Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Moonrise over Manaslu - Nepal  (Read 9218 times)
Tony Jay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2029


« Reply #40 on: April 23, 2012, 03:19:29 AM »
ReplyReply

FWIW I am with shadowblade on the points he has raised.

Short startrails don't look right.
Startrails are bit like an interesting cloudy sky at sunset - an essential backdrop to the real subject of the image.

Also as much as one likes to post good pics assuming that a large print at full resolution will look the same as the massively downresed images posted on LuLa doesn't stand scrutiny.
All of the images I have posted look much better, sometimes spectacularly so, as large prints.

Dare I say it - as much as shadowblade rattles my cage I look forward to seeing his next image post.

Regards

Tony Jay
Logged
dreed
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1169


« Reply #41 on: April 23, 2012, 04:59:39 AM »
ReplyReply

I've never been a fan of short trails - they look like an unintentional mistake, rather than an intentional exposure.

For me, it's either long trails, or no trails at all.

Right, no trails would have been my preference for this shot and to have seen you attempt to see what you could get away with in terms of exposure time vs trail length. When there are long star trails then it is usually the star trails that are the subject of the image. In this case, that's not the case.

Also, what could you have done with some masking and merging a short exposure of the sky with a longer one to get the mountains?
Logged
shadowblade
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 591


« Reply #42 on: April 23, 2012, 05:09:26 AM »
ReplyReply

Right, no trails would have been my preference for this shot and to have seen you attempt to see what you could get away with in terms of exposure time vs trail length. When there are long star trails then it is usually the star trails that are the subject of the image. In this case, that's not the case.

Since I was using a fairly long lens (105mm) the frame actually looked quite empty and devoid of stars - it's not like when you're shooting with a wide-angle lens and have a large section of the sky in view.

Quote
Also, what could you have done with some masking and merging a short exposure of the sky with a longer one to get the mountains?

Capturing the mountain wasn't the problem - I could have done that with a few seconds of exposure around the start of moonrise. But, to capture the stars, I would have needed a longer exposure (shooting at ISO 100) - at 100mm, you can't have more than a few seconds of exposure without developing short trails, which is why most night sky photos which don't have trails and aren't taken using a tracking mount (which would make it impossible to have any non-celestial features in the photo) are taken at wide angles. Not to mention, as I said earlier, there just weren't all that many stars in that small patch of sky covered by the lens.
Logged
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2320


« Reply #43 on: April 23, 2012, 10:30:29 AM »
ReplyReply

No - why? I'm Australia-based, so never heard of those festivals.
It was just a foolish thought.
Logged
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2320


« Reply #44 on: April 23, 2012, 11:29:31 AM »
ReplyReply

I've never been a fan of short trails - they look like an unintentional mistake, rather than an intentional exposure. For me, it's either long trails, or no trails at all.
But would you call these (Yan Zhang's photo) long trails or are they medium? ;-)

...a similar shot without as many star trails...
Logged
Keith Reeder
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 189


WWW
« Reply #45 on: April 24, 2012, 11:07:15 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for sharing Shadowblade - don't let the turkeys get you down! Keep shooting what you like shooting. If others find it "ubiquitous, cliche and kitsch" - ignore them.

So aren't you saying in essence that you only consider responses to a C&C request (albeit in the wrong forum) to be acceptable if they respond with banal, bland approval?

Seriously Terry, what's the point of that?

There are any number of places on the 'Net where gushing approbation of anything is almost guaranteed, so isn't it a good thing that some people here are prepared to risk the wrath of the Nice Police by being honest about their reservations?

Logged

Keith Reeder
Blyth, NE England
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2320


« Reply #46 on: April 24, 2012, 12:19:36 PM »
ReplyReply

So aren't you saying in essence that you only consider responses to a C&C request (albeit in the wrong forum) to be acceptable ...
One of the things that Terry was saying is that it wasn't "a C&C request" because it wasn't in the "User Critique" forum.

Seriously Terry, what's the point of that?
Well he did say - "I think it's great that people share what they see and photograph" - so my guess is that Terry thinks that would be the point.

... so isn't it a good thing that some people here are prepared to risk the wrath of the Nice Police by being honest about their reservations?
It's really not an act of bravery ;-)

Apparently quite a few people would simply like to share their photographs, so that others can admire them (or not); and sometimes they might like others to look critically at their photos.

There's an obvious place to submit photos for critique, but it isn't obvious that photos submitted here are not requests for critique - so let's ask that it be made obvious.
Logged
John R Smith
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1357


Still crazy, after all these years


« Reply #47 on: April 24, 2012, 12:52:15 PM »
ReplyReply


Well, excuse me - but -

There is nothing in the title of this Forum sub-section to suggest that nobody is allowed to voice an opinion about the merits or demerits of a posted photograph. It says -

Landscape & Nature Photography (and underneath) Nature Photography - technical and aesthetic issues

One would imagine that such a heading invites debate, particularly debate regarding "technical and aesthetic issues". Which would seem to be the case in this particular thread.

John
Logged

Hasselblad 500 C/M, SWC and CFV-39 DB
and a case full of (very old) lenses and other bits
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2320


« Reply #48 on: April 24, 2012, 01:58:33 PM »
ReplyReply

There is nothing in the title of this Forum sub-section to suggest that nobody is allowed to voice an opinion about the merits or demerits of a posted photograph.
I agree.

One would imagine that such a heading invites debate, particularly debate regarding "technical and aesthetic issues". Which would seem to be the case in this particular thread.
Rather than imagine, we can just look at what's typically posted in this discussion forum. I would say the vast majority of "New Topics" started in this forum are simply someone wanting to share a photo they've made (aka advertise their photography). I would say the vast majority of posts to those threads are simply people acknowledging and admiring the photo. (Most posts in this forum aren't questions about "technical and aesthetic issues".)

I think there have been half-a-dozen occasions over the last few months when someone's expectations have been upset because a photo was criticised rather than admired (or ignored).

Is there a reason not to have a place where user photos are submitted for admiration (as-well-as a place where user photos are submitted for critique?) If not then let's have the title and description changed to match how this forum is actually being used.

« Last Edit: April 24, 2012, 02:14:03 PM by Isaac » Logged
John R Smith
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1357


Still crazy, after all these years


« Reply #49 on: April 24, 2012, 02:13:53 PM »
ReplyReply

I think there have been half-a-dozen occasions over the last few months when someone's expectations have been upset because a photo was criticised rather than admired (or ignored).

Is there a reason not to have a place where user photos are submitted for admiration as well as a place where user photos are submitted for critique? If not then let's have the title and description changed to match how this forum is actually being used.

So - just to get this quite clear - you are asking for this section to be a place where photos are posted, and the replies to them may only be ones of approval or approbation? That is the ground rule? And if, as a viewer, you do not like the photograph or feel that certain aspects of it are weak and could be improved, you may think this but you are not allowed to say so?

John
Logged

Hasselblad 500 C/M, SWC and CFV-39 DB
and a case full of (very old) lenses and other bits
Enda Cavanagh
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 530



WWW
« Reply #50 on: April 24, 2012, 02:21:45 PM »
ReplyReply

It does get a bit confusing to know here who the Hell is arguing with who.!! Grin
Logged

Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2320


« Reply #51 on: April 24, 2012, 02:27:41 PM »
ReplyReply

... you may think this but you are not allowed to say so?
You may think this but it would be clearly understood that no one actually asked you for critique -- so others may well consider you to be boorish and rude if you choose to criticize ;-)

Why wouldn't those who want to do more than share, (or advertise) their photos, post in "User Critiques"?

Why wouldn't those who want to do more than admire, choose to post their comments in "User Critiques"?

Fear of the denizens of the "User Critiques" forum? :-)
« Last Edit: April 24, 2012, 02:41:11 PM by Isaac » Logged
John R Smith
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1357


Still crazy, after all these years


« Reply #52 on: April 24, 2012, 02:56:16 PM »
ReplyReply


Well, Isaac, I have to say that I am jolly pleased that you and Terry have got everything really well sorted out here. It's always much more reassuring to know exactly where you stand when posting on a forum like this. And I'm sure that everybody else who posts here is very grateful to you too. Now just remember, chaps - no nasty criticism! You can think it, but you musn't say it!

 Wink John
Logged

Hasselblad 500 C/M, SWC and CFV-39 DB
and a case full of (very old) lenses and other bits
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2320


« Reply #53 on: April 24, 2012, 03:07:12 PM »
ReplyReply

Well, Isaac, I have to say that I am jolly pleased that you and Terry have got everything really well sorted out here. It's always much more reassuring to know exactly where you stand when posting on a forum like this. ... Now just remember, chaps - no nasty criticism! You can think it, but you musn't say it!
Oh! You really are scared of the denizens of "User Critiques"! :-)
But you already post there, they can't be that ferocious.

I don't care whether those who use this forum decide to welcome "nasty criticism" or reject it - but I think we should decide one way or the other, and then ask that our understanding be made clear in the forum title and description.
« Last Edit: April 24, 2012, 03:48:04 PM by Isaac » Logged
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4998



WWW
« Reply #54 on: April 24, 2012, 03:23:09 PM »
ReplyReply

It does get a bit confusing to know here who the Hell is arguing with who.!! Grin

Ah, I see you already met Isaac! Wink
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2320


« Reply #55 on: April 24, 2012, 03:45:34 PM »
ReplyReply

Ah, I see you already met Isaac! Wink
Another day, another taunt.
Logged
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4998



WWW
« Reply #56 on: April 24, 2012, 04:33:05 PM »
ReplyReply

Another day, another taunt.

Oh, pardon me! My bad.

You were actually seriously proposing whatever it is that you were proposing?
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2320


« Reply #57 on: April 24, 2012, 05:15:41 PM »
ReplyReply

It does get a bit confusing to know here who the Hell is arguing with who.!!
There's been a recurrent disagreement about whether people who post photos in this forum should expect them to be critiqued.

Instead of squabbling about it every couple of months, I suggest the people who use this forum should just decide whether they want to have this as a place where it's understood that the people who post photos are not asking for critique - and people who want critique should post to "User Critiques".
Logged
Enda Cavanagh
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 530



WWW
« Reply #58 on: April 24, 2012, 05:52:44 PM »
ReplyReply

Isaac

I'm sure the vast majority of photographers here want a critique whether it be positive or negative and not to have their egos inflated. The problem for many it seems has nothing do do with negative critique. What people seem to have a problem with is that some members post repeated condescending comments about images and in a very arrogant way. The condescending way the message is relayed ends up time and time again where the thread completely deviates off the post to where everyone ends up bloody bickering to the point where every word is hyper analyzed and quoted in an effort to prove that one is right and where the original poster probably sits bemused on the sidelines Cheesy I also am now not writing about the image which I do believe to be a very strong one. I actually believe the photographer has made something quite strong and unique from something that may be a cliche. But is it more of a cliche than a photo of a bird on a twig or a photo of a rock or a photo of a tree or a photo of a lake or a photo of a flower closeup up. You work with the cards that you are dealt with.

There are different ways of saying the same thing. I for one have absolutely no problem with honest constructive criticisms. I of course can also counter a comment good or bad. I personally have greatly benefited from some comments about mistakes on my photos regarding post production. I also have received comments well that in my opinion are not accurate and I will make my point. That is debate. That is good. Yet again what has resulted here is not debate. In relation to yourself for example to be honest I enjoy your comments because they humor me but I'm afraid I don't take you seriously. That is a pity because occasionally believe it or not I actually agree with you initially but more often than not the thread ends up in some sort of slagging match.

As ye say that's just my 2 cents.
Logged

Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2320


« Reply #59 on: April 24, 2012, 06:09:41 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm sure the vast majority of photographers here want a critique...
Terry seems sure that they don't. Terry seems sure they want encouragement.

Why wouldn't those who want critique post in "User Critiques"?


... honest constructive criticisms.
What others consider to be "honest constructive criticism" might not feel like "honest constructive criticism" to you.
Logged
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad