandates
> expand your photographic thinking.
>
> SavageDuck03 - About the same comments as above. Trite subject matter
> normally, but it fits the mandate. That green thing in the right
> quarter bothers me a bit. A spot of color is good, but when we don't
> know what the object is it becomes a distraction.
>
> RichardS (hand) - Once again, application of imagination to a mandate.
> I am just as impressed by someone who seeks out and finds something to
> fit as I am by someone who takes a great photo.
>
> Sid-1 - Kind of a postcardy look, but well done for what it is. I
> have a personal bias against shots that are too balanced. I like the
> center of attention to be offset. The top line being at an angle
> instead of level saves this, though. Sid makes good use of color in
> all three images.
>
> Alan Browne - I don't think there's anyone here that does a better job
> of focusing for detail the way Alan does. I think he could find hair
> on my scalp. He's also the master of depth-of-field transitions. The
> subjects are not all that interesting to me, though.
>
> CodyHouston - 4000 x 3000?
>
> NM5K - I really want to encourage new participants in this exercise,
> but these photos have been on view in the newsgroup for weeks.
> They're well-done, but we've already discussed them.
>
> As to the ones I didn't comment on...any critique I provide is based
> on my own prejudices, biases, and favoritisms. I like strong
> object-oriented photographs and people photographs. I'm not big on
> patterns, abstracts, landscape distance shots, and arty stuff.
> (Unless I take the picture) I withhold comment on these because I
> don't relate to them.
>


That's fair comment. If we all liked the same thing it would be a boring
world.

--
Peter