10 PeterN comments

Discussion in 'Digital Cameras' started by PeterN, Aug 29, 2013.

  1. PeterN

    PeterN Guest

    Overall a neat bunch of images:

    1. I have nothing to say. Simply a really nice image, well executed in
    all respects. I wish I shot that.
    2. Neat abstract quality. Just a nit. I would have tried to clone out
    the house. I find my eye drawn to it.
    3. You set the bar too high with the other two. I like the angle, but
    it just doesn't grab me. Sorry.

    Bob Coe:
    1. Nice seeing. I like the interplay of the light and the shadows.
    good use of negative space. You are starting to express more of an eye
    for the abstract than I've seen before. Do you think a crop on the
    right, just at the right hand edgfe of the tunnel would make a stronger
    2. Nice composition. (no pun intended.) I like your angular placement of
    the seating. To my eye there appears to be some blocking in the shadow
    3. the sunlight certainly gives the effect you were looking for. In this
    case the dead area on the right leads me right into what you wanted me
    to see. A small comment I would have cloned out the red fire alarm.

    Martha Coe:
    1. Well exposed. A good record of the area. Did you consider coming in
    tighter, and eliminating the transmission lines.
    2. A thistle by ant other name could be an artichoke. For me it would
    be difficult to make the shot from a lower perspective. Try to crop
    tighter and eliminate the hot spot just to the left of the flower.
    3. Sorry. I understand your desire for preservation. But, I don't see
    anything but a shot of a poster. Try to put something of your own
    creation into the image.

    Tim Conway:
    1. You meet the mandate, but my comments about Martha's image are
    2. A nice well executed image. I like the layering effect. I wish you
    have put a small subtle, partial vignette in the upper left. It would
    have drawn my eye more into the beauty of your image.
    3. Well it meets the mandate, but is not interesting to me. But then I
    did not appreciate the exhibit at Mass MoCA, "Trying to Remember the
    Color of Jackie Kennedy's Pillbox Hat."

    Eric Stevens:
    1. A nice, interesting old machine. I am not certain that the
    overhead lights and the guard rope add anything to the image. I probaby
    would have cloned them out.
    2. Where is the steam. There are so many interesting areas in this
    picture, that I don't know where to look first. Here I would have like
    to be perpendicular to the engine.
    3. See! You took my advice. well done and nicely composed. Quite often
    less is more. You just proved it.

    The Duck:
    1. Well composed image. Good conversion to B&W. I can see myself
    watching her for hours. If I must pick a nit, I would have a problem.
    Nice image.
    2. Well done. I wonder what effect a longer shutter speed would have
    on the froth. This image has commercial potential.
    3. Good composition. To my eye the waterfall looks a bit washed out,
    and I would have liked to see richer blacks. I have a personal
    preference for more subtle borders.

    Tony cooper:
    1. How many watermelons will she sell while sleeping. Nice capture.
    Try as I might, I can't find too many nits, except I would have darkened
    down the fence and mailbox like thingie, in the background.
    2. Very interesting composition. Good use of color.
    3. OK It's a well exposed picture of a statue, that meets the mandate.
    I've seen much better work from you.
    4. Well I admit my prejudice. I shot of a picture that meets the
    mandate. Sorry, it's simply not interesting to me.

    1. Nice attempt. Certainly meets the mandate. To my eyes, the image is
    not quite as sharp as it could be. Was it hand held?
    2. Nice capture. You certainly caught the moment. It certainly holds
    my interest. I'll betcha that guy at the bottom wishes he was up there
    with those jets. I do.
    3. Well done. Anyone wo got hit by a lightning bolt would be well
    done too. I don't think I would have the guts to stand that close.

    I will leave my comments about my images to my response to others.

    Thanks to all for playing.
    PeterN, Aug 29, 2013
    1. Advertisements

  2. PeterN

    Eric Stevens Guest

    I thought hard about cloning out the lights but eventually decided to
    leave them alone. As far as the guard rope goes, I didn't even notice
    it until you pointed it out. Even then I had to look for it. I agree,
    I should have deleted it.
    I'm afraid no steam has been anywhere near that locomotive for more
    than 40 years. You will notice that all sorts of parts which should be
    bright have been painted black. I too would have liked a different
    view point but I had to shoot around a roof-supporting column (the
    right-hand side is cropped to it).
    I saw the extraordinarily bright wheel shining from a distance but
    when I got close I could not see it unless I was prepared to lie down
    on the ground. I shot blind from below knee level until I got a shot I
    liked and then cropped it down until most of the extraneous stuff had
    Eric Stevens, Aug 29, 2013
    1. Advertisements

  3. PeterN

    PeterN Guest

    As the artist, it's your choice. If you like it, that's all that counts.
    There are many things I don't see in my own images.
    I completely understand. there are times in my CC competitions when the
    judge will comment that I should have stood three feet to the right.
    Yep, that would have put me off the edge of a cliff. Seriously, have you
    tried the perspective control in DXO?

    For me lying down is not a problem. but, getting up can be a bear. I
    still like that shot.
    PeterN, Aug 29, 2013
  4. PeterN

    Bowser Guest

    No worries. You have a lot of company on that one.

    Bowser, Aug 29, 2013
  5. PeterN

    Eric Stevens Guest

    See https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/31088803/_DSC4074a_DxO.jpg and
    I couldn't have used the perspective control to change the view point
    of the valve gear as it would have had me viewing all sorts of places
    which should have been out of sight from the purported location of the
    There was a puddle ...
    Eric Stevens, Aug 29, 2013
  6. PeterN

    Savageduck Guest

    Thanks. It was one of those target rich days.
    I will be there on Sept. 7 for the 2013 opportunity. If you are in the
    neighborhood it is worth exploring. If you can get there for the
    Thursday Farmer's Market, that is a weekly street party well worth
    Thanks again. That was one of those shots which has been tough for me
    to replicate. It was the last of a series of five, shot over 2 minutes
    from the same position. In each of the other shots the foam pattern was
    erased by receding wave to leave a bland, washed sandy beach. It was
    the moment captured.
    Perhaps, more along these lines?
    Savageduck, Aug 30, 2013
  7. PeterN

    PeterN Guest

    DXO does a neat job of fixing the perspective of the interior walls. It
    distorted the light fixture. YOur picture looks almost like a vertical pan.
    PeterN, Aug 30, 2013
  8. PeterN

    PeterN Guest

    Why the greenish cast?
    I didstate a preference for a more subtle frame for this type of shot,
    PeterN, Aug 30, 2013
  9. PeterN

    Eric Stevens Guest

    In the end I chose the one with the sides tapering to the top. I also
    used the volume anamorphisis tool. You will see the change in the
    hanging lamp.
    Eric Stevens, Aug 30, 2013
  10. PeterN

    Savageduck Guest

    Greenish cast??? Take your RayBans off.
    Subtle frame! How subtle do you want it?
    I gave you plain white.
    Here is my standard black with white stroke frame/border treatment.
    Savageduck, Aug 30, 2013
  11. PeterN

    Tony Cooper Guest

    On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 21:48:33 -0400, PeterN

    What! Do you know how *hard* it is to find a grotesque in Orlando?
    This is the all-time, second-best shot of a grotesque I've ever done!

    All over this town you'll find anthropomorphized statues of mouses and
    ducks and bears and alligators, but just try to find a good grotesque.
    Let alone a griffon grotesque with a "10" in view. Give me credit for
    the find!

    There's only one other building with a grotesque in the area, and
    that's five miles away in another part of town:


    There's not a gargoyle (a grotesque used as a drainspout) anywhere in

    To me, either. I just couldn't pass it up since it was such a mandate
    Tony Cooper, Aug 30, 2013
  12. PeterN

    PeterN Guest

    On my laptop I saw a greenish cast. But then, the monitor is not color
    corrected. As to frames, I actually prefer the black against a white
    background. Having said that my personal preference is for a very thin
    frame for digital displays. Otherwise the frame intrudes on the image.
    Your preference obviously differs.
    PeterN, Aug 30, 2013
  13. PeterN

    PeterN Guest

    On 8/29/2013 9:42 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:

    When shooting W/A I often forget to allow extra width in my image, where
    I know I will use perspective control. One day the lesson will sink in
    while i am shooting.
    PeterN, Aug 30, 2013
  14. PeterN

    Tony Cooper Guest

    SmugMug and PBase have a black background, so I use a 3 or 5 pixel
    white stroke. (Select all>stroke in Photoshop)
    Tony Cooper, Aug 30, 2013
  15. PeterN

    Eric Stevens Guest

    'mice' :)
    Eric Stevens, Aug 30, 2013
  16. PeterN

    Savageduck Guest

    Savageduck, Aug 30, 2013
  17. PeterN

    Tony Cooper Guest

    Naw. Mice are real creatures or devices used with computers. Mouses
    are the plural of Mickeys.
    Tony Cooper, Aug 30, 2013
  18. PeterN

    Eric Stevens Guest

    In that case it should be "Mickey Mouse's", although Mickey Mouse's
    what, I don't know. :)
    Eric Stevens, Aug 30, 2013
  19. PeterN

    Eric Stevens Guest

    And 'Mickeys' are the plural of Mickey. So we have a plural of a
    plural - which is a what?
    Eric Stevens, Aug 30, 2013
  20. PeterN

    Savageduck Guest

    No! No! that apostrophe would make it a possessive. What you will find
    in the Orlando (& Anaheim) areas are all sorts of folks dressed as
    Micky Mouse, hence a plethora of "Mickey Mouses" (& Minnie Mouses). ;-)
    They aren't real mice, so "mouses" is quite appropriate.
    Savageduck, Aug 30, 2013
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.