>>> challenge 19 - comments and critiques thread <<

[Andy]

right here guys. this is the place to put your images that you are considering entering into dgrin challenge 19, "wide angle."

remember, you've got to give, to get. so please, provide feedback, comment, and critique to your fellow dgrinners. try to hit 2 or 3 other photos each time you visit. and visit often.

here is the challenge 19 info thread, rules, and where you enter your photos (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?p=23145#post23145)

have at it!

[Shakey]

Okay I will kick this off.
Title :Bridge Work.
http://shakey.smugmug.com/photos/7087894-L.jpg

Tim
Dang usually I am a day late and a dollar short. Now I am a day early and still a dollar short:D .

[Andy]

Okay I will kick this off.
Title :Bridge Work.
http://shakey.smugmug.com/photos/7087894-S.jpg

Tim

okay but remember, the challenge starts at 12:01 am Monday morning nyc time ....

[Shakey]

Doh! oh well back to the drawing board LoL . :rofl My sched stinks for shooting in the summer .:cry

Tim

[DoctorIt]

okay but remember, the challenge starts at 12:01 am Monday morning nyc time ....baby steps to 12:00... baby steps to 12:00...

[dugmar]

Airshow this weekend! Should be a good place to get some big, wide shots.

Doug

[lynnma]

No, I am not going to crop it, I like the impression that the rocks are so high up.

They aren't, just high enough for a short legged dog to see over, only eyes and ears showing.


http://gingersnap.smugmug.com/photos/7134651-M.jpg


Just to show you what the photo looks like without having to scroll down.
gGinger, this shot made me smile from ear to ear.. so it works for me. I love it.:D :D

[rutt]

Rutt, is there one kind of general L Curve for this type of situation. Don't care about the color so much, like what I have, but will take suggestions on the blown areas, except for the trash can. Can't do it, no way, baby.

g Looks pretty blown to me. There are things you can do to recover some detail in cases like this. Did you shoot RAW? That would make a big difference in how to approach this problem. The lens flare in this shot might also be a problem. Andy has been known to hate it and wrote a tutorial on getting rid of it (in Sid's Hall of Fame.)

[lynnma]

Thanks, Lynn, re Corgi Sighting. A lot of my photos could be repeated, or are typical, IMO, but that one, I swear, I have never seen anything like that before, to say the least of "repeating" it. I am really going to try to sell it, or something. If it weren't for the wide angle, the whole shot would have been so much less.

This is a more typical shot, yesterday morning. I always wear tennis shoes, so it was just to much trouble to take them off, ..........to make it short, I now have flip flops, got into the ocean, and this is one of the "wave" shots I took.




That was really fun!
Been years!
Going to do it again.
Have more, :rofl
(OK, I got the idea from a book, a look see how to, so it is not "dumb")
But they are my waves, not the other guys.

gI played with this for 2 mins.. I don't think I've improved it (as usual):rofl

[Sandy]

Ginger, I like the colors and feeling in this flower shot.



http://gingersnap.smugmug.com/photos/7152017-L.jpgThanks



for Playing Lynn. I went up and made an L curve, hehe, LAB, of course, my own area of extreme dislike and inexpertise. It actually came out pretty good. Now I am asking, is the gold, coming down off of the wave, is it lens flare? I will post the "fixed" blown area where the sky meets the sea in a sec.

Most of them have that gold area, and, though I printed out Andy's tutorial, it seems a bit much work to fix a whole line of supposed lens flare, thereby changing the whole photo. It either is not flare, or it is massive flare and not worth it, IMO.

Andy, Sid, any experts on flare? I used the blow up image thing, and I could not see that it was flare, looked like the gold color that the sea turns when there is that sun on it.

But experts, please speak. I will post the fixed version, anyway. In a minute.

Meanwhile, here is a flower photo for you all to look at as you are waiting. I promise to shoot fruit, also, probably this afternoon, :rofl :rofl :rofl .

[Stan]

My view for the summer

ISO100; F/14; 1/50sec; FL18mm

[mercphoto]

http://gingersnap.smugmug.com/photos/7152017-L.jpgThanks


To me the fence in the background is disturbing in its lack of focus. I'd rather see it in focus, or much more blurred. For my tastes its inbetween blurry and focused in a not-pleasant way. Can you retake the shot?

[DoctorIt]

My view for the summer

ISO100; F/14; 1/50sec; FL18mmnot a bad view! I like the shot too, how bout some kick in those colors? I'm sure an old LAB steepening a la Rutt would do it. :D

[DoctorIt]

here I am:

http://www-unix.ecs.umass.edu/~ermiller/photos/2004-08/2004-08-09.jpg

yeah yeah, go head Rutt, tell me you want it in color (I just don't like how I look in color. i look to real and boring, this makes me a little cooler and more mysterious... ooooo).

[wxwax]

http://gingerSnap.smugmug.com/photos/7134651-S.jpg

Ginger, this is hilarious, made me laugh out loud.

[wxwax]

here I am:

http://www-unix.ecs.umass.edu/~ermiller/photos/2004-08/2004-08-09.jpg

yeah yeah, go head Rutt, tell me you want it in color (I just don't like how I look in color. i look to real and boring, this makes me a little cooler and more mysterious... ooooo).

My, what big toes you have. :evil

[Andy]

here I am:

http://www-unix.ecs.umass.edu/~ermiller/photos/2004-08/2004-08-09.jpg

yeah yeah, go head Rutt, tell me you want it in color (I just don't like how I look in color. i look to real and boring, this makes me a little cooler and more mysterious... ooooo).

a fine example of what wide angle can do. nice one. notice the perspective change?

[Andy]

let's identify the focal length, it helps us all.

so, in the official thread, please say:


photo title, focal length, shooter


in the comments thread, just say "28mm" or some such.

[wxwax]

I'm not sure all of our members will know what focal length they were using. They'd have to know how to read EXIF data.

[ginger_55]

I have been assuming that since I have been shooting with the kit lens, as wide as possible, that it has been 18 mm.

Is that not correct, and what is the exif?

ginger

[ginger_55]

I have the one who basically has been posting. Mine is the first on the Challenge forum, only one other.

Did someone complain re the focal length?

They all look wide to me?

Aside from the fact that I have kept that lens at 18 mm, and I was wishing tonight that I could put it wider.

I don't know what to think on the timing and the big red letters, re how I was shooting.

And I don't know how to prove it.

ginger

[wxwax]

I have been assuming that since I have been shooting with the kit lens, as wide as possible, that it has been 18 mm.

Is that not correct, and what is the exif?

ginger

:D Thanks for making my point, Ginger! :thumb :rofl

EXIF is the data that the camera stores for each shot. Depending upon the camera, it can include the time, date, camera model, shutter speed, aperature, ISO, focal length, special camera settings, whether you left the iron turned on back home... that sort of thing.

It's what cmr looks up when he wants to know if you made the bed before leaving the house for the day.

I always get in trouble when I do math, but if your lens is 18mm on a camera with a 1.6 magnification factor, then you're actually shooting at 28.8mm.

[Shakey]

Here are a couple that I took on Sunday so they are not eligible.I shot every shot at 18mm thinking the contest had started DOh!
18mm or 28.8 after conversion
http://shakey.smugmug.com/photos/7101971-M.jpg

http://shakey.smugmug.com/photos/7096314-M.jpg

I hope to be able to get out this week to get something.

Tim

[Shakey]

I like this one so far Ginger
http://gingersnap.smugmug.com/photos/7152020-S.jpg
The one that is similar to this without the dog looks like it has had to much post process work.And it does not look real to me.

Tim

[ginger_55]

I like this one so far Ginger
http://gingersnap.smugmug.com/photos/7152020-S.jpg
The one that is similar to this without the dog looks like it has had to much post process work.And it does not look real to me.

Tim
Thanks, Tim. They both had the same amount. The assembly line process. But the sky or something was a bit blue in the other one. Different shots, same post...........

ginger

[spockling]

First attempt today.......5.4 mm or 35 mm equivalent

[Stan]

not a bad view! I like the shot too, how bout some kick in those colors? I'm sure an old LAB steepening a la Rutt would do it. :D

The front of the tractor is altered alot, shot through tinted glass, it mutes all the colours.
Here's the unaltered pic

[gubbs]

Found myself in a pub on Monday evening, I have cropped this slightly just to lose the camera from the right. Eligible?? and any good?? :D

http://Gubbs.smugmug.com/photos/7167955-L.jpg

[SeeMoon]

Found myself in a pub on Monday evening, I have cropped this slightly just to lose the camera from the right. Eligible?? and any good?? :D

http://Gubbs.smugmug.com/photos/7167955-S.jpg

I like the idea Gubbs! But her face in the mirror does not take the attention that it should..maybe a little extra exposure?
By the way..only Brit's 'find' themselves in a pub, do they? :D

[Andy]

nobody's complaining. relax. breath deeply. :D

we just want to know. it helps.

so put on your entry, ginger, 18mm x 1.6 crop factory = 29mm. that'll be fine.

no worries.

[bikehiker]

Can I play? I had a little time yesterday morning, but the morning haze was playing tricks on me. I'm going to try a spot Fri. that I've been wanting to get to and haven't yet. well this is what I have so far.

Childs Play at 35.5mm equivalent
http://bikehiker.smugmug.com/photos/7193162-M.jpg

[bikehiker]

here I am:

http://www-unix.ecs.umass.edu/~ermiller/photos/2004-08/2004-08-09.jpg

yeah yeah, go head Rutt, tell me you want it in color (I just don't like how I look in color. i look to real and boring, this makes me a little cooler and more mysterious... ooooo).
I like the bw effect Eric.

[ginger_55]

nobody's complaining. relax. breath deeply. :D

we just want to know. it helps.

so put on your entry, ginger, 18mm x 1.6 crop factory = 29mm. that'll be fine.

no worries.
________________________________________________

Thanks, Andy. I understand what you are saying now. No need to clarifly.

I will put it back in at 29 mm.

ginger

[ginger_55]

I went to that outdoor vegetable/fruit/flowers market, and took about 150 pictures. Did not see a single good one. (Had the best peach I have had in 20 yrs).

I was quite surprising, to me, that I still cannot shoot those things. Certainly not with wide. I will make a point of working a few up and posting them, perhaps I can get some critiques as to why they were so bad.

The shots from before sunset, till after dark, they came out well, as I can see from a contact sheet. Not the same problems.

The other shots came out well, too. Got a great bridge shot, unusual, but that market was a bit of a wash. Good thing I was not being paid. And I tended to center everything. The only reason I can think of that I did that, well I can't think of one.

I usually only center when appropriate. I have nothing against centering, but this was a "style", kind of a beginners style. Skye was centered, but I thought that worked so well, was totally an accident. The only thing I really had control over, and not much control, was a small brain synapse that said, "shoot".

ginger

[ginger_55]

This was anothre grab shot, as my husband drove me to the doctors yesterday.
Taken thru the windshield. Only a few turned out, but this would have been the one I would have hoped to turn out. The beginning of an ongoing bridge series I expect to continue throughout this challenge.

18 mm, sraight shot, conversion about 27 mm?
This is the last, and only, time I am going to put the conversion factor in.
No cropping, wouldn't have known how, smile.

http://gingersnap.smugmug.com/photos/7194339-L.jpg


Those bridges in the background, one a part of Charleston since the 1920s, they are going to sleep with the fishes, as soon as the new one is finished in 2005/2006.

g

[dkapp]

________________________________________________

Thanks, Andy. I understand what you are saying now. No need to clarifly.

I will put it back in at 29 mm.

ginger

But if the photo wasn't taken at 18mm, you can't just put that there. I thought that picture was taken at 55mm x 1.6 crop factor?

I'm not sure whats going on?

Dave

[ginger_55]

He might have been confused. I will change the info on it, I am going to simply put 50 or 55 mm, will go back and looked. That picture was not cropped, but there is a conversion, or difference.

I am not going to go there, unless I have a picture extensively cropped, it is too confusing. I just posted a photo taken last night, it has got to be at 18 mm, will check it, too.

I personally think that the easiest thing to do is to use the mm figures at which we are shooting, rather than convert them to the old way. We are not shooting the old way. If a picture is cropped more than just to straighten, or the straightening changes the picture my more than a few pixels, perhaps that should be stated.

Have over eaten, medicated myself, just hit me, OK.

ginger

ginger

[wxwax]

Found myself in a pub on Monday evening, I have cropped this slightly just to lose the camera from the right. Eligible?? and any good?? :D

http://Gubbs.smugmug.com/photos/7167955-S.jpg

Very good :nod It's a good idea, and the B&W really helps.

[dkapp]

He might have been confused. I will change the info on it, I am going to simply put 50 or 55 mm, will go back and looked. That picture was not cropped, but there is a conversion, or difference.

I am not going to go there, unless I have a picture extensively cropped, it is too confusing. I just posted a photo taken last night, it has got to be at 18 mm, will check it, too.

I personally think that the easiest thing to do is to use the mm figures at which we are shooting, rather than convert them to the old way. We are not shooting the old way. If a picture is cropped more than just to straighten, or the straightening changes the picture my more than a few pixels, perhaps that should be stated.

Have over eaten, medicated myself, just hit me, OK.

ginger

ginger

The crop factor is not how much you crop a photo. Its the built in magnification on most Digital SLR cameras. Your Canon has a 1.6 crop factor. This means if you shoot at 18mm on your lens, you need to multiply by 1.6 to get the true focal length. So 55mm on your lens is actually 88mm. Shooting 18mm will actually be a focal length of 28.8mm.

Your picture of the dog on the rock shows focal length of 55mm before the crop factor. So this shot is actually shot at 88mm.

I hope this clears thing up a bit. Let me know if you have more questions.

Dave

[lynnma]

The crop factor is not how much you crop a photo. Its the built in magnification on most Digital SLR cameras. Your Canon has a 1.6 crop factor. This means if you shoot at 18mm on your lens, you need to multiply by 1.6 to get the true focal length. So 55mm on your lens is actually 88mm. Shooting 18mm will actually be a focal length of 28.8mm.

Your picture of the dog on the rock shows focal length of 55mm before the crop factor. So this shot is actually shot at 88mm.

I hope this clears thing up a bit. Let me know if you have more questions.

DaveWhether or not it clears it up for Ginger Dave, it's helped me a lot:D I thought I knew this but my brain cells will only hold onto so much stuff at once and then some of it drops out. Very clearly put. Thanks a bunch. Now where's my calculater.....
:D

[gubbs]

The crop factor is not how much you crop a photo. Its the built in magnification on most Digital SLR cameras. Your Canon has a 1.6 crop factor. This means if you shoot at 18mm on your lens, you need to multiply by 1.6 to get the true focal length. So 55mm on your lens is actually 88mm. Shooting 18mm will actually be a focal length of 28.8mm.

Your picture of the dog on the rock shows focal length of 55mm before the crop factor. So this shot is actually shot at 88mm.

I hope this clears thing up a bit. Let me know if you have more questions.

Dave "so by the same rationale" :D If my 8080 is 7.1 – 35.6mm (equivalent to 28 – 140mm lens in 35mm format) my crop factor is 3.94. Is that right??

[dkapp]

Whether or not it clears it up for Ginger Dave, it's helped me a lot:D I thought I knew this but my brain cells will only hold onto so much stuff at once and then some of it drops out. Very clearly put. Thanks a bunch. Now where's my calculater.....
:D

I'm glad it helps. I had a hard time wrapping my brain around the crop factor when I first got into digital cameras. The thing that makes it hard is the prosumer P&S, to the P&S & DSLR all have different crop factors. Right now the only one I can understand it the DSLR numbers. I'll leave the others to Andy :)

P.S. I had to find a calculator to help with the math. I started out doing it in my head, but I didn't have my coffee yet.

Dave

[dkapp]

"so by the same rationale" :D If my 8080 is 7.1 – 35.6mm (equivalent to 28 – 140mm lens in 35mm format) my crop factor is 3.94. Is that right??


Your math looks good to me :)

Dave

[gubbs]

Your math looks good to me :)

Dave Thanks Dave, enjoy the coffee!

[dkapp]

Thanks Dave, enjoy the coffee!

It's a Tully's Americano. I have one every morning, and can't get going w/o one. Just think, last year I didn't even like coffee.

Dave

[ginger_55]

http://gingerSnap.smugmug.com/photos/7198513-L.jpg

[ginger_55]

http://gingerSnap.smugmug.com/photos/7198518-L.jpg

[ginger_55]

http://gingerSnap.smugmug.com/photos/7198514-L.jpg


This is my attempt at manipulation, by color. I used layer (s), put solid color all over it, burned it in, brought it back a bit, took a wide soft brush and wiped off the color on the water, then I took a small hard brush and touched up the places I had missed.

This is all part of a series. Area photographers, much better than I am, have been following the building of the new bridge, the old bridges are a large part of the history of anyone who has lived in Charleston. We all have our own stories of those bridges. I have mine.

The people who would not come to Mt Pleasant because of their fear of a narrow bridge going into Charleston. They have that story.

I was the opposite. In 1985, I got my first speeding ticket since 1965, for going over 65 mph on the narrowest of the bridges. It never occurred to me that there was a speed limit. I was so proud of myself that I had worked up to that speed, I expected to exceed it, lol.

After the hurricane of 1989, we were under a curfew. I defied the curfew and drove those bridges both ways. It was very strange, empty and dark.

These living bridges are being immortalized, through photography. I don't know where they stand to get their photos. I am experimenting, more than half way through the game.
This is ongoing through the Wide Challenge. g

[ginger_55]

I'm glad it helps. I had a hard time wrapping my brain around the crop factor when I first got into digital cameras. The thing that makes it hard is the prosumer P&S, to the P&S & DSLR all have different crop factors. Right now the only one I can understand it the DSLR numbers. I'll leave the others to Andy :)

P.S. I had to find a calculator to help with the math. I started out doing it in my head, but I didn't have my coffee yet.

Dave

On the crop factor, and I had no idea it was called that. This is how I do it, no sweat. And not important, IMO. But for kicks, I do it sometimes.

You take the D figure, double it, and pull back by 1/2, and I figure that is close enough.

For instance. 18 X 2 = 36. Half of 18 is 9, subtract that from 36 and you get 27. That is close enough for me.

I do not actually do that math. Doubling it is easy, to 36. I know that is not right, so I take around the right amt from that, and I have figure I think is workable. For instance I might take ten from 36 (10s are easier for me than 9s). That would give me 26, then I add one, just for because, and I am at 27, that way too. I might decide to throw another one in and get to 28, but IMO the exact figure is not as important as my sanity, speed, etc.

I do that same thing with tips. People have slide things to figure the tips. I can figure a tip in seconds. Pennies are not that important, and if they are to you, they probably are to him/her, too, so I add them. Wouldn't want to be cheap.

ginger

I am putting up my bridge pictures to show that where I think that dog shot is one of the best things I have ever done, it was a grab, and I think I have better shots for the Challenge, in the long run. So the facts of the dog shot are really academic and just to be worried about by the purists, IMO.

One thing to be considered here. I think there are people hesitant to enter this challenge for fear they don't have a wide enough lens. I am hoping as many people enter as possible. I hope what I did, completely inadvertently, does not scare any people away. This Challenge, like all is to learn from. The only way to learn is to participate. I hope to see a large number of entries in the final. Even without winning shots, well one never knows there, but just enter, don't be scared by this. If all you have is a 50/55 mm lens, I am sure it would be understood. My situation was a bit different. I am going to duct tape my lens, so it cannot be accidentally moved.

One reason to enter is to help your fellow photographers. The more who enter, the more finalists. This might not be someone's favorite area of expertise, your equipment might not be the best for this Challenge, but some time it will be, for you, or you, or you, and the more photographers who enter will be to your advantage, too.

I am going to continue to work on that bridge through this whole thing. Actually, with bug repellent, it wasn't too bad, it is delightful out there, waiting to see what the sunset will bring, or what I need to do to maximize it.
Fishermen see it every night. Kind of like going backward in time, with new equipment and a new bridge going to change our skyline.

We are likely to get some effects from the storms, it is cloudy right now. So don't know what that will do as far as the amt of time I can spend on this.

[rutt]

Hey, Andy, I understand this no crop thing and think it's a good idea, especially for this challenge. Please, clarify, though. What about the bare minimum crop needed to straighten a slightly off kilter horizon or vertical elements? Either way is fine, I just want to know the rules. I have trouble holding the camera level. So this might be a good time to practice...

Thanks.

[gubbs]

Found myself in another pub at lunchtime (artistic purposes only Simone! :D)

http://Gubbs.smugmug.com/photos/7201340-L.jpg

[DJ-S1]

This was anothre grab shot, as my husband drove me to the doctors yesterday.
Taken thru the windshield. Only a few turned out, but this would have been the one I would have hoped to turn out. The beginning of an ongoing bridge series I expect to continue throughout this challenge.

18 mm, sraight shot, conversion about 27 mm?
This is the last, and only, time I am going to put the conversion factor in.
No cropping, wouldn't have known how, smile.

http://gingersnap.smugmug.com/photos/7194339-S.jpg


Those bridges in the background, one a part of Charleston since the 1920s, they are going to sleep with the fishes, as soon as the new one is finished in 2005/2006.

gOh, you have to be kidding me! They are finally going to tear down the Cooper River Bridges??? That's big news, wait until I tell my family that one. I remember my mother being pertrified going over the "old" bridge, which was barely 2 lanes wide and seemed like it was going to collapse any minute. And that was in 1976! :nod (It's the little one on the right in Ginger's picture.)

[Andy]

Hey, Andy, I understand this no crop thing and think it's a good idea, especially for this challenge. Please, clarify, though. What about the bare minimum crop needed to straighten a slightly off kilter horizon or vertical elements? Either way is fine, I just want to know the rules. I have trouble holding the camera level. So this might be a good time to practice...

Thanks.

it's spelled out in the rules for this challenge. in this thread (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?p=23145#post23145)


here's the relavent passage:
* there is no cropping allowed for this challenge. yep - you have to get it right at time of shoot. minor, and i do mean minor, leveling of the horizon in a shot is allowed, even if this results in you cropping off a pixel or three.

[ginger_55]

Hey, Andy, I understand this no crop thing and think it's a good idea, especially for this challenge. Please, clarify, though. What about the bare minimum crop needed to straighten a slightly off kilter horizon or vertical elements? Either way is fine, I just want to know the rules. I have trouble holding the camera level. So this might be a good time to practice...

Thanks.
Either way was fine with me, too.

He has said the bare minimum, just to straighen a horizon, is acceptable. I know he said that, I asked it on Sunday, and he answered, I think it is in the stuff he put up Sunday. I expected it to be a question.

I was fine with it, either way. Some of my beach shots seem to look better tilted, IMO.

I try to pick shots that don't need straightening. Just one more piece of work. I just did those bridge shots, but I cannot think of one I had to straighten.

However, you can, and he mentioned that you could lose 3 pixels in doing it.

ginger

[ginger_55]

Oh, you have to be kidding me! They are finally going to tear down the Cooper River Bridges??? That's big news, wait until I tell my family that one. I remember my mother being pertrified going over the "old" bridge, which was barely 2 lanes wide and seemed like it was going to collapse any minute. And that was in 1976! :nod (It's the little one on the right in Ginger's picture.)
And the darn cop told me I could never go 65 mph again, to say the least of faster. The limit might be 45, I just go with the traffic flow.

When it was first built in the 20s, they had policemen who would drive frightened people across. When I moved here, in the 80's, they no longer assisted people across, so some people just would not go.

In fact I was in a group therapy class for quite a while, gotta have someone to talk to when you can't hear. It was great for awhile. But more than several people came in to get over their fear of crossing those bridges.

They made me feel safe. I was not happy in school, but every night, I could cross those bridges, away from the school, then cross to the island over the "rainbow" causeway, giving me more distance from the city. I still am not a "downtown" person.

I have been down there for this Challenge, just a bit, and plan to go more. I tell people I have a love/hate relationship with that place.

But I love the Cooper River Bridges, the ones I am used to. They separate the men from the boys, IMO, of whichever gender.

g

They are going to sink them in the deep blue...... but they forgot to ask for funding for that. HAHAHA!

[snapapple]

Either way was fine with me, too.
He has said the bare minimum, just to straighen a horizon, is acceptable. I know he said that, I asked it on Sunday, and he answered, I think it is in the stuff he put up Sunday. I expected it to be a question.
However, you can, and he mentioned that you could lose 3 pixels in doing it.

ginger

No time to shoot yet. Looked through some of my pics from last summer last night and found lots of wide shots among the vacation pics. It's my usual way for shooting scenery. Now I guess it's time to get some practice using wide for other stuff.

Here's an example of why I usually crop. I guess I should have walked up a little further, but I was trying to find a moment when someone didn't walk directly in front of me. I cropped out the street in front and made this into a size that fits the panorama frames available. I think it looks better that way. But, now that we're talking about the perspective, the wide street does give it a certain perspective.
Focal length 7.1mm = 35mm
http://snapapple.smugmug.com/photos/7201750-M.jpg

Cropped version - 7.1mm = 35mm
http://snapapple.smugmug.com/photos/7178787-M.jpg

[snapapple]

Got to get back to work. But, just to let you know I'm thinking about this challenge. I'll try to get out on the weekend.

7.1mm = 35mm
http://snapapple.smugmug.com/photos/7202214-M.jpg

[dkapp]

I am putting up my bridge pictures to show that where I think that dog shot is one of the best things I have ever done, it was a grab, and I think I have better shots for the Challenge, in the long run. So the facts of the dog shot are really academic and just to be worried about by the purists, IMO.


This is a wide angle challenge, and that shot was not a wide angle. As much as you like the picture, it doesn't fit the theme & criteria. So the facts are academic, and for a reason.

Thanks for humoring me & sticking to the challenge rules.

Dave (Purist)

[bikehiker]

http://gingersnap.smugmug.com/photos/7198514-L.jpg


This is my attempt at manipulation, by color. I used layer (s), put solid color all over it, burned it in, brought it back a bit, took a wide soft brush and wiped off the color on the water, then I took a small hard brush and touched up the places I had missed.

This is all part of a series. Area photographers, much better than I am, have been following the building of the new bridge, the old bridges are a large part of the history of anyone who has lived in Charleston. We all have our own stories of those bridges. I have mine.

The people who would not come to Mt Pleasant because of their fear of a narrow bridge going into Charleston. They have that story.

I was the opposite. In 1985, I got my first speeding ticket since 1965, for going over 65 mph on the narrowest of the bridges. It never occurred to me that there was a speed limit. I was so proud of myself that I had worked up to that speed, I expected to exceed it, lol.

After the hurricane of 1989, we were under a curfew. I defied the curfew and drove those bridges both ways. It was very strange, empty and dark.

These living bridges are being immortalized, through photography. I don't know where they stand to get their photos. I am experimenting, more than half way through the game.
This is ongoing through the Wide Challenge. g

I really like what you've done here ginger.

[DoctorIt]

On the crop factor, and I had no idea it was called that. This is how I do it, no sweat. And not important, IMO. But for kicks, I do it sometimes.

You take the D figure, double it, and pull back by 1/2, and I figure that is close enough.

For instance. 18 X 2 = 36. Half of 18 is 9, subtract that from 36 and you get 27. That is close enough for me.

I do not actually do that math.....

I do that same thing with ....

ginger

I am putting up my bridge....

One thing to be considered here. I think there are people hesitant to enter this challenge for fear they don't ....

....YIKES!
Andy, for once, I have to disagree with you: never, ever, ever call it a crop factor within a contest that has a no crop rule!!! :rofl

Its a multiplier, suffice to say, the CMOS chip in the Drebel is not the same size as a 35mm film, and the result is this factor. Ginger, I have to admit, sometimes your posts get too long for me so I skim, but there's no mystery or halving and subtracting 9, its straight up:

(focal length) x 1.6 = (corrected focal length)

back to trying to catch up...

[DoctorIt]

The front of the tractor is altered alot, shot through tinted glass, it mutes all the colours.
Here's the unaltered picwow, that tint sure does take a lot out. I bet you could even get away with a little more though.

[pathfinder]

If we can crop for being slightly askew, can we crop/transform to correct for perspective distortion also? Or must the distortion of the wide angle be made to stay apparent? I have a couple of images that were shot with about a 12mm wide angle on a 10D or 12mm x 1.6 mag factor = 19.2 mm but the shots have been corrected in PS for perspective distortion - otherwise they are full frame - Is this OK?

This is what they look like.... all with 12-24 mm Sigma zoom at the wide end

http://pathfinder.smugmug.com/photos/7212481-L.jpg

http://pathfinder.smugmug.com/photos/7212486-L.jpg


http://pathfinder.smugmug.com/photos/7212487-L.jpg

[Andy]

yes, but minor cropping only. i understand the need for this and i'm okay with it.

remember folks the intent here is to be a hard-ass on purpose :D becuase we want to compose with the viewfinder not photoshop.

to reiterate: minor, very minor, cropping to correct horizon or perspective is OK with me.

thanks for the heads up, pf!

[wxwax]

How do I use the Free Transform tool to get the right perspective on life, and is that considered a minor adjustment?

[Andy]

whatever it is :D

just be sure you shoot wiiiiiiiiide.

oh and do read petteri's article, it's really good!

YIKES!
Andy, for once, I have to disagree with you: never, ever, ever call it a crop factor within a contest that has a no crop rule!!! :rofl

Its a multiplier, suffice to say, the CMOS chip in the Drebel is not the same size as a 35mm film, and the result is this factor. Ginger, I have to admit, sometimes your posts get too long for me so I skim, but there's no mystery or halving and subtracting 9, its straight up:

(focal length) x 1.6 = (corrected focal length)

back to trying to catch up...

[snapapple]

How do I use the Free Transform tool to get the right perspective on life, and is that considered a minor adjustment?

My camera is very bad with this particular thing. I got the camera the day before I left on my vacation last summer. I took lots of pictures of churches and towers in Italy. I was shocked to see the warped images on my computer when I returned. I finally learned about this tool.

Click on Image> Transform> Distort. Then pull the top corners of the frame out until the image is straight. There really is no cropping required. You lose a tiny bit of the image on the sides, that's all. Now, I do this in Photoshop Elements, but I assume Photoshop is the same for you other guys.

[ginger_55]

This is a wide angle challenge, and that shot was not a wide angle. As much as you like the picture, it doesn't fit the theme & criteria. So the facts are academic, and for a reason.

Thanks for humoring me & sticking to the challenge rules.

Dave (Purist)
Ok, do you mind if I get to it, when I get to it. I am sitting with papers all over.

I will take it down and now. But I was waiting for the results of the Challenge, which I would assume you could understand, and I undertook to collate and put together all the tutorials I have collected, so I would have some order.

But to humor you, anything.

g

[snapapple]

My camera is very bad with this particular thing. I got the camera the day before I left on my vacation last summer. I took lots of pictures of churches and towers in Italy. I was shocked to see the warped images on my computer when I returned. I finally learned about this tool.


I never had this problem with my Tamron lens. There was hardly any distortion at all. I really think this is a defect with this camera (Olympus c5050z).

Here's a composit with the before and after. Look at that *bent* pillar on the left!

[Andy]

comments on all entrants, including the finalists and the winner, made by me are in this thread (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=2157&page=4&pp=10)

harry will get to his today and tomorrow.

[DJ-S1]

comments on all entrants, including the finalists and the winner, made by me are in this thread (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=2157&page=4&pp=10)

harry will get to his today and tomorrow.
Hey Andy, I think you missed mine. I was anxious to read your (and Harry's) comments/areas for improvement. Thanks!

[lynnesite]

Found myself in another pub at lunchtime (artistic purposes only Simone! :D)

http://Gubbs.smugmug.com/photos/7201340-S.jpg

I like this one a lot, Gubbs! Great job preserving the mid and near fore detail.

[Andy]

Hey Andy, I think you missed mine. I was anxious to read your (and Harry's) comments/areas for improvement. Thanks!

so sorry, you are right. i missed yours. it's done now. keep on the lookout for harry's comments.

[DJ-S1]

so sorry, you are right. i missed yours. it's done now. keep on the lookout for harry's comments.
No prob, thanks for all the effort you put into this. :thumb

[digismile]

If we can crop for being slightly askew, can we crop/transform to correct for perspective distortion also? Or must the distortion of the wide angle be made to stay apparent? I have a couple of images that were shot with about a 12mm wide angle on a 10D or 12mm x 1.6 mag factor = 19.2 mm but the shots have been corrected in PS for perspective distortion - otherwise they are full frame - Is this OK?

This is what they look like.... all with 12-24 mm Sigma zoom at the wide end



http://pathfinder.smugmug.com/photos/7212486-S.jpg

A very good friend of mine took a trip to France last year and took a bunch of pictures of doors ... houses, buildings, whatever grabbed him. I've been hooked ever since! I think we should have a door challenge :D

Nice shot.

Brad

[ginger_55]

I would like to use the wide opportunity to try shooting crooked and converging bldgs. Most of ours aren't that big, so I probably won't. I have some shots of the bridge that need to be "fixed", but I have enough others that don't. Learning how to fix them is not as easy as picking another one.

I just wondered if anyone else had thought of using the distortion, rather than fighting it.

ginger

[digismile]

Found myself in another pub at lunchtime (artistic purposes only Simone! :D)
http://gubbs.smugmug.com/photos/7201340-S.jpg

I think this photo has great mood. It's been 20 years since I was in Great Britain, but this brings back strong memories, smells, sounds ... I think that maybe that's partly what makes a great picture. Something that provides an instant connection for the viewer.

Great shot!
Brad

[ginger_55]

http://gingerSnap.smugmug.com/photos/7222620-L.jpg

[ginger_55]

http://gingerSnap.smugmug.com/photos/7222621-L.jpg


He played for money. He looked so unhappy.
I don't think it was just the camera, either.

[ginger_55]

http://gingerSnap.smugmug.com/photos/7222623-L.jpg

[AltPro]

Took the boys to Busch Gardens again today, and while getting ready to leave tonight, decided to grab my camera and take a few shots.

200asa 4 second exposure, ambient light source from the park, 8.9mm/14.24mm

"Quiet Falls"
http://ThroughTheLensLtd.smugmug.com/photos/7221550-L.jpg

Pathfinder, I love the door shot, also think doors would be a good challenge...

Ginger Very nice waiting for Sunset... Nice color.

This is going to be another busy challenge...

ginette

[AltPro]

Hey Ginger... He does look sad doesn't he? Money doesn't buy happiness? What does it look like without the PS blurring? I wonder at the background...

See you're up late too... I'm heading down for the night now, though.
Bonne Nuit

ginette

[wxwax]

Found myself in another pub at lunchtime (artistic purposes only Simone! :D)

http://Gubbs.smugmug.com/photos/7201340-S.jpg

Gubbsie, I really like this. I like the backlighting and the shape. Quite a lot of pure black in the foreground?

[gubbs]

Gubbsie, I really like this. I like the backlighting and the shape. Quite a lot of pure black in the foreground? Thanks Sid,
There is a huge dynamic range, I did shoot it in raw though, so I'm sure I can get more out of it. Some guidance on blending different exposures would be really helpful... I'll check out the "hall" later on
Thanks again

[SeeMoon]

Found myself in another pub at lunchtime (artistic purposes only Simone! :D)

http://Gubbs.smugmug.com/photos/7201340-S.jpg

Lovely! Great one Gubbs! Glad you guys hang out in pubs..for artistic purposes..of course.. :D
The dark foreground doesn't bother me at all, i'm curious to see what you're going to do in post..

[ginger_55]

http://gingersnap.smugmug.com/photos/7225359-L.jpg


In Mt Pleasant there is the forgotten road,
People meet on tuesday, generations together
enjoy the food and the music. They enjoy
each other.

g

[gubbs]

Lovely! Great one Gubbs! Glad you guys hang out in pubs..for artistic purposes..of course.. :D
The dark foreground doesn't bother me at all, i'm curious to see what you're going to do in post..
Thanks Simone, It was a very hot day, so I did manage a drink too, a very cold "Amstel" coincidently.
I don't want to do too much, just a hint of detail in the foreground, If I can work out how to do it :D

Sorry Lynn and Digismile, I was working backwards, thanks for the comments :thumb

[ginger_55]

http://gingerSnap.smugmug.com/photos/7226159-M.jpg

The composition is better. The background seemed busy, but not busy enough...............if that makes any sense. I think this is a better photo than the first one. I am very tired and not thinking well. That day, for some reason, I was putting everyone, thing, in the center. This is not.



http://gingerSnap.smugmug.com/photos/7226157-M.jpg

[Stan]

Lynnesite, new Avatar :thumb

[cletus]

http://pathfinder.smugmug.com/photos/7212486-S.jpg :thumb


http://pathfinder.smugmug.com/photos/7212487-S.jpg http://www.advrider.com/forums/images/smilies/Disappointed.gif

This one just looks funky to me. It has a "perspective corrected" look to it.

[ginger_55]

for outdoor photography: have no indoors, not for exhibit. So need suggestions on
photography in blah, very heavy rain. The storms a comin'. And I am not kidding, I can't go 3 or 4 days and no photographs.

ginger

That was short and sweet.
Suggestions needed for photographs, wide, in heavy rain conditions.

Probably the rain will flatten the ocean. Less dramatic rather than more. I think this is more of a flooding type, dripping through the ceiling storm.

Don't want to call photographer's anonymous......... don't know their number.

[Stan]

for outdoor photography: have no indoors, not for exhibit. So need suggestions on
photography in blah, very heavy rain. The storms a comin'. And I am not kidding, I can't go 3 or 4 days and no photographs.

ginger

That was short and sweet.
Suggestions needed for photographs, wide, in heavy rain conditions.

Probably the rain will flatten the ocean. Less dramatic rather than more. I think this is more of a flooding type, dripping through the ceiling storm.

Don't want to call photographer's anonymous......... don't know their number.


Sounds like a good time to go to the mall and brush up on people, candids, portraits, see if you can catch a shop lifter

[ginger_55]

and with the light sepia background. All shots at that fair type market, a real gathering place. This is so typical of the different generations, enjoying each other and the atmosphere. I am soooo bad at this kind of thing. I tried, should be another one next week, the peaches are over, though. Anyway, comments on all shots please.

I am not tough. Like people say they can take it, well, I am asking, but I don't take it well. So, please say something nice and something bad, if doG forbid, there should be anything bad to say. Say which you prefer. Say you hate them all. I funk quietly. I took some downtown the other day, have not worked them up yet, may save them for storm days, then I did ask for permission in some cases. For this thing, it is right in my backyard, so to speak, my "people". They were quite friendly, but I had a devil of a time photographing them, and I did not ask permission. I kind of just snuck closer, like with this guy. With this guy I think it worked. Cropping is not an option, so I went for the sepia and the image????

But here it is straight. Simone asked to see the Sad Violinist without the blur, I did that, too. I like the vertical on that, the small one without blur. Anyone have an opinion? g
http://gingerSnap.smugmug.com/photos/7225358-L.jpg

[ginger_55]

Sounds like a good time to go to the mall and brush up on people, candids, portraits, see if you can catch a shop lifter

Stan, I appreciate your suggestion. Will try to convert it to someplace I go, someplace that has not kicked out my camera yet, like Barnes and Noble did.

I just have to answer you though, thought it was funny, I don't go to malls, not indoor malls. Visited my son in Chicago years ago, he took me to a huge mall, I thought he was trying to torture me.

We have a wonderful outdoor type mall that I love, but I have never liked indoor malls, and the bigger they get the more I don't like them. Also, warehouse stores, yuch. I shop at Wal-mart now, out of necessity, but it is not my idea of fun. Belong to Sam's, I send Bill.

Just thought it was funny....................so not me. And so memorable the times I have been "treated" to trips to the mall.

Thanks, though, perhaps I can convert it to somewhere I do go????

I noticed on TV, that bad weather is like "night", the color kind of disappears. I think man made colors show up well.

ginger

[Stan]

Stan, I appreciate your suggestion. Will try to convert it to someplace I go, someplace that has not kicked out my camera yet, like Barnes and Noble did.

I just have to answer you though, thought it was funny, I don't go to malls, not indoor malls. Visited my son in Chicago years ago, he took me to a huge mall, I thought he was trying to torture me.

We have a wonderful outdoor type mall that I love, but I have never liked indoor malls, and the bigger they get the more I don't like them. Also, warehouse stores, yuch. I shop at Wal-mart now, out of necessity, but it is not my idea of fun. Belong to Sam's, I send Bill.

Just thought it was funny....................so not me. And so memorable the times I have been "treated" to trips to the mall.

Thanks, though, perhaps I can convert it to somewhere I do go????

I noticed on TV, that bad weather is like "night", the color kind of disappears. I think man made colors show up well.

ginger

The mall was meant with a pinch of salt. Shopping is my idea of... well I don't go more than I can help. I live 15 miles from Cambridge and go there maybe three times a year. Should go one evening and take some night shots of the colleges though

The point was for you to try another discipline, somewhere undercover, then in your next post you show a very natural, unposed shot of real joy :thumb

[ginger_55]

The mall was meant with a pinch of salt. Shopping is my idea of... well I don't go more than I can help. I live 15 miles from Cambridge and go there maybe three times a year. Should go one evening and take some night shots of the colleges though

The point was for you to try another discipline, somewhere undercover, then in your next post you show a very natural, unposed shot of real joy :thumb
Thanks, Stan. I sat in the same spot and waited about an hour to get that shot. She would run up, then leave before I could get my camera up. And I was so afraid that the man might notice I was taking his picture, I was getting nothing.

I was like my dog, I snuck closer and closer. I was in his face a few times, he never flinched and never noticed me. Other people did, and we all laughed. I took lots of shots right there, but that was the one I was waiting for. When I nailed it, it was centered.

I honestly have asked people, Mt Pleasant people are not usually happy about this stuff, and explaining why I want their photo, well, it is very difficult for me. (The internet is a scary place for some people, especially if we are talking children.) On Monday I was handing out cards, when I did ask, or when it became very obvious.

I have never "specialized" in scenics. They were the territory of others in my family. I took "people" pictures. In my family, I was jokingly known for a "ginger's type photograph", and it meant people. My people grew up, moved away................I have taken pictures of them, and theirs, on trips and holidays. Other than that, I have not been that much of a photographer until this "forum". And it has been easier to switch over to the "nature", landscape, dog photographer I have become.

People were my roots, though. years of people. Places like that market have been difficult for me, even when the people were dependent on me for bed and board. They are never lined up right. I do like that man and the little girl shot, though. Wish I had a release. I got so I would have my camera up if the kid even looked at the man, it was still difficult. And he loved her, just adored her..........watched her all the time, his eyes were so lit up. Wonderful relationship. I am more stiff with children. I think it is because I can't hear them, but that was beautiful to watch.

My rainbow picture, along with some of my copy on it, is in our weekly paper today. I am quite proud of that. "I swear it laid down at my feet and stayed long enough to be photographed every which way from Sunday."

ginger

Moultrie News is the paper with a circulation of 25,000. Used to be owned by people I knew, who hated me. Thought my daughter was a bad influence on their daughter. Both kids turned out great.

[ginger_55]

Relationships

http://gingersnap.smugmug.com/photos/7225208-L.jpg

I wanted to add that I learned from some of Andy's examples that taking pictures from behind the people could work.
I was sitting down at a picnic table, drinking water. I became aware that this was the "main street" of the market.

This little girl is/was adorable:
(She is the only one who smiled at me right after I took this photo)

http://gingersnap.smugmug.com/photos/7225349-L.jpg


Street Photography in MY TOWN.
by ginger

You all, I have noticed that I have felt no need to frame these.

[pathfinder]

:thumb

http://www.advrider.com/forums/images/smilies/Disappointed.gif

This one just looks funky to me. It has a "perspective corrected" look to it.Thanks Cletus - I think you are right - I need to stretch it more when it is transformed perhaps - I thought it was croped tonear the bottom of the door just a little strip of cement, but I think yoiu are right that the door is too wide for its height.. What caught my eye of course was the nice splash of red. I know where it is now and I can go back and grab it again.

Actually I think this subject will be better handled by a 85mm lens - lots less perspective distortion to correct, but I knew I could correct the falling away with the wide angle in PS so I wanted to get close and use it. I need to find some WA shots with a powerful foreground subject and work on them.

But I do like good shots of colorful doors anyway too.

[DoctorIt]

How do I use the Free Transform tool to get the right perspective on life, and is that considered a minor adjustment?Aw, come on... whats wrong with a little perspective? Thats the whole fun in shooting wiiiide!

[ginger_55]

I am kind of worried, actually, that my shots don't show more wiiiiide distortion.
Sorry, this is another dog shot, it is my dog, but all the other dog shots lack perspective "changes", so I am posting this to show that I, too, am learning to shoot wide that old fashioned way, the way it should be done. I am not there yet, but am on my way.

http://gingersnap.smugmug.com/photos/7157754-M.jpg


No dog, here. She asked nicely....... and I messed up a bit with her picture, too.

http://gingerSnap.smugmug.com/photos/7225354-M.jpg

[ginger_55]

This might be better, even.

Not hoping for more, hoping for less, or a smaller number than the 18mm this photo was shot with.

http://gingerSnap.smugmug.com/photos/7225356-L.jpg

[Stan]

Thanks, Stan. I sat in the same spot and waited about an hour to get that shot. She would run up, then leave before I could get my camera up. And I was so afraid that the man might notice I was taking his picture, I was getting nothing.

I was like my dog, I snuck closer and closer. I was in his face a few times, he never flinched and never noticed me. Other people did, and we all laughed. I took lots of shots right there, but that was the one I was waiting for. When I nailed it, it was centered.

I honestly have asked people, Mt Pleasant people are not usually happy about this stuff, and explaining why I want their photo, well, it is very difficult for me. (The internet is a scary place for some people, especially if we are talking children.) On Monday I was handing out cards, when I did ask, or when it became very obvious.

I have never "specialized" in scenics. They were the territory of others in my family. I took "people" pictures. In my family, I was jokingly known for a "ginger's type photograph", and it meant people. My people grew up, moved away................I have taken pictures of them, and theirs, on trips and holidays. Other than that, I have not been that much of a photographer until this "forum". And it has been easier to switch over to the "nature", landscape, dog photographer I have become.

People were my roots, though. years of people. Places like that market have been difficult for me, even when the people were dependent on me for bed and board. They are never lined up right. I do like that man and the little girl shot, though. Wish I had a release. I got so I would have my camera up if the kid even looked at the man, it was still difficult. And he loved her, just adored her..........watched her all the time, his eyes were so lit up. Wonderful relationship. I am more stiff with children. I think it is because I can't hear them, but that was beautiful to watch.

My rainbow picture, along with some of my copy on it, is in our weekly paper today. I am quite proud of that. "I swear it laid down at my feet and stayed long enough to be photographed every which way from Sunday."

ginger

Moultrie News is the paper with a circulation of 25,000. Used to be owned by people I knew, who hated me. Thought my daughter was a bad influence on their daughter. Both kids turned out great.


Congratulations on getting published :thwak to the ex owners.

Taking pictures of friends and family is easy, however taking shots of stragers takes nerve. :nono

[gubbs]

2nd attempt

http://Gubbs.smugmug.com/photos/7245125-L.jpg

[Stan]

2nd attempt

http://Gubbs.smugmug.com/photos/7245125-M.jpg

Subtle but noticable difference, without turning the floor too red, nice

[Stan]

A bad shot of the overgrown back garden and building site this evening after a great thunderstorm

[ginger_55]

http://gubbs.smugmug.com/photos/7245125-S.jpg2nd attempt



Fog Man walks again!

Gubbs, that is much better for me, I couldn't visualize it before, as I have never been to a pub in England. Bars that I have been in can be very different from one another.

Thanks for opening it up.

ginger

[ginger_55]

A bad shot of the overgrown back garden and building site this evening after a great thunderstorm
Stan that is a great rainbow. I certainly am not going to notice grass or anything, when the rainbow is that glorious.

Can you shift the color a bit on the house. Other than that I think it is a great shot.

ginger

[lynnesite]

2nd attempt

http://Gubbs.smugmug.com/photos/7245125-S.jpg

Nice lines and curves, Gubbs. :rofl

Congrats Ginger on your published photo. I like the "life" in your people shots.

Here's my pitiful first wide attempt, and it's sure not a contest image. Horses don't fare well photographed with a wide angle lens. And my 70-200 is my "instrument", but I'll soldier on. Used to shoot a bunch of wide stuff at the Grove, outdoor shopping "town" in LA. Nice fountain, if anyone is thereabouts.

http://lynnesite.smugmug.com/photos/7248501-M.jpg

[Andy]

he's all done with is, they are in the comments thread right here (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=2157&page=7&pp=10)

snappy, i see he missed yours, i alerted him to that and i'm sure he'll pop back in and get to yours.

a big thank you to my good friend harry behret. thanks man, you're the best.

watch out guys, i'm sure that harry will be entering our challenges soon.

[ginger_55]

Nice lines and curves, Gubbs. :rofl

Congrats Ginger on your published photo. I like the "life" in your people shots.

Here's my pitiful first wide attempt, and it's sure not a contest image. Horses don't fare well photographed with a wide angle lens. And my 70-200 is my "instrument", but I'll soldier on. Used to shoot a bunch of wide stuff at the Grove, outdoor shttp://lynnesite.smugmug.com/photos/7248501-S.jpghopping "town" in LA. Nice fountain, if anyone is thereabouts.


Hi, Lynn, that is a nice horse, and the lighting isn't messed up. I took horse and buggy shots in Charleston monday evening/night. I took them sideways, hehe, help, orange light, etc. Anyway, I took a couple straight on, the horses nose distorted, but I read in a book that it was OK to distort animals.

I assume that your horses are your babies and you wouldn't want to see them distorted. But in a pinch you could just go with that couldn't you?

(I distort my husband's nose from time to time)

g (Horses, dogs, etc, don't like flash, but I imagine you know that. The carriage driver almost freaked when he saw me coming with a camera. I do use flash with my Corgis, but I get better shots outside. So, lol, when your horse is inside...................... Lynn, I have no idea where, or why, I am going with this.)

Good luck, and thanks for the nice words on "my" people.

[DaveW]

This is my second contest.. and my first attempt at a decent wide angle shot. My olympus 750 only goes down to the equiv of 38 mm ..

While stopping by the local digital lab to print some pics I came across this...

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v415/DLGW/distilleryWA.jpg
I liked the angles and colors - the highlights are a bit blown - unfortunately no RAW mode or tripod to bracket reliably with at the time..

Comments and criticisms appreciated.

[AltPro]

Lynnesite, I think your take on the horse is really very beautiful. The composition, IMO is wonderful and right on. Great color in the sky, and detail in both the near and distant shadows. Really, very nice!

http://lynnesite.smugmug.com/photos/7248501-S.jpg


No comments at all on the waterfall shot from last evening... So, I'm trying this one, of the Lochness Monster, an ACE Roller Coaster Busch Gardens Williamsburg, VA...

"25 Years"
http://throughthelensltd.smugmug.com/photos/7250855-L.jpg

15mm
ginette

[digismile]

Here's my pitiful first wide attempt, and it's sure not a contest image. Horses don't fare well photographed with a wide angle lens. And my 70-200 is my "instrument", but I'll soldier on. Used to shoot a bunch of wide stuff at the Grove, outdoor shopping "town" in LA. Nice fountain, if anyone is thereabouts.
http://lynnesite.smugmug.com/photos/7248501-S.jpg


This may not be particularily "wide", but I don't think you're going to get much agreement on being a pitiful shot :D ! I think this is a fine shot. I checked the picture in photoshop and you have considerable detail in the shadows and the horse. I actually like it pretty much as is. I might enhance the sunset colour and possibly the horse (but just a bit).

IMHO, I think you should be very proud of this shot.

Brad

[Andy]

http://ThroughTheLensLtd.smugmug.com/photos/7221550-S.jpg


hey i like this ... it's got a lot of dark though, and that troubles me somewhat. this would be a great shot to experiment with some slow synch flash, maybe? just to illuminate the shadow areas just somewhat?

[digismile]

This is my second contest.. and my first attempt at a decent wide angle shot. My olympus 750 only goes down to the equiv of 38 mm ..

While stopping by the local digital lab to print some pics I came across this...

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v415/DLGW/distilleryWA.jpg
I liked the angles and colors - the highlights are a bit blown - unfortunately no RAW mode or tripod to bracket reliably with at the time..

Comments and criticisms appreciated.

Hey Dave, please excuse my ignorance, but what am I looking at? Interesting shot, but as you stated, a little blown out.

Brad.

[ginger_55]

[QUOTE=AltPro]Lynnesite, I think your take on the horse is really very beautiful. The composition, IMO is wonderful and right on. Great color in the sky, and detail in both the near and distant shadows. Really, very nice!










No comments at all on the waterfall shot from last evening... So, I'm trying this one, of the Lochness Monster
____________________________


Ginette, I am rushing as I am going to watch a show on HBO, well, I am going to, want to, etc.

Want you to know that I did like that shot from last night. I don't know about the green roller coaster.

Last night's shot, I almost posted on it. I liked it, but as Andy mentions further down something was troubling me, I thought I would wait, then I forgot. Was up real late anyway.

Andy says dark, I thought color............... The colors in places reminded me a bit of the rocks that Skye was behind, and I didn't think that was supposed to be that way.

So, I would play with it, as Andy said. And I did not respond, except in my mind, where it did no good.

I am sorry. I really remember thinking I like that shot, but I wonder......

That type of thing.

So that makes some of us.

No one is saying much of anything about anyone's pictures. I have a gazillion up. I think you might have said something. Finally Stan, Lynnsite, Snappy.............. see I can count them, and it has been very slow, I don't think many people are around here, except me, and I was swamped doing little last night.

Sorry.

I did like it. ginger

[lynnesite]

Hi, Lynn, that is a nice horse, and the lighting isn't messed up. I took horse and buggy shots in Charleston monday evening/night. I took them sideways, hehe, help, orange light, etc. Anyway, I took a couple straight on, the horses nose distorted, but I read in a book that it was OK to distort animals.


It's cool to distort if that's what you're setting out to do--unfortunately a lot of people try to take "good" closeup photos of horses and fail. Lens has to be more than 70mm (and better if a lot longer) to not distort them.

That said, I was undeterred, and bribed my models with a bucket for this shot, which I think might be my entry. Comments welcome. Shot at 24mm (35 equiv.)
http://www.photo.lynnesite.com/photos/7257522-M.jpg

[lynnesite]

This may not be particularily "wide", but I don't think you're going to get much agreement on being a pitiful shot :D ! I think this is a fine shot. I checked the picture in photoshop and you have considerable detail in the shadows and the horse. I actually like it pretty much as is. I might enhance the sunset colour and possibly the horse (but just a bit).

IMHO, I think you should be very proud of this shot.

Brad

Thanks, Brad, I had another shot at it tonight, we had a dramatic sunset, and think this one is much better (below). Thanks, Ginette for your kind words, and there ya go with lines and curves on that coaster. I love the monochromatic effect you applied, I really dig your eye. (If I didn't tell you so, I loved your "noodles in the pool house shot" and thought the color "made" that shot.

[wxwax]

Suggestions needed for photographs, wide, in heavy rain conditions.


Rain makes thing shiny, reflective and moody. It's hard to work in it because you and your gear get wet; but rain, like snow, can transform a landscape or streetscape. How about street lights reflecting off a wet road around dusk, shot from the second floor? How about a foot about to step into a puddle? How about a sea of shiny umbrella tops? (OK, that last one might be kinda hard to make happen, unless there's a busy public transportation place where people crowd.)

[wxwax]

2nd attempt

http://Gubbs.smugmug.com/photos/7245125-S.jpg

Ooooh. :nod

[wxwax]

http://lynnesite.smugmug.com/photos/7248501-S.jpg
That's a lovely shot. The lighting's kinda muted, maybe that's what you were going for? Lovely, elegant composition.

[wxwax]

http://gingersnap.smugmug.com/photos/7225359-S.jpg

Ginger, I like how you handled this. Very sweet. You're right about the centered composition. Ah well. In every other respect it's a fine, fine shot. Sweet expressions.

[wxwax]

http://ThroughTheLensLtd.smugmug.com/photos/7221550-S.jpg

Ginette, this is simply beautiful. The dark areas seem to be impenetrably dark. Any thoughts about adding detail, or is this the look you like best?

[wxwax]

It was back to the ballpark tonight. This time I took the 16-35 lens. I wish I had a fishe-eye, it's the only way to get those wacky stadium shots. But I had fun. next time, I'll take the flash as well.

16mm x 1.3 = 20.8mm.
http://wxwax.smugmug.com/photos/7258638-L.jpg

[wxwax]

Have I mentioned how it's killing me not to crop?

16 x 1.3 = 20.8mm
http://wxwax.smugmug.com/photos/7259476-L.jpg



16 x 1.3 = 20.8mm
http://wxwax.smugmug.com/photos/7259417-L.jpg

[AltPro]

That said, I was undeterred, and bribed my models with a bucket for this shot, which I think might be my entry. Comments welcome.
http://www.photo.lynnesite.com/photos/7257522-S.jpg

(Shot at 24mm)35 equiv.

Lynne,
There is nothing quite as compelling to horse lovers as a mother with it's foal. Warms the heart. I do love how you captured the pair just about to "kiss." Still at the point where they breath each other's air, each taking in and revelling in the scent of the other. You have a fantastic ability to capture the details in the shadows, which to me and my eye, simply beautiful and rewarding to the viewer who really takes a moment, to look. You are right, the sunset is wonderful here, offering a warm color to what is, as it should be, a warm scene. I love the lighting on the mares tail, the legs of the mare and foal, the green (blue) feed pail. In this piece, even the subtle lines of the electic lines and poles don't bother me overly much, but tend to pull into the scene.

Still, all of that being said, I can honestly say, I prefer your first attempt. There is really something about the composition in that one, the attention in the horses head and alertness of the ears, that grabs me and makes me want to look and imagine what she might be seeing off in the distance. If it is the color of the sunset that makes your second attempt more "palatable," why not warm the sky?

You :boware wonderful at taking photos of your horses. How many do you have? On how much acreage, where? (We currently have 4) I honestly think you could make money with some of these.

My thoughts.

ginette

[AltPro]

It was back to the ballpark tonight. This time I took the 16-35 lens. I wish I had a fishe-eye, it's the only way to get those wacky stadium shots. But I had fun. next time, I'll take the flash as well.

16mm x 1.3 = 20.8mm.
http://wxwax.smugmug.com/photos/7258638-S.jpg Sid... I would like the lines and curves of this shot, and the convergence, the blue and attention grabbing red dots... but... it bothers me that the couple is so out of focus, and I want to see them! (I too, would LOVE a Fish Eye!!!)
ginette

[AltPro]

Have I mentioned how it's killing me not to crop?

16 x 1.3 = 20.8mm
http://wxwax.smugmug.com/photos/7259476-S.jpg

Now Sid, this one I love.
The lighting in the background, the details, perspective. The timbre of her little body, the looseness of her arm, her stance. The way she is "just looking" off into the sidelines... I like the way the shadow falls behind her, the colors of the shot. It's perfect... almost?... I am sure that the reason the "no crop" is killing you is that you would want to crop her closer to the base of the photo... but then Sid, you would lose the shadow, and I, in my VHO, do feel the shadow adds to the verbage of the photo. So I'd not be overly agressive with cropping, were I you... Guess what I am trying to say, is Sid, I Love the feeling of this Photo.

ginette

[AltPro]

Here is another shot of the waterfalls taken with the ambient lighting available at Busch Gardens Park.

Hopefully this one shows more detail in the shadows. It's a very dark area, much of the lighting is reflective-- onto the water, and off in the distance from this path.



ISO 200, Manual 5 sec, Exposure w/o tripod, aperature 3.2, Exposure bias 0.00, 8.9mm x 1.6 = 14.24mm
http://ThroughTheLensLtd.smugmug.com/photos/7262248-L.jpg



Another sleepless night, and now off to bed...
ginette

[bikehiker]

I like this a lot, I feel like I'm having a drink there myself.

and also wxwax great job at the ball park. The 1 of the girl is a keeper.

2nd attempt

http://gubbs.smugmug.com/photos/7245125-L.jpg

[ginger_55]

Here is another shot of the waterfalls taken with the ambient lighting available at Busch Gardens Park.

Hopefully this one shows more detail in the shadows. It's a very dark area, much of the lighting is reflective-- onto the water, and off in the distance from this path.


ISO 200, Manual 5 sec, Exposure w/o tripod, aperature 3.2, Exposure bias 0.00, 8.9mm x 1.6 = 14.24mm
http://throughthelensltd.smugmug.com/photos/7262248-S.jpg



Another sleepless night, and now off to bed...
ginette
Ginette, what are the grainy areas, are they vegetation? Maybe they look more like gravel, the areas inside the whatever. I like the water. And the trees outside, it is that stuff, I have no idea what it is, and that wouldn't matter, it is just with the light like it is, I thought it might help to know.

I would have stayed up, too, but we lost our power.

I think they will make some decisions here later this AM. re The Storm.

ginger
(Obviously we got our power back, when I don't know. Might have been god's way of getting me to go to bed.)

[ginger_55]

[QUOTE=lynnesite]It's cool to distort if that's what you're setting out to do--unfortunately a lot of people try to take "good" closeup photos of horses and fail. Lens has to be more than 70mm (and better if a lot longer) to not distort them.

That said, I was undeterred, and bribed my models with a bucket for this shot, which I think might be my entry. Comments welcome.
__________________________________________________ _____

Lynnsite, I love that photo, the one you might enter. You should enter it, it is gorgeous!

ginger

[ginger_55]

http://gingersnap.smugmug.com/photos/7225359-S.jpg

Ginger, I like how you handled this. Very sweet. You're right about the centered composition. Ah well. In every other respect it's a fine, fine shot. Sweet expressions.
Sid, That is on the short list right now as my entry, not certain, naturally, but it is top so far.

Some people have liked it best all in color, others with this sepia. Perhaps the
color takes away from the "centering" look. Centering doesn't bother me, but it does others, and this is a contest.

My husband likes it with the sepia best, and you seem to, too. Everyone else has liked it without the treatment, so that it is all in color.

I was getting so I liked the color, now I am confused.

http://gingerSnap.smugmug.com/photos/7225358-S.jpg


http://gingerSnap.smugmug.com/photos/7225360-S.jpg


Please, I would like as much feedback as possible on this. Andy? Sid?
et al.

Of course, I will be showing more, but right now this one, or the other, is ahead in my mind. I would like a people shot, if possible.

Oh, Sid, I love your little girl, the whole of the photo, at the baseball game, I think it is.

ginger

[cletus]

16mm x 1.3 = 20.8mm.
http://wxwax.smugmug.com/photos/7258638-S.jpg
Sid,

I really like this one. One thought - Just to see what it would look like, I'd like to see the exact same composition with a very shallow depth of field and the people sharp with the seats blurring out away from them :dunno


http://wxwax.smugmug.com/photos/7259476-S.jpg
Very cool! Is that lens flare along the bottom edge of the frame? If so, have you tried cleaning it up any???


http://wxwax.smugmug.com/photos/7259417-S.jpg
Good, but not in the same ballpark :rofl:rofl:rofl as the little girl.

[ginger_55]

Rain makes thing shiny, reflective and moody. It's hard to work in it because you and your gear get wet; but rain, like snow, can transform a landscape or streetscape. How about street lights reflecting off a wet road around dusk, shot from the second floor? How about a foot about to step into a puddle? How about a sea of shiny umbrella tops? (OK, that last one might be kinda hard to make happen, unless there's a busy public transportation place where people crowd.)
Thanks, Sid, what I realized finally, is that I don't take my car downtown when it rains. All those neat water areas are kind of salty and often are high enough to stall out my older, small car.

Yes, I have been after that umbrella shot all my life, even one red umbrella, in just the right place.

So alot of the urban type stuff is out, around here, Mt Pleasant, people disappear. Unfortunately, it is not raining now. When it does the winds are supposed to be a factor. They will be begging people to stay home. Might close the bridges.

I have tried to think of other places, but I got very tired, then we lost our power, the rain came after it was darkish.

I have thought of going to the upscale, haha, newly renovated Isle of Palms, to a front beach bar or something. On the beach side, it doesn't look as upscale.

Some of this is hanging on my husband's work plans, aaaaaaaaaggggggghhhh.

ginger

[ginger_55]

This is my second contest.. and my first attempt at a decent wide angle shot. My olympus 750 only goes down to the equiv of 38 mm ..

While stopping by the local digital lab to print some pics I came across this...

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v415/DLGW/distilleryWA.jpg
I liked the angles and colors - the highlights are a bit blown - unfortunately no RAW mode or tripod to bracket reliably with at the time..

Comments and criticisms appreciated.
Dave, I don' know what this is, but I like it, especially all the bright colors. Could you go back and try shooting it at different angles and stuff?

ginger

[ginger_55]

Another one from the outdoor market.

http://gingerSnap.smugmug.com/photos/7248325-L.jpg

[Andy]

Another one from the outdoor market.

http://gingerSnap.smugmug.com/photos/7248325-S.jpg

i just love how shooting wide forces us to be close to the action, and i just love the results. this is almost a perfect shot. the man, upper left, with his head cut off, detracts from the photo - so this is a great example of the other point of this challenge - composition with the viewfinder - and guess what? it's not easy at all. why do you think the greats are so great :D

a good solid effort, ginger, and one which we can all learn from.

[wxwax]

Sid... I would like the lines and curves of this shot, and the convergence, the blue and attention grabbing red dots... but... it bothers me that the couple is so out of focus, and I want to see them! (I too, would LOVE a Fish Eye!!!)
ginette

Thanks Alty. I think they're blurry because they're moving.

Cletus, you suggested a depth of field shot... I find I have trouble manually focusing people who are distant in my viewfinder. Guess I should practice!

[wxwax]

Sid,
Very cool! Is that lens flare along the bottom edge of the frame? If so, have you tried cleaning it up any???


Good call. :nod I thought it was the color of the dirt, but a closer inspection shows you're right.

[wxwax]

Please, I would like as much feedback as possible on this. Andy? Sid?
et al.



Ginger, I far prefer the sepia version. I think you're right, it helps overcome the centering. Plus, it just looks good.

[cletus]

Cletus, you suggested a depth of field shot... I find I have trouble manually focusing people who are distant in my viewfinder. Guess I should practice!
Why manual focus??? You should be able to auto focus on them, and then recompose and shoot :dunno

[wxwax]

Why manual focus??? You should be able to auto focus on them, and then recompose and shoot :dunno
I tried that, not much success. The subjects are really quite small in the frame.

[ginger_55]

http://gingerSnap.smugmug.com/photos/7266856-L.jpg

[Andy]

http://gingerSnap.smugmug.com/photos/7266856-S.jpg

so with wide angle, when you shoot from higher up, the effect is that they are further away and below. for this shot, i'd crouch down and get more eye-level with the subjects :D

[ginger_55]

http://gingersnap.smugmug.com/photos/7266857-L.jpg


They very nicely posed for me.
I took this shot, in addition to the posed shots.
IMO, we should all have someone look at us this way.

ginger

[ginger_55]

Did you say something, Andy? :rofl

I was busy posting the next shot of those two, actually my favorite of the two.
The reason I like the first one is I wanted to get the shoes in. Just wanted to, so I stepped back and took a record shot.

ginger

[ginger_55]

http://gingerSnap.smugmug.com/photos/7248335-L.jpg

[ginger_55]

I was on a pier, could not get closer without walking on water. Besides, I wanted a lot in this photograph.

On the left are boys staying with their boat for the moment, it is in safe harbor at a late hour. Past them are the arches of the old Cooper River bridges, I love them, and they will probably be gone next year, if not gone the skyline will still be changed considerably. Also there was a gorgeous sunset. Maybe I was not successful, but that was what was in my mind as I composed the shot.

http://gingerSnap.smugmug.com/photos/7225881-L.jpg

[ginger_55]

Ginger, I far prefer the sepia version. I think you're right, it helps overcome the centering. Plus, it just looks good.
Thank you Sid, I really appreciate it. Everyone's comments and opinions mean a lot to me.

I have a few difficult choices, IMO. One I have not posted yet. So, my short list is now at that little girl and the older man (one of them) and Partners,2.
Those are the ones you all have seen.

I do like the sunset photos, but as someone has pointed out, that seems to be my modus operandi here. And I want to show that I can do something else. Street shots, as street shots are available to me, in my world. People. My main thing for years. In those years I tossed out a few scenics, here and there to prove I could. Now I am trying to concentrate on working up my people shots.

Of course, I take everything, where ever I am. And my camera is set on wide, so........................

I have one more chance at the dancing kids, next tuesday, if the weather cooporates, if there is music there, and if there are kids dancing. I will put the camera on sports, sit on the ground and just start shooting with kids. That is what I do with the dogs........ Then I wait, and I take, and I cull.
This is weather dependent, totally.

On the centering of the man and the little girl, I guess I am going to critique my own photos............so, one could look at it that they are centered, and that is bad, or that they are centered, and it looks good, or that there is a nice triangle going on, not quite center weighted, as the unfortunate shape of the man's back weights the photograph more to the right, with the girl, very important with her delightful expression, she is smaller though, so her side in not weighted as strongly and her eyes take us right back to the man, where the weight of the picture is, to our right. So it is not really centered.

There is, IMO, a great triangle going on, from one to the other, but the photo is weighted slightly to the right.

There is a photograph that I am going to rename senior citizens, I will say it is definitely one of my favorites. It is taken from the back, at the market. But it has not gotten the mentions that the other photos have, so I figure it is just me that is interested in "old" people.

Smile, ginger

[rutt]

Hike to Great Point on Monday night. This should be a great subject, but it's hard to do better than postcards. I'm finding wide angle challenging, as expected. Please comment. Don't be afraid go be blunt; I think I have a lot to learn here.

46mm

http://rutt.smugmug.com/photos/7272086-L.jpg

46mm:

http://rutt.smugmug.com/photos/7271493-L.jpg

29mm:

http://rutt.smugmug.com/photos/7272082-L.jpg

21mm:

http://rutt.smugmug.com/photos/7272647-L.jpg

29mm:

http://rutt.smugmug.com/photos/7272650-L.jpg

[DaveW]

Dave, I don' know what this is, but I like it, especially all the bright colors. Could you go back and try shooting it at different angles and stuff?

ginger
I'm not exactly sure what they were either to be honest.. coloured cloth wrapped around a frame or perhaps woven together like macrame??

Don't know if they'll still be there in a day or so when the rain stops...

[rutt]

http://gingersnap.smugmug.com/photos/7248335-S.jpg
Ginger, I like this a lot, but I don't think it's really 18mm. I think it's 18mm * 1.6 = 28mm. Right? In order for you get 18mm with your rebel you'd need an 11mm lens, something I doubt even Pathfinder has.

[cletus]

Hike to Great Point on Monday night. This should be a great subject, but it's hard to do better than postcards. I'm finding wide angle challenging, as expected. Please comment. Don't be afraid go be blunt; I think I have a lot to learn here.

46mm
http://rutt.smugmug.com/photos/7272086-S.jpg
Good, but for some reason I don't like it as much as some of the others in your group.


46mm:
http://rutt.smugmug.com/photos/7271493-S.jpg
I like this one a lot more than your first image. If this were my shot I think I'd try to get rid of the slight brown cast of the silhouette.


29mm:
http://rutt.smugmug.com/photos/7272082-S.jpg Another good shot! I think it might have worked a little bet better if you had swung the camera to the right, moving the fisherman to the left, and more importanly, moving the tip of the fishing rod away from the right edge of the frame.


21mm:
http://rutt.smugmug.com/photos/7272647-S.jpg
Very cool :thumb If it was my shot, I'd try to remove the shadow using Photoshop, if only to see what it looked like. Also it looks like there's a bit of a lean to the image.


29mm:
http://rutt.smugmug.com/photos/7272650-S.jpg
I think this one is my favorite. I don't think there's anything I would change... Well done :clap

[ginger_55]

Ginger, I like this a lot, but I don't think it's really 18mm. I think it's 18mm * 1.6 = 28mm. Right? In order for you get 18mm with your rebel you'd need an 11mm lens, something I doubt even Pathfinder has.
Rutt, I have an interesting take on that issue. And it seems to differ from the rest of the world, but it won't soon. Digital is digital and film is film, IMO. So when we are shooting with a digital camera, which I am, and I can't imagine anyone, in the need, who doesn't know that. So when we are shooting with a digital camera, I cannot imagine any reason to convert to a film camera statistics. I did for a few posts, then I said, this is the last time I will be doing this. I have also said I am shooting with a kit, and you would not be familiar with that, maybe, lens, and it is 18-55mm on the lens. You can/may convert that if you want.

My idea on this is that when in Rome, or Paris. Since my only knowledge is of french and very little of that. I would point out that when speaking English, we say "the cat", we do not then say "le chat". The same with le chien.
(I think they are both masculine which is a non issue in English)

Also, we are going 60mph, not so many whatevers as we would be going in Europe, for examples. Some things here are a foot, 12 inches, whatever long, not then converted.

I see digital as a medium that has been around long enough, exists in its own right. I do not see any reason to compare it to film photography when mentioning the mm s. Or any other term peculiar to the medium.

I do think that it is good to know what is allowed on this Challenge, and it is interesting, informative, etc. to know that a telephoto lens shoots at its longest, equivalent to 1.6 times that which we think it does, by comparing it to the same length word on film cameras. That made me excited.

I think it would be nice for the opposite end to be true. IMO, the wider the better, so I would rather not know, or even have the fact be true, but an 18 on a digital shoots the equivalent of a 18 X 1.6 of what we might think.

Most of us understand this. That is my opinion, my strongest opinion.
If the rules are that we state the whole thing out, it will be more work, but I will do it. Won't be much more work for those not posting.

I will say that on Smugmug it gives the conversion figure, and it often says around, or about, or something like that.

I think 18mm digital is 18mm digital. If one is shooting with a film camera and scanning photos, then one could phrase that differently, as in 18 SLR, scanned to the PC, or Mac.

ginger

[lynnesite]

Lynne,
There is nothing quite as compelling to horse lovers as a mother with it's foal. Warms the heart. I do love how you captured the pair just about to "kiss." Still at the point where they breath each other's air, each taking in and revelling in the scent of the other. You have a fantastic ability to capture the details in the shadows, which to me and my eye, simply beautiful and rewarding to the viewer who really takes a moment, to look. You are right, the sunset is wonderful here, offering a warm color to what is, as it should be, a warm scene. I love the lighting on the mares tail, the legs of the mare and foal, the green (blue) feed pail. In this piece, even the subtle lines of the electic lines and poles don't bother me overly much, but tend to pull into the scene.

Still, all of that being said, I can honestly say, I prefer your first attempt. There is really something about the composition in that one, the attention in the horses head and alertness of the ears, that grabs me and makes me want to look and imagine what she might be seeing off in the distance. If it is the color of the sunset that makes your second attempt more "palatable," why not warm the sky?

You :boware wonderful at taking photos of your horses. How many do you have? On how much acreage, where? (We currently have 4) I honestly think you could make money with some of these.

My thoughts.

ginette

Thanks, Ginette. I have really high standards for my horse photos, and ruthlessly trash them if they aren't up to snuff. So far, I haven't done sky replacement, sort of don't believe in it; the closest I come to being a purist. Part of that is shooting a lot for editorial use, where that's taboo. And yeah, as it says in my profile (?) I'm a professional horse photographer, but have spent the last few months ramping up the fine art aspect of that. My featured galleries over at smugmug kind of show that, and the images are really drawing notice, and I'm transitioning into hopefully full time photography. If you're in the mood, check out <http://www.lynnesite.com/dropbox.html>, a little iPhoto movie of the foal's first 4 months. Moved here last winter, I have 3 horses now, mom and brother are Arabian, kid is half Lipizzan and we live on 45 acres that aren't mine at 2000 feet (above the smog) in SoCal. Earlier today we had thunder and lightning (24 strikes that I counted; rare for here, some monsoonal thing) and the horses are statues: kid's hearing it for the first time, while the adults each are watchful in different directions. Living fairly primitively by SoCal standards, I call myself "techno trailer trash" because of the biz class satellite.

I like what you did with the waterfall, BTW, bringing the details out. I've spent a lot of time learning how to shoot to retain that foreground detail, and love silhouettes.

[ginger_55]

very cool :thumb If it was my shot, I'd try to remove the shadow using Photoshop, if only to see what it looked like. Also it looks like there's a bit of a lean to the image.

_____________________________________

On the other hand, lol, I like that one, the one with the window and the shadow. It might have lean, might want to correct that, or not.

But I really like the shadow. However, it is one I would call a photographer's photo, and maybe only liked by one photographer, so I just want to say that I like all except the guy fishing (Looks like there is a rim of light all around him), and maybe the first one. But my favorite is the window and the shadow.

I didn't even look at the mm, I assume it is within limits, lol.

ginger

[DoctorIt]

This is my second contest.. and my first attempt at a decent wide angle shot. My olympus 750 only goes down to the equiv of 38 mm ..

While stopping by the local digital lab to print some pics I came across this...

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v415/DLGW/distilleryWA.jpg
I liked the angles and colors - the highlights are a bit blown - unfortunately no RAW mode or tripod to bracket reliably with at the time..

Comments and criticisms appreciated.why does this image look so square? i'm not sure what camera it came from, but it certainly feels square - and this really doesn't help it feel wide. As andy said, i'm not sure what I'm looking at, and where to focus. the shadows are cool, but maybe too much contrast and range of exposure here.

[rutt]

I think it would be nice for the opposite end to be true. IMO, the wider the better, so I would rather not know, or even have the fact be true, but an 18 on a digital shoots the equivalent of a 18 X 1.6 of what we might think.

I think 18mm digital is 18mm digital. If one is shooting with a film camera and scanning photos, then one could phrase that differently, as in 18 SLR, scanned to the PC, or Mac.

ginger
18mm digital is not always the same. The rebel you have has a 1.6 multiplier, but my 1dmkii is 1.3. For digicams like the Sony f828, things are very different, since they have much smaller sensors. So it really isn't just as simple as 18mm digital if we want to be able to compare, say Damon's images made with his f828 with yours. The idea of standardizing to 35mm equivalents is just to make this sort of comparison easier.

It doesn't really matter in your case. It's easy enough to figure out that you have a rebel and are stating the unstandardized lens length. But if everyone does that, it sort of defeats the purpose that Andy had in mind when he asked for these numbers.

[ginger_55]

on the window shot. Just looked again, and it is a choice as to which part you would want level.

I think it is a matter of perspective, and I wouldn't worry about it. Or I would darken a bit more the part not in perspective, if you would decide to straighten a window side, I might darken a bit the bottom side.

This is, IMO, an artistic call. I like that photo, also the bottom one that Cletus liked, but I don't love the one Cletus liked.

Just wanted to tell you that.

ginger

[ginger_55]

18mm digital is not always the same. The rebel you have has a 1.6 multiplier, but my 1dmkii is 1.3. For digicams like the Sony f828, things are very different, since they have much smaller sensors. So it really isn't just as simple as 18mm digital if we want to be able to compare, say Damon's images made with his f828 with yours. The idea of standardizing to 35mm equivalents is just to make this sort of comparison easier.

It doesn't really matter in your case. It's easy enough to figure out that you have a rebel and are stating the unstandardized lens length. But if everyone does that, it sort of defeats the purpose that Andy had in mind when he asked for these numbers.
I am not quite sure, really, as to why he asked for those numbers.

But then I am so untechnical. Wide to me is wide. And I don't compare that much, I don't have your windows to do with, or duplicate.

One thing, lots of people are shooting with lenses that are not as wide as mine. Well, I don't really understand the point anyway, except to make us aware if we are legal. Since I wasn't, totally inadvertently.

Wide might be wide, but I, too, would like a fish eye.

A better day might suit, too. Going to go out and see if there are any interesting headlights?????? Bill said no one is out there, I want to relax, but that isn't going to happen until I give this a "shot". :rofl

Just for your sensibilities, I only put one rolly there.

Smile, ginger

[rutt]

Just wanted to tell you that.

ginger
Thanks, good suggestion about darkening the element not straight. I'll try.

I hope I'm just getting warmed up. I like the window witht he self portrait shadow, but as you say, it's probalby pretty personal.

[DoctorIt]

http://rutt.smugmug.com/photos/7272647-S.jpg

:wave Hi Rutt!

I like this one. What ISO was that at? looks a weeee bit noisy - doesn't affect the shot, just curious.

[Andy]

i gave you personal instructions to shoot at 18mm with your kit lens, and not to go more than 31mm.

you're fine, don't worry 'bout the math dear, you go shoot!

hehehe



Rutt, I have an interesting take on that issue. And it seems to differ from the rest of the world, but it won't soon. Digital is digital and film is film, IMO. So when we are shooting with a digital camera, which I am, and I can't imagine anyone, in the need, who doesn't know that. So when we are shooting with a digital camera, I cannot imagine any reason to convert to a film camera statistics. I did for a few posts, then I said, this is the last time I will be doing this. I have also said I am shooting with a kit, and you would not be familiar with that, maybe, lens, and it is 18-55mm on the lens. You can/may convert that if you want.

My idea on this is that when in Rome, or Paris. Since my only knowledge is of french and very little of that. I would point out that when speaking English, we say "the cat", we do not then say "le chat". The same with le chien.
(I think they are both masculine which is a non issue in English)

Also, we are going 60mph, not so many whatevers as we would be going in Europe, for examples. Some things here are a foot, 12 inches, whatever long, not then converted.

I see digital as a medium that has been around long enough, exists in its own right. I do not see any reason to compare it to film photography when mentioning the mm s. Or any other term peculiar to the medium.

I do think that it is good to know what is allowed on this Challenge, and it is interesting, informative, etc. to know that a telephoto lens shoots at its longest, equivalent to 1.6 times that which we think it does, by comparing it to the same length word on film cameras. That made me excited.

I think it would be nice for the opposite end to be true. IMO, the wider the better, so I would rather not know, or even have the fact be true, but an 18 on a digital shoots the equivalent of a 18 X 1.6 of what we might think.

Most of us understand this. That is my opinion, my strongest opinion.
If the rules are that we state the whole thing out, it will be more work, but I will do it. Won't be much more work for those not posting.

I will say that on Smugmug it gives the conversion figure, and it often says around, or about, or something like that.

I think 18mm digital is 18mm digital. If one is shooting with a film camera and scanning photos, then one could phrase that differently, as in 18 SLR, scanned to the PC, or Mac.

ginger

[rutt]

:wave Hi Rutt!

I like this one. What ISO was that at? looks a weeee bit noisy - doesn't affect the shot, just curious.
The ISO was 500, not very much for the 1Dmkii. The noise came from a pretty extreme aplication of shadow/hightlight. The shot is striking without this, but I wanted to recover some of the bench and some of the details of the walls.

[Andy]

now the rest of everybody knows that ging has a rebel @ 1.6 multiplier. easy enough for us to figger out, and then ginger doesn't have to worry bout it :D



18mm digital is not always the same. The rebel you have has a 1.6 multiplier, but my 1dmkii is 1.3. For digicams like the Sony f828, things are very different, since they have much smaller sensors. So it really isn't just as simple as 18mm digital if we want to be able to compare, say Damon's images made with his f828 with yours. The idea of standardizing to 35mm equivalents is just to make this sort of comparison easier.

It doesn't really matter in your case. It's easy enough to figure out that you have a rebel and are stating the unstandardized lens length. But if everyone does that, it sort of defeats the purpose that Andy had in mind when he asked for these numbers.

[ginger_55]

Thanks, good suggestion about darkening the element not straight. I'll try.

I hope I'm just getting warmed up. I like the window witht he self portrait shadow, but as you say, it's probalby pretty personal._________________________________________ ______________

hehe, I am going to skip the fact that you are only giving one set of figures, also,as far as how wide, so I would have figured they were digital figures, but I would imagine they are not.

That is why I expect this to change given a short period of time, most people are going to give just one figure, unless there is a strong need otherwise. Like we all have access to the Acropolis, and it would be interesting to know what others have used particularly if one were going to try to duplicate it. But this is just my take.

Andy has said to go shoot.................. not you, I don't think. I plan on that, (Not you) had it all planned rain headlights, etc. No rain now, light blown skys. Can't count on nothin' these days.

However, on your picture the one with the window. So glad to hear another positive opinion.

I love "noise", so I wouldn't have noticed that either. But I am just so glad someone else likes it, hate being the only one in an area of expertise at which I am not totally sure of myself.

I also wanted to say that when I say a photographer's photo, I am complimenting you. If you were shooting for Hallmark, you would be dissappointed, but I would not expect that you were doing that. Actually, I guess I am saying that I am not sure how wide the appeal would be, ask here before so you know how these people feel re a photo, but that I really like it.

A photographer's photo, IMO, as I am using the expression is "photographer's photo", I am speaking like a movie critic's movie (not a chick flick, in fact probably a very good picture, but very different,) as these guys are bored to death of commercial type movies, same with book critics, etc.

All your masters, the people you love to love, IMO, they did photographer's photos of their times. I am not that aware of each circumstance, Penn, was/is very famous and did well, I would imagine, but lots of great artists have not been commercial successes, as I am sure you know.

I am putting you in that class when I say a photographer's photo. I would put Sid's in that class, too, the one that won the last time he entered. A lot of street photography is such that only a photographer is going to love.

Then there are the crossover artists, so to speak, as in music, they exist in many arts.

My rainbow was very commercial, that is why I asked the paper if they wanted it. My reflection was OK, if I were employed for the paper, and that were my part of town, it would be printed, you know the houses, almost totally a reflection, but it is not terribly commercial.

Then the Black Skimmer, I don't know why you and Phil both liked that so much, that is a nature lover's photograph.

Never mind, I have to go shoot something, or someone. I like that photo, you may just be warming up, but I like your start this time.

ginger

[gubbs]

http://rutt.smugmug.com/photos/7272082-S.jpg

Tough shot, you get so much from him blocking the sun, great detail, shadow & action but it'd be good to have the end of the rod and the space he's fishing in. I still like it though, a lot!

[gubbs]

Really cool, is that your shadow??

http://rutt.smugmug.com/photos/7272647-S.jpg

[gubbs]

http://rutt.smugmug.com/photos/7272650-S.jpg

The patterns in the sand combined with the light are lovely.

Rutt you live in a beautiful place!

[AltPro]

http://gingerSnap.smugmug.com/photos/7225358-S.jpg


http://gingerSnap.smugmug.com/photos/7225360-S.jpg

Please, I would like as much feedback as possible on this. Andy? Sid?
et al.
ginger Ginger:

Tough call. But I think that I like the Sepia background. The "near center" composition doesn't really bother me at all here. There are times when near center works, and more when it doesn't, I suppose. But I do think it is nice here. Very nicely done manipulation.

ginette

[ysr612]

just shot this this afternoon e-20 9mm lens with 0.5 addon guess about 20-25mm =

I had up the cropped one this is the uncropped

http://ysr612.smugmug.com/photos/7284896-L.jpg

[rutt]

http://rutt.smugmug.com/photos/7272082-S.jpg

Tough shot, you get so much from him blocking the sun, great detail, shadow & action but it'd be good to have the end of the rod and the space he's fishing in. I still like it though, a lot!
Right, it's flawed by comosition, but it was very hard to get. He actually has a fish on and was moving around a lot while playing it. Too bad, but it's a nice snapshot.

[rutt]

Really cool, is that your shadow??

http://rutt.smugmug.com/photos/7272647-S.jpg
Yeah, i't me. I'm wearing a backpack with my tripod sticking out, hunched over composing the shot. I liked this a lot, but thought it might be just me. Might be worth some more post work.

[ginger_55]

Yeah, i't me. I'm wearing a backpack with my tripod sticking out, hunched over composing the shot. I liked this a lot, but thought it might be just me. Might be worth some more post work.
I think lots of people like it Rutt. Looks to me like a photograph I might find in a very good book, or collection of photographs.

ginger

[ginger_55]

A beautiful evening at the beach, Isle of Palms. Bill joined the VFW, so we will have a better vantage point to watch the beach. Second floor, as most things are. For the storm surge on the first floor.
So this was tonght, here. We could have gone downtown, etc, it was that nice. Not supposed to be nice tomorrow.

http://gingerSnap.smugmug.com/photos/7287024-L.jpg

[ginger_55]

And you all need to be treated to this. I shot a volley ball game at 18 mm on my D Rebel, conversion factor 1.6, leaving the math to others. But a volley ball game on wide. I sat as close as I could.

http://gingerSnap.smugmug.com/photos/7287022-L.jpg

[ginger_55]

We have all said we would be back tomorrow morning, don't think it will happen, not with me.

http://gingerSnap.smugmug.com/photos/7287500-L.jpg

[Andy]

with ginger's great shot from "lines and curves"

it's right here (http://dgrin.smugmug.com/gallery/167709)

[AltPro]

And you all need to be treated to this. I shot a volley ball game at 18 mm on my D Rebel, conversion factor 1.6, leaving the math to others. But a volley ball game on wide. I sat as close as I could.

http://gingersnap.smugmug.com/photos/7287022-S.jpg
Ginger,
This shot is wonderful, everyone looking up, action stance, at the ready... The line of the net is placed beautifully in the frame. The only thing missing, is the "Ball." It leaves one wondering "what they are looking at." Yes, I realize that it ought to be understood... but... In MVHO this would be the winning shot were the ball in the image.
ginette

[pathfinder]

just shot this this afternoon e-20 9mm lens with 0.5 addon guess about 20-25mm =

I had up the cropped one this is the uncropped

http://ysr612.smugmug.com/photos/7284896-L.jpg
A while back Rutt and I had a discussion about how to shoot great images with wide angles lenses, and one of the suggestions was to include a good foreground element. I used deer footprints in the image I posted as an example leading to a bridge. I would like to point out that I think the reason this image works so well is the rope as a leading foreground element. My only suggestion might be to crop part of the sky and raise the horizon in the frame higher - close to the 2/3 line - The sky really is not what this image is about in my opinion. Good shot - I lilke it.:1drink

[wxwax]

My only suggestion might be to crop part of the sky and raise the horizon in the frame higher - close to the 2/3 line - The sky really is not what this image is about in my opinion. Good shot - I lilke it.:1drink


Don't forget the no cropping restriction for submissions.:evil I really like the shot too, and the placement of the motorcycle works well.

[wxwax]

http://wxwax.smugmug.com/photos/7305458-L.jpg

[snapapple]

Just had to do some fruit, hehe.
Oly c5050 7.1mm eq to 35mm. - Just wish I had wider. To me *wide* is less than 35. Oh well, saving up for a new camera.

http://snapapple.smugmug.com/photos/7305467-L.jpg

[spockling]

Here's our sunrise today in Calgary. Shot at 5.4 mm = 35 mm.

[ginger_55]

That is beautiful Spockling!


Just want to tell everyone that I just got my power back. Woke up this AM, no power. Guess we had a 45 minute storm that I slept through, but it shut the whole city down, and took away our power.

It just came on. I have done nothing but sleep.

I would just like to thank the person re the volleyball shot, I have one more I like of it, I have plenty with the ball, that was so difficult.

The problem is that I am trying to shoot people, spontaneously, and they are all flawed. It just occurred to me that as a person, I am flawed, too. :rofl

But I don't know how else to do it, and I can't keep doing these things over again, the events don't happen over again. Also, I am going way beyond where I usually go. Good gosh, I don't play volleyball. Nor do I go to that part of the beach. That is where the VFW has it front beach bar, no dogs, lots of alcohol, but it is a place to get a coke and sit. Maybe I will be around that volleyball place more, but Bill doesn't get "joined" until next week, about the same day he has surgery.

I guess I am just so frustrated. I was out there trying to remember what Andy said about cutting the man's head off, didn't bother me a bit (hehe, I am so frustrated from no power that I would love to see heads roll. And I know others have it worse. It was not the lack of power, it was everything it entailed. No computer, no coffee, nothing open.............anywhere.

But I am having so much trouble trying to take this perfect people picture. Since I have balls, and the people, perhaps someone could tell me how to put them together, and that would ruin the shot............... I looked at that shot a lot before I went to bed, and the angle and the tension. A ball would not be a good thing.

ginger
Sorry, just grouchy

I am thinking I guess, how am I going to do this, and what do I have to do?
I have like 5 baptisms to photograph tomorrow. And work up. Then Bill has surgery on Thursday. So I have a few days to accomplish a miracle.

And I love Rutt's window shot and Spockling's shot and Lynnsite's shot. Really like the shots I have seen, so .............what am I fighting for?

[ginger_55]

SMUGMUG IS DOWN

I want to put my other volleyball shot up, and Smugmug is down!

ginger :cry

(How long has it been down?)

[ginger_55]

This is my favorite, I held it back last night. What do you all think?


http://gingersnap.smugmug.com/photos/7308028-L.jpg

That jump to get the ball, I can't do that. Wondered if he had had gymnastics. I like the colors better too.
This is very difficult as I couldn't get any closer than the lines around the thing, and I just kept shooting.
From here, where the guy was serving, and from the net. I liked this best because of the jump. Last night I just wanted to show how difficult this is.

ginger

I am so confused on my pictures, I like so many. And I like so many that others have done. Am sure good ones will come in after the weekend, too.

The reason I held this volleyball photo back was I wanted it to stand out from the group I was entering all together last night. Andy has said an individual photo does not get as much notice when immersed with a bunch.

[ginger_55]

Just had to do some fruit, hehe.
Oly c5050 7.1mm eq to 35mm. - Just wish I had wider. To me *wide* is less than 35. Oh well, saving up for a new camera.

http://snapapple.smugmug.com/photos/7305467-S.jpg
I really like that, Snappy. I like the foreground composure, the woman at 10:00, the bananas hanging, AND the scale at 1:00. The colors...etc.

I think it is as good a shot as I have seen, we are all doing good, if not different.

ginger

[ginger_55]

http://wxwax.smugmug.com/photos/7305458-S.jpg


Sid, I like this, but I don't think the distortion is used to the best advantage here. What do you think on that? I hate it when someone says "you can do better". If I thought I could have, I would have, smile.

However, that is my thought here, Sid you will do better. And you aren't alone, everything I do, action, once in a lifetime happenings, and I can do better? This seems to be a very difficult assignment if you shoot people.

ginger

[snapapple]

It is nine months after the big fire of October 2003. The lush green vegetation surrounding the lake is gone. It will be ten years before the site looks anything like before the fire.
Oly. c5050 7.1mm eq. to 35mm

http://snapapple.smugmug.com/photos/7307378-L.jpg

[snapapple]

Oly. c5050 - 7.1mm = 35mm

http://snapapple.smugmug.com/photos/7306440-L.jpg

[ginger_55]

It is nine months after the big fire of October 2003. The lush green vegetation surrounding the lake is gone. It will be ten years before the site looks anything like before the fire.
Oly. c5050 7.1mm eq. to 35mm

http://snapapple.smugmug.com/photos/7307378-S.jpg
Snappy, I really like that one. As a photograph I really like it.
Then I have a question: is the tree still alive? Will it get green again?
Our big hurricane in 1989, we lost lots of vegetation, many areas, including this neighborhood are just looking good again. Scary.

Very nice photograph. I love the shapes and the hills, with the colors.

ginger

[AltPro]

Oly. c5050 - 7.1mm = 35mm

http://snapapple.smugmug.com/photos/7306440-S.jpg
Snappy:
Here I am again, the middle of the night and unable to sleep, it's here I find myself looking at your work and thinking, "strange how appropriate."
I find that I prefer the portrait view of this photo over the landscape... Perhaps it is because it seems to isolate the tree, bringing it forward, in the lonely starkness of the surrounding landscape, which lends to the overall "feel" of the photo.
The warmth of the color, for all it's bleakness in for lack of vegetation, holds a visual appeal. I find myself searching, wishing that I could find one small sprig of "hope" in the image, a small speck of green, a tiny desert flower, some sign of life's return...
Nicely done, Snappy.
ginette

[AltPro]

This is my favorite, I held it back last night. What do you all think?

http://gingersnap.smugmug.com/photos/7308028-S.jpg
ginger ginger:

After all that I said last evening, about wanting to see the ball... I have to admit that I (personally for whatever value it might hold) prefer the first volleyball image (the one posted below)far over this newer one.
http://gingersnap.smugmug.com/photos/7287022-S.jpg
I love the overall perspective, as it really draws you into the game, and I am drawn, as I said last evening, to the color of the net. The warmth of the skin tones, the color of the skyline is bluer, not so blown out in it's appearance, the saturation of the overall image, the body language, all enter into it, I think...
While I agree that the jump in the upper image is engaging, IMVHO the lower image locks on and hold my interest... There is strong visual appeal. I suspect the upper photo had "flash," and in the original I like that it doesn't have a "flash-look" about it.
If only there had been enough head room to "patch in" the ball... (and there may well be a way...)
Forgive me ginger if I am seeming harsh with my critique, that's not the intent, rather that so many of your photos have come such a long way, and they really are beautiful, I am only speaking "aloud" the thoughts that enter my mind as I view them.
ginette

[ginger_55]

ginger:

After all that I said last evening, about wanting to see the ball... I have to admit that I (personally for whatever value it might hold) prefer the first volleyball image (the one posted below)far over this newer one.
http://gingersnap.smugmug.com/photos/7287022-S.jpg
I love the overall perspective, as it really draws you into the game, and I am drawn, as I said last evening, to the color of the net. The warmth of the skin tones, the color of the skyline is bluer, not so blown out in it's appearance, the saturation of the overall image, the body language, all enter into it, I think...
While I agree that the jump in the upper image is engaging, IMVHO the lower image locks on and hold my interest... There is strong visual appeal. I suspect the upper photo had "flash," and in the original I like that it doesn't have a "flash-look" about it.
If only there had been enough head room to "patch in" the ball... (and there may well be a way...)
Forgive me ginger if I am seeming harsh with my critique, that's not the intent, rather that so many of your photos have come such a long way, and they really are beautiful, I am only speaking "aloud" the thoughts that enter my mind as I view them.
ginette
Ginette, I appreciate your saying something...........anything, actually, about the shots I post. I am frustrated, so I also sound harsh. At times.
Neither had flash, I had trouble with it coming on later, neither of these had flash. The Storm was coming, it was basically a grey sky with blue at times, a bit. However, I don't think the sky was blown, and the green cast, in the jump shot, it was a storm portending color, as I have learned around here.

The lower net shot has more expectation, in the bluer sky, etc. I am rambling. Actually, I don't care which one people like. I concentrated very hard on getting the "little" boy, among men, in that first shot, the "look up" shot that you saw. But with the net like that, a ball would, just imo not "fit". I do have one, with the net like that, exactly, probably moments before or after, with the ball. It is on the ground, and that is where the "men" are focused.

I would not, after thinking, want to patch a ball in. It would not fit, shift the attn, and make no sense..............

On the other one, I could change the color shift. I could not make a grey, Storm sky, blue, well I could, but the whole look is towards a storm, so I would not want to do that. I could understand that people would not understand the look of a beach or the colors of an approaching storm, so I could change the color shift a bit.

I am not wedded to either shot. One has a jumper, one has a little boy among men. Both have appeal to me. Considering, I guess, that I have never shot sports before. Just was trying to get people, color, action. I was after surfers, actually, but they were either too far out, or had quit for the day. Except the boy I showed on those sliding boards. I got my tennis shoes soaking wet trying to get close enough to one of those boys so he would not be a dot............ tried to follow Andy's advice. I think that is a good picture, it is just that it became a scenic, and my scenics are too common for me, and are not getting any comments, except one from Rutt. So, I think to do something different, get people. I thought that volleyball game was funny, I couldn't get close, they were all men, except one girl, and the shots with her in them did not have appeal. It was difficult. I was surprised to get any comment, any notice of that photo. Just put it in for laughs. I did like the second one I put in, the jumper, but still thought maybe the people were too small.

Now I know that you and Snappy really prefer the shot with everyone looking up. But I need to hear from more people.

I am disappointed in the feedback, and participation so far. And, on that feedback, I would say that my "leaders" are the volleyball game, no ball, and the little girl with the man, sepia background. That is with about two opinions on each.

Maybe I put too many photos on, but if I did not do that, important photos could be missed. It is raining now, 80% chance today, so after the 5 baptisms, I am now thinking that if it is still raining to try to get some shots of whatever. I told Bill that the rain is light, so we could try to work my way downtown. There are areas that are worse than others.

If I do that, I will have more photos............. I will want to post them, I do need feedback, so Ginette, I really appreciate what you are saying. I might not like hearing that all is lost without the ball, but I do like hearing that that is a nice photograph. Otherwise, I might not have considered it.

Please keep commenting. And please don't mind when I respond. In the real world I work things out by talking about them, and here, too, I can come to terms with the "ball" situation and the photo by talking.

I don't know if it bothers others. I don't know if others even care about that picture. I do know what I have done "wrong" from Andy, in other pictures. I don't know if I have done anything right. Hopefully, I can go back to that market thing on tuesday, but if this weather keeps up, it was a one shot happening. I have looked, and I can't clone the man out.

Thanks to you and Sid, I do have a "kind of" :thumb on two pictures, volleyball and the man and the girl, with the sepia background.

So please, keep the critiques coming. I did not post more than the other volleyball picture last night, as I am waiting for more critiques, or some resolution, a sense that we are through talking about one of my pictures, putting it into a maybe pile. Then I will add a few more. I don't want to confuse the issue right now. And I have done a tremendous amount of shooting.

ginger

[AltPro]

ginger....
I did comment on your "Old Man" and little girl... I really like the sepia cast. Very nice... But I want you to know that I really like the Volleyball shot with everyone looking up... I would like to see the other that you spoke of with the ball having landed in the sand.

Here too, along the eastern shore line of southern Virginia, the rain from Charley continues. So much rain, for far too many days. A constant drizzle. If it keeps up, I will have to make another attempt indoors...

ginette

[tmlphoto]

I don't really think any of these are challenge worthy, but I'm stuck at home with the kids and I'm working with it...

Tribute to Platon:
http://tmlphoto.smugmug.com/photos/7329436-M.jpg
1/60 F/22 ISO 400 27.2mm

Rain Guage:
http://tmlphoto.smugmug.com/photos/7330382-M.jpg
1/30s F/22 ISO 200 27.2mm

Wide Angle Roses:
http://tmlphoto.smugmug.com/photos/7330074-M.jpg
1/15 F/22 ISO 800 27.2mm

Hopefully, something better to follow.

[lynnesite]

ginger....
I did comment on your "Old Man" and little girl... I really like the sepia cast. Very nice... But I want you to know that I really like the Volleyball shot with everyone looking up... I would like to see the other that you spoke of with the ball having landed in the sand.

Here too, along the eastern shore line of southern Virginia, the rain from Charley continues. So much rain, for far too many days. A constant drizzle. If it keeps up, I will have to make another attempt indoors...

ginette


My feelings echo ginette's, Ginger. It seems as if you are able to shoot more than many of us (and many of the "usual suspects" are mute this time, both with critiques and images...) I'm enjoying your images!

Ginette, what a drag about your insomnia, but you seem to get quite inspired ideas in the night, what a cost though.

Lynne
sleep is right up there with food, last night featured a neighbor's party about 1/4 rural mile away with a live band/mariachis until 3:40 a.m. No houses between him and me. Grrrr. How he got the band to stay that late...must be relatives. :dunno

[dugmar]

Three of a USAF C5 Transport.
18mm (guess: 28mm in 35mm)

http://dugmar.smugmug.com/photos/7330998-L.jpg



http://dugmar.smugmug.com/photos/7330995-L.jpg



http://dugmar.smugmug.com/photos/7330996-L.jpg

[ginger_55]

[QUOTE=AltPro]ginger:

After all that I said last evening, about wanting to see the ball... I have to admit that I (personally for whatever value it might hold) prefer the first volleyball image (the one posted below)far over this newer one.
http://gingersnap.smugmug.com/photos/7287022-S.jpg
I love the overall perspective, as it really draws you into the game, and I am

________________________

Hi, just got home. I was thinking in church, that the bottom one, here, the one you like Ginette, "screams" wide angle more, if one were trying to go there. The net is what does it. The other is a good shot. But does not say, to me, wide angle.

Ginette, yes, I remember that you said something about the little girl. You have been a big help, really. And Snappy. Now Lynnsite. And my dog group seems split on these two shots, too. I think if I were to put one on the short list, it would be the bottom one, no ball. Just anticipation, after all there is a net.

But I will work up the one where the ball landed. I think, though that the boy child really helps this shot, and he is not visible much in anything else. I got him when he was playing that corner. He would stand there and glare. Then he got in that position, and I was lucky.

Have been downtown trying to shoot window reflections. Also street shots. I just point my camera at people and scream, please don't move.:rofl :rofl

And I don't see much point in the whole thing. Andy and Sid are going to have to give me some pointers.

It is grey here. It rained, then stopped. I got reflections of the church steeple, all, everything, at 18mm. I even took the Baptism shots at 18mm, I couldn't figure out why the candle was a problem, growing out of people, etc. Curved. Then I realized that I always use that lens, but don't have it stuck at 18mm.

Lynnesite. I loved your mother and foal shot, it is not up???? I am surprised.

I think other people must be working somewhere else, on other sites. Noticed that there was an Andy inspired shot on the Challenge now, forgot who did it, but I know he was working on another site.

So, it might be mostly us and him........... can't think of any names right now.

Just wanted to tell you all that god told me the dominant net volleyball shot was more appropriate for wide angle.

ginger

[snapapple]

I just read through this whole thread. Quite a lot here, but not as many people participating as usual, I think. Either everyone is at work, like me, or away on vacation, like I wish I was.:cry

Ginger You have been busy as usual. Doing great work as usual. I love the flower on the beach. The one with no dog. I like the blurred fence, I like the flow of it. Another one that would look great hanging on a wall. The bridge on pg 4 is a cool shot. Great perspective. But, I like the flower better. You really did a great job on the bridge pic called 1926-Last Look. The colors are beautiful. The dark area in the lower right bothers me though. I found it distracted me from the bridge. When I got to page 9, I stopped short at the picture of the old man and the little girl. It was absolutely captivating. The facial expressions are wonderful. The one called Romley's Point is a beautiful shot. Good perspective with the piers. The people really add to the shot. Very nice. The Volleyball shots are both great. I'd have a hard time deciding between those and the old man and little girl. I like the one with no ball. The composition is bolder. Much more tension there, in the faces and in the composition. Doesn't need a ball. Everyone is looking at a spot above the top border of the picture. Makes me look there too, and I *know* the ball is there. Great shot!

Stan - I like the tractor shot a lot. I played with it and just upped the reds a little and made the field more orange and the tractor redder. I like it better with more color. Has more zip or pop. Great perspective.

Erik - I really like your picture of you. How did you do it? Set the timer I guess. It's imaginative, creative, and different. Really grabs me.

Gubbs - Love the improved version of the Pub shot. Great detail in the dark areas. Great backlighting. Great mood. Really gives the feeling. I was in London once about 15 years ago, and it brings me back.

Ginette - I like the second shot of the falls. The lighter one. Got rid of the dark areas. The monotone effect is very soothing. The motion effect of the water is very nice. The roller coaster just didn't do anything for me.

Lynnesite - I Love your horse shots. I think the head shot is beautiful. The soft light is wonderful and the way the horse is looking into the sunset gives it real personality. The second shot is real nice too, but I'd like it better if the forground was a tiny bit lighter. I had not even seen the blue bucket until someone mentioned it. I had to go back and look real hard. If you can lighten that, I'd say it was a difficult choice. I hate those tough choices.

Sid - My favorite is the little girl in the ballpark. The subject matter is so unusual. The girl is darling. and the perspective is great.

Rutt - The window! It's a very cool shot! Original, creative, well seen. The lighthouse is my next choice. Very well done. The footprints in the front give it some real interest. But, the window. Now, that's one you won't see everywhere. I really dig it.

I have to get out and do some shooting now. Midday light again. Geeese, it always happens. Sunday morning, got up late...same old story.

[AltPro]

Three of a USAF C5 Transport.
18mm (guess: 28mm in 35mm)


http://dugmar.smugmug.com/photos/7330996-L.jpg
Dugmar...
If I had to pick just one, this would be it... Great composition, wonderful clarity, and perspective! Great clouds, too... I would perhaps work it a bit adjusting color, levels, and curves.... Just a tweak.
Great shot.
ginette

[ysr612]

Don't forget the no cropping restriction for submissions.:evil I really like the shot too, and the placement of the motorcycle works well.I hope monday is a nice day because I know that the bouy will still be there I hope the hawse is so I can reshoot.

Thanks

[ginger_55]

http://gingerSnap.smugmug.com/photos/7349966-L.jpg

[ginger_55]

Snappy and Ginette, you two deserve a medal for all the critiqueing, advising, commenting and stuff you are doing.

May the two of you, each and both, get the best photos possible, your own selves.

I had church, went downtown, have had computer problems this afternoon, after a few troublefree days. I have been able to work up some photographs, and I am pleased. I just put one up. It is not my type of photography at all, so I am just pleased as punch over it. Had to put it up.

But the two of you are being the real angels of this thread.

Thank you so much. :clap :clap

Ginger

[AltPro]

Finally, in frustration of another day of continual downpour... (we are well over 3" for today!) I retreated to my room, where the kittens were sleeping and tried to read awhile... Well with two 10 week old kittens, and the boys, it was not to be, so I pulled out the camera and shot off a few, handheld, 1/15 exposure shots, at 8.9 mm on my camera... Here are a couple of the "better" ones.

http://ThroughTheLensLtd.smugmug.com/photos/7343737-L.jpg

http://ThroughTheLensLtd.smugmug.com/photos/7343206-L.jpg

Comments and Critiques Greatly Appreciated.
ginette

[ginger_55]

http://throughthelensltd.smugmug.com/photos/7343737-S.jpgFinally, in frustration of another day of continual downpour... (we are well over 3" for today!) I retreated to my room with where the kittens were sleeping and tried to read awhile... Well with two 10 week old kittens, and the boys, it was not to be, so I pulled out the camera and shot off a few, handheld, 1/15 exposure shots, at 8.9 mm on my camera... Here are a couple of the "better" onees.

Comments and Critiques Greatly Appreciated.
ginette


Ginette, I love them both, but this is my absolute favorite. No distracting elements. Just soft sweet kittens and boy. :clap I love it!

Uh, they keep telling me that rain makes good shots of headlights. I had to go to church, photographer, a real good rain til just before we left the house. I wanted rain..........no.

I did get a puddle or two at the church.

ginger (18mm as always)

http://gingerSnap.smugmug.com/photos/7349961-M.jpg

[pathfinder]

http://gingersnap.smugmug.com/photos/7349966-L.jpg
I think Andy is just going to love this one Ginger. Not sure that the color adds a lot - tri-x look might be worth a try - just a thought. The juxtapostion is just perfect. Did you plan this one and wait for the two ladys to sit down or was this just a "found" shot?

Great picture.:clap

[dugmar]

Dugmar...
If I had to pick just one, this would be it... Great composition, wonderful clarity, and perspective! Great clouds, too... I would perhaps work it a bit adjusting color, levels, and curves.... Just a tweak.
Great shot.
ginetteYeah I agree. This was a tough spot to shoot, as I wasn't allowed to bring in my bag for security reasons, so for 8 hours in the hot sun I lugged my big 400mm lens around and whatever I could fit in my cargo shorts pockets.

They had the C5 open to sit in, so I sat where the troops usually sit for about an hour and drank a big jug of water. Just to give you an idea of how big these planes are, check this photo out (Obviously not an option for this challenge.) These things are impressively huge...

http://dugmar.smugmug.com/photos/7354278-L.jpg


I have been away all weekend, there are some really great shots here. The waterfall shot is great. Really reminds me of some of my shots of the Pow Wow River I took back in the spring when we got 7" of rain in 48 hours. Similar lighting too, but a lot more water.

http://dugmar.smugmug.com/photos/3227743-M.jpg See what I mean?...

http://dugmar.smugmug.com/photos/3234366-M.jpg

Ginger's shot of the surfers is great. I love candid shots and that is a good one.

Gubbs' shot of the pubroom is excellent. It reminds me of a great bar in Essex, Connecticut called the Griswold Inn. It has a simiar ceiling, ecxcept it is a hull of a boat (turned upside down) instead of brick. Nice shot, great light!

And the "partners 2" shot by Ginger is great. I really like that as well.

Lynnesite, I have to be blunt, the horse shots are great, but the subject matter is getting a bit tiresome to me. Great composition, great lighting, great scenery.. but the horses, I don't know, just not doing it for me week after week, so I tend to skim over them. Maybe it's just me.

[ginger_55]

I think Andy is just going to love this one Ginger. Not sure that the color adds a lot - tri-x look might be worth a try - just a thought. The juxtapostion is just perfect. Did you plan this one and wait for the two ladys to sit down or was this just a "found" shot?

Great picture.:clap
We ate there, I was anxious to leave and shoot, it started to rain, even better, sent Bill to the car to get a sweatshirt to cover my camera. I was bored. Wandered around.

Saw the Marilyn Monroe picture, and I thought, "wouldn't it be neat if two women were sitting down under it". That is what I honestly thought. And low and behold, there sat those two ladies.

I almost lost it, no I was cool, I was so cool that I took two shots, just to cover myself. It was difficult to line it up just right. When I went to work one up, there was a part of another person in it. Good thing I took two.

So the planning only took place in my head. I went to church this AM, had to photograph about 5 baptisms. Maybe god took note and dumped those two women right there.

I think it, well it proves to me that I am not a one note photographer. I am so tickled. I have never taken a shot like that. You know irony.

I think it is Andy's type shot. I hope so, I love it. I love my others, but this was such a find. When I am antsy like that, dying to shoot, I look at my surroundings very carefully. Took a photo of guys eating at the counter, stuff like that.
But that Marilyn Monroe and two women, that was just tooooo much!

Now I thought about color vs blk and white, too. Wouldn't have hurt me to work it up in blk and white after the color. But I wanted Marilyn's photo to really stand out as different from the two "ladies".

So that is why it is in color.

ginger :D

[AltPro]

http://throughthelensltd.smugmug.com/photos/7343737-Ti.jpg

Ginette, I love them both, but this is my absolute favorite. No distracting elements. Just soft sweet kittens and boy. :clap I love it!

I did get a puddle or two at the church.

ginger (18mm as always)

http://gingersnap.smugmug.com/photos/7349961-S.jpg
ginger,
Glad to hear that you liked "MaTT & the Dastardly Duo." :lust He will be happy to know that his love for the kittens made a nice photo, too. Any assignment with this much rain, is tough... It is still pouring, and leterally has been since early yesterday, without let up! Ugh, our ground feels like sponge or jello, depending where you stand.

I like your "Church Puddle Reflection" WOuld have been great for the past assignment, eh? Really a stunning reflection. Very, Very, Nice!:clap

http://gingersnap.smugmug.com/photos/7349966-S.jpg

But I really like this one... great shot.!!:clap
Nice to see someone is getting some work done!
Keep at, keepin' at it.
ginette

[Mitchell]

Been stuck in side and evacuated my home to avoid hurricane Charley. Not much wide angle shooting for me. Finally ventured out to the beach today and the clouds were nasty.

mitch

[Mitchell]

another

[ginger_55]

[QUOTE=lynnesite]It's cool to distort if that's what you're setting out to do--unfortunately a lot of people try to take "good" closeup photos of horses and fail. Lens has to be more than 70mm (and better if a lot longer) to not distort them.http://www.photo.lynnesite.com/photos/7257522-S.jpg

_______________________

I love this shot Lynne, but for the life of me, I cannot see a bucket. I had trouble with Snappy's mtn range separation, too. So I think I am seeing things a bit differently on my monitor than the rest of you.

Does anyone know an easy way to just turn the light up a bit on a monitor?
I don't want to get into full calibration, or anything. Just turn the light up a bit. If I could just barely see the bucket here, I would think I was about where the rest of you are on light level.

ginger

[HarveyMushman]

http://harveymushman.smugmug.com/photos/7355639-L.jpg


http://harveymushman.smugmug.com/photos/7355649-L.jpg


http://harveymushman.smugmug.com/photos/7355663-L.jpg

[Shakey]

A Big Wide DGrin (dogs grin)
http://shakey.smugmug.com/photos/7359268-L.jpg

Tim

[pathfinder]

A Big Wide DGrin (dogs grin)
http://shakey.smugmug.com/photos/7359268-L.jpg

Tim
Good looking Dog Tim!

I have been shooting wide angle sunsets 31mm lens equivalent

http://pathfinder.smugmug.com/photos/7362763-M.jpg

And a vertical

http://pathfinder.smugmug.com/photos/7362558-L.jpg

[ginger_55]

Good looking Dog Tim!http://pathfinder.smugmug.com/photos/7362763-S.jpg

I have been shooting wide angle sunsets 31mm lens equivalent



And a vertic
I love this sunset, Pathfinder. It looks like there is a lot of room to take them, there, smile. Do you have to drive to get them?

I used to live front beach on the ocean here. The sunrises were like that sunset there. Not much to frame it with on the ocean, unless I went down to the dunes. I didn't do that.

That is beautiful. The vertical is nice, too, but I like the sunset better.

ginger

[ginger_55]

I found another reflection, in a window. At 18mm, but I like it, the couple is even carrying an umbrella. You all know I said I was going to look for these things.

http://gingerSnap.smugmug.com/photos/7349968-M.jpg


The Poster

http://gingerSnap.smugmug.com/photos/7349965-M.jpg


The Movie Theater

http://gingerSnap.smugmug.com/photos/7349964-M.jpg


Chess Set 2

http://gingerSnap.smugmug.com/photos/7349969-M.jpg
All 18 mm by ginger

[lynnesite]

Lynnesite, I have to be blunt, the horse shots are great, but the subject matter is getting a bit tiresome to me. Great composition, great lighting, great scenery.. but the horses, I don't know, just not doing it for me week after week, so I tend to skim over them. Maybe it's just me.

That's cool. Last challenge my entry was unclaimed luggage, though. ;-)

[dugmar]

That's cool. Last challenge my entry was unclaimed luggage, though. ;-)
Oh yeah. See, I told you it may be just me. :)

Doug

[cletus]

http://snapapple.smugmug.com/photos/7307378-S.jpg
Perfect! I wouldn't change a thing. :clap

[cletus]

http://gingersnap.smugmug.com/photos/7349966-S.jpg
Ginger,

I think PF is right... you should try this one as a grainy black and white. I think it will be the finishing touch on a great image.

[cletus]

A Big Wide DGrin (dogs grin)
http://shakey.smugmug.com/photos/7359268-S.jpg
Tim
Tim, I really like this shot :thumb

[ginger_55]

Ginger,

I think PF is right... you should try this one as a grainy black and white. I think it will be the finishing touch on a great image.
Thanks, Cletus, will do later............I posted it as is: in The Challenge. Will try the black and white, too, later.

Am just happy I "saw" the shot, for now. And sad for my other shots.

Going to have coffee, and I will try it out in black and white, then post it for others to see and comments. But later, I have a week.

ginger

[cletus]

http://harveymushman.smugmug.com/photos/7355639-S.jpg


http://harveymushman.smugmug.com/photos/7355649-S.jpg


http://harveymushman.smugmug.com/photos/7355663-S.jpg
Harvey,

#1 is my favorite, with #2 close behind. The only thing keeping #2 from being my first pic is the fact that the man is almost silhouetted but not quite. Maybe it's just a personal thing :dunno

#3 just doesn't grab me. I'm not sure why. Maybe I keep looking for some interaction between the boy and the plane :dunno

By the way is that Buford T. Justice standing behind the boy? :D

[rutt]

I've been finding this challenge, err, challenging. I already knew that it was hit or miss with my WA lens. The little hint about having a strong foreground element, doesn't seem to correspond to my best WA images (like the Yellowstone Reflections entry.) Look at Penelope's image that Andy posted! This is one beautiful WA shot, and were is the foreground image?

Anyway, I do seem to be good at using WA to make my subjects seem a small part of a huge enviornment. Here are a few I took yesterday of my son and dog.

21mm:

http://rutt.smugmug.com/photos/7378275-L.jpg


21mm:

http://rutt.smugmug.com/photos/7378197-L.jpg

[rutt]

Longer is easier for me, but not as on message:

46mm:

http://rutt.smugmug.com/photos/7378514-L.jpg

[cletus]

I'm not sure which Ice Cream Man composition I like better... This:
http://ab0wa.smugmug.com/photos/7377718-L.jpg

Or this:
http://ab0wa.smugmug.com/photos/7377719-L.jpg

I also got this shot over the weekend. I'm not completely happy with the framing of the shot, but considering I nearly got sick taking this picture, I wasn't in a hurry to reshoot:
http://ab0wa.smugmug.com/photos/7377720-L.jpg

By the way, all three images were shot at 35mm.

[rutt]

I'm told this kind of tiny sailboat is called an "Optimist". It's sort of the mini of sailboats, at least in terms of size. Probably not in terms of performance. This family towed theirs across the harbor with a Zodiac.

21mm:

http://rutt.smugmug.com/photos/7378487-L.jpg

21mm:

http://rutt.smugmug.com/photos/7378424-L.jpg


21mm:

http://rutt.smugmug.com/photos/7378513-L.jpg

[rutt]

http://ab0wa.smugmug.com/photos/7377720-S.jpg

Eric, forget the ice cream man and enter this! I love the framing just the way it is. Yeah, I know she is cut off on the bottom and a little on the left, but it makes it more interesting and also conveys the sickness you felt. (I have to recover for hours from a ride in a merry-go-round, myself.)

[rutt]

This speaks to me as an avid beach walker. I think you could recover some detail in the black shoes and in the sky with PS/CS shadow/highlight followed by LAB curves. This is a dramatic picture and calls for dramatic color and contrast. See this thread (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=2042) on LAB curves and this thread (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=2049) on shadow/highlight.

http://www.dgrin.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2096&stc=1

[cmr164]

I've been finding this challenge, err, challenging. I already knew that it was hit or miss with my WA lens. The little hint about having a strong foreground element, doesn't seem to correspond to my best WA images (like the Yellowstone Reflections entry.) Look at Penelope's image that Andy posted! This is one beautiful WA shot, and were is the foreground image?

Anyway, I do seem to be good at using WA to make my subjects seem a small part of a huge enviornment. Here are a few I took yesterday of my son and dog.


21mm:

http://rutt.smugmug.com/photos/7378197-S.jpg
I would probably like to see this shot with the camera pointed more to the right, opening up the expanse on that side and reducing (but not eliminating) the bulk on the left. Just a thought...


http://rutt.smugmug.com/photos/7378513-S.jpg
Maybe I would prefer this one less centered also. The colors and depth are fantastic.

[rutt]

http://www.dgrin.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2097&stc=1

I like this quite a bit. My comments about shadow/highlght and LAB curves also apply here. I think you can open up the detail in the waves, make them greener, and lose none of the drama. In fact LAB steepening will light up the blue in the sky and make the sand pinker. You can play with the L curve after shadow/highlight to get recover the black in the sky, which I think is important here.

[rutt]

http://rutt.smugmug.com/photos/7378197-Th.jpg

I would probably like to see this shot with the camera pointed more to the right, opening up the expanse on that side and reducing (but not eliminating) the bulk on the left. Just a thought...

I thought I was pretty brave as it was when I shot it. I don't remember what's to the right, but I think it might be something ugly. Vertical might have been the way to go (kneeling.) But I don't love the shot as much as I love seeing it live. Sigh.

[AltPro]

Been stuck in side and evacuated my home to avoid hurricane Charley. Not much wide angle shooting for me. Finally ventured out to the beach today and the clouds were nasty.
mitch
Mitch...

I really like the shot of the beach with the sandals... Very nice...
ginette

[rutt]

http://rutt.smugmug.com/photos/7378513-Th.jpg

Maybe I would prefer this one less centered also. The colors and depth are fantastic.
BTW, this is my least favorite of the three Optimist shots. I included it only because WA made the little boat seem so small and the seascape so huge. But I don't think it really conveys how very "optimistic" the boat and it's passengers are.

[cletus]

Mitch...

I really like the shot of the beach with the sandals... Very nice...
ginette
:nod :thumb

[AltPro]

I also got this shot over the weekend. I'm not completely happy with the framing of the shot, but considering I nearly got sick taking this picture, I wasn't in a hurry to reshoot:
http://ab0wa.smugmug.com/photos/7377720-S.jpg

By the way, all three images were shot at 35mm. Wow... I love this shot... great focus on the womans face, wonderful movement in the background. I like the composition, shows her moving through the frame. I love it.

ginette

[pathfinder]

I'm not sure which Ice Cream Man composition I like better... This:


Or this:
http://ab0wa.smugmug.com/photos/7377719-L.jpg

I also got this shot over the weekend. I'm not completely happy with the framing of the shot, but considering I nearly got sick taking this picture, I wasn't in a hurry to reshoot:


By the way, all three images were shot at 35mm.
How about this - it puts the vendors head in the upper right third - and gives a nice diagonal eye movement across the image. Just a quick thought - this is a cute image - but Andy said no cropping for the challenge - crop only with your feet - that's why I like longer lenses I think:rofl

[rutt]

http://harveymushman.smugmug.com/photos/7355639-S.jpg


http://harveymushman.smugmug.com/photos/7355649-S.jpg


http://harveymushman.smugmug.com/photos/7355663-S.jpg
Great subject. I think the framing is a problem in the first two, but I like the boy and plane a lot. I know I'm beginning to sound like a broken record here, but shadow/highlight can help this image a lot. I'm finding it really invaluable for WA because it's hard to get correct exposure over such a wide area (especially in daytime.)

Here is you shot after shadow/highlight at 22/75/30:

http://rutt.smugmug.com/photos/7381418-L.jpg

Then I converted to LAB and used the L curve to recover a little more detail in the engine. And used the sharpen tool to bring up the light spots in the engine.

http://rutt.smugmug.com/photos/7381419-L.jpg

I think it would be better still if you could somehow get some of the boy's eyes. I have a feeling they are "pilot blue".

[rutt]

A Big Wide DGrin (dogs grin)
http://shakey.smugmug.com/photos/7359268-S.jpg

Tim
Great subject, great composition. I think the B&W conversion could probably be better. Do you really want this much contrast and this much loss of shadow detail? Is there more detail in the origiinal?

[rutt]

http://pathfinder.smugmug.com/photos/7362558-S.jpg

I have to disagree with Ginger. Sunsets are nice, but, hey, we all shoot them. They are not "photographer's pictures" as Ginger says. But this one is. Jim, the images of yours I like best are like this one. They convey a sense of place, of history, and rightness. The scale is smallish, but everything is so peaceful and right. It's your style.

As with so many of the images posted here, I'd play with shadow/highlight and LAB curves here a little to open the shadows a bit and make it pop.

[ginger_55]

:D http://ab0wa.smugmug.com/photos/7377720-S.jpgI

I also got this shot over the weekend. I'm not completely happy with the framing of the shot, but considering I nearly got sick taking this picture, I wasn't in a hurry to reshoot:


By the way, all three images were shot at 35mm.

But I am with the group, the woman on that torture thing, by far!

ginger

That is my question??? It has occurred to me, why in the world anyone rides those things. I almost broke my nedk on one years ago. I won't get on them. And if you scream that you want off, they think you are having fun!
I think they are dangerous, smile.

So, a photo like that would be about the only good reason I can think of to be on one, :rofl :rofl :rofl

[rutt]

http://gingersnap.smugmug.com/photos/7349966-S.jpg

Ginger, I think you have chosen well. This is a very interesting image. I love the broken symetry, the shape of the lights cast on the wall. I think this is plenty atmospheric in color. Perhaps a little work with curves could further excentuate? I'll play a little if you like.

[ginger_55]

I'm told this kind of tiny sailboat is called an "Optimist". It's sort of the mini of sailboats, at least in terms of size. Probably not in terms of performance. This family towed theirs across the harbor with a Zodiac.

21mm:http://rutt.smugmug.com/photos/7378487-S.jpg



Rutt, this is my favorite of the shots posted this AM. I happen to be a strong fan, though, of well done center placement.

This shot and the shot of the window are my two favorites. I think this is strong as a scenic, but the window is "different", so it has a stronger chance of being liked, or not. I think these are kind of "just shots", kind of middle ish, and I don't think they have as strong a chance at much of anything.

Sorry, that didn't come out very well.
I would say that if I were doing a coffee table book on good photography, August 2004, I would pick your window shot.

ginger

(And my shot, too. Gonna be tough. Oh, yes, Cletus shot, and that is just what I am thinking of at this moment.)

[tmlphoto]

"Diehard Fans" 0.3s f/22 iso 400 17x1.6=27.2mm fill flash

http://tmlphoto.smugmug.com/photos/7383365-L.jpg

[ginger_55]

http://pathfinder.smugmug.com/photos/7362558-S.jpg

I have to disagree with Ginger. Sunsets are nice, but, hey, we all shoot them. They are not "photographer's pictures" as Ginger says. But this one is. Jim, the images of yours I like best are like this one. They convey a sense of place, of history, and rightness. The scale is smallish, but everything is so peaceful and right. It's your style.

As with so many of the images posted here, I'd play with shadow/highlight and LAB curves here a little to open the shadows a bit and make it pop.
That might work, good gosh, Rutt, no one was on commenting all weekend, except a few of us. So I wanted to say something when I saw it.

What I really thought was that we have a week left, and I would keep shooting.

That would be my emphasis. And I could be completely wrong about the photos, as you have pointed out about the sunset. I was impressed by the flat wide open ness of the country with the small bldgs on the left. Wide open............ Most impressive sunsets do need a hook and a "sky" (clouds or something like that).

ginger

[tmlphoto]

comments:
Rutt: I like your small boat in a big ocean shot
Ginger: Would love to see your dining ladies in B&W, great shot
Snapapple: Your tree shot looks great to me.
Cletus: I really like the spinning girl shot, I think the framing is fine. Nice shot.
Mitchell: the lighting is really cool on your beach shot, love the shoes.

Rutt I think your comments about a pure wide open shot versus foreground interest is interesting. I think a pure wide shot can look great, but I think that the shots that include foreground and even fore, middle, background can be very interesting, but I think are much more difficult to pull off. Playing around with perspective is interesting too, but it seems to be difficult to get a shot that doesn't look gimmicky.

I still can't find anything of mine that I like, but its been educational just walking around with a 27mm lens. Its a different world.

[ginger_55]

http://tmlphoto.smugmug.com/photos/7383365-S.jpg"Diehard Fans" 0.3s f/22 iso 400 17x1.6=27.2mm fill flash


Thomas, I like that :clap And wide it is!

ginger