Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Golden Wavelets at Dusk  (Read 1026 times)
gerafotografija
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 224



WWW
« on: February 23, 2013, 01:50:06 AM »
ReplyReply

I am starting to understand why photographers wake up before dawn and stay out until after sunset. Although I have been shooting this egret (and now her chick) for a little while, this is the first time I caught the water just as the sun was setting.

I had to push the ISO a bit for my little m4/3 sensor with a long telephoto lens, so I am curious if the IQ is still acceptable by the high standards you guys set? Compressed JPEG attached ~1/8 the original size.

Happy Friday!
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 6181


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #1 on: February 23, 2013, 02:37:59 AM »
ReplyReply

I think you got everything perfect! From colors, reflections, white balance, and composition. Really well done!

Now, someone might dismissively say its just another pretty picture for a chocolate box, but even so, it would be one hell of a chocolate box.
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
Chris Calohan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2082


Editing Allowed


« Reply #2 on: February 23, 2013, 08:32:54 AM »
ReplyReply

The water takes on the discovery of chaos in nature as described by Dave in his tree series. It is almost as if there are two images: one the egret, and the other, this serpentine water undulating across the frame. Nicely seen and shot.
Logged

What! Me Worry?

Life is about a little kid driving a Mini...
rogerxnz
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 297


« Reply #3 on: February 23, 2013, 11:45:16 AM »
ReplyReply

Now, someone might dismissively say its just another pretty picture for a chocolate box, but even so, it would be one hell of a chocolate box.

Would be great, Slobodan, if you would focus on giving your critique without putting down other possible critiques. What is wrong with saying it is pretty picture which would look great on a chocolate box? Why do you label such an opinion as dismissive?

You have said previously you see nothing wrong with pretty pictures and no one has denied that. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but it seems to me you are really using the possibility of someone else saying it is a pretty pictures to get across your own assessment of the image.

So, please do not put down other legitimate views, especially in advance, and, if you have a lesser opinion of an image, please just say so honestly and politely and without involving others.

You are entitled to your opinion—just stick to that.

I do not want to set myself up as the critique police but I do want to show the oblique ways some members are using to put down other reviews and reviewers.
Roger

 
Logged

Roger Hayman
Wellington, New Zealand
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 6181


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #4 on: February 23, 2013, 12:07:14 PM »
ReplyReply

... So, if all members would just politely move past critiques which do not suit their needs...

Obviosly, my critique does't suit your needs. Why not just "keep calm and carry on" instead of lecturing me (again)?

Oh, hypocrisy, thy name is...
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 6181


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #5 on: February 23, 2013, 12:09:36 PM »
ReplyReply

... What is wrong with saying it is pretty picture which would look great on a chocolate box? Why do you label such an opinion as dismissive?...

Oh, I do not know... maybe because you and your alter ego (or is it the other way around?) used it dismissively in previous critiques?
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
Chris Calohan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2082


Editing Allowed


« Reply #6 on: February 23, 2013, 12:09:58 PM »
ReplyReply

"You are entitled to your opinion—just stick to that."

Didn't he just do that?

I don't mind your self-serving role as Critique Policia. I actually find it quite amusing. What I mind however, is this constant jumping to conclusion as to someone's motives. This subject of pictures for calendars, etc has already been discussed and answered by at least one member - me. Thus, any referrals to this type of discussion are subject to being brought up again. Sometimes it just comes down to preventive medicine.
Logged

What! Me Worry?

Life is about a little kid driving a Mini...
Chris Calohan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2082


Editing Allowed


« Reply #7 on: February 23, 2013, 12:16:26 PM »
ReplyReply

Back to the photograph. I am curious as to why you felt you needed a shutter speed of 1/1000? I don't think in this instance the ISO bump hurt the image particularly, but if the bird is being static, I'd trade noise anythime I could get a cleaner image.

Of course, the buggers have a way of quickly darting for food, and it was late in the day so who's to say if your choice still wasn't the best.
Logged

What! Me Worry?

Life is about a little kid driving a Mini...
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 6181


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #8 on: February 23, 2013, 12:57:09 PM »
ReplyReply

... I do not want to set myself up as the critique police but I do want to show the oblique ways some members are using to put down other reviews and reviewers.
Roger

Or not so oblique... like this:

What's the nature or the meaning of the project?

Don't take the dismissal of RSL seriously. He thinks he is Henri Cartier-Bresson and likes to pretend a lot. There will follow a whole gang of others who then quote him like zombies and add a "+1" as their seal of obeisance. It's not a nice welcome, but it's the best they can do.

Say some more about the project and what you'd like to know about the photographs. We even have guys posting pictures of wet parking lots, so don't be worried that your photos aren't "good enough." They look interesting. I'm interested.

But than again, you wouldn't castigate your alter ego, would you? It would add split personality to delusion, I guess.
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
gerafotografija
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 224



WWW
« Reply #9 on: February 23, 2013, 01:15:55 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi, good point, but I didn't have a tripod with me, was using a 600mm equivalent lens, and the bird was wading past.

Early on I had a lot of blurred bird pictures when I started using this long lens even with stabilization – so now I tend not to go much less than 1/1000 and seem to lose fewer shots, but I do prefer base ISO when I can get it.

Just curious, what shutter speed would usually work with a relatively long focal length for these types of shots?

As a side note, ISO 800-1,600 is a tricky range for me with the OM-D. There was another thread on this a while back and I need review to see what the conclusions of MR, et al were. If I remember correctly, some thought 400 was the preferred upper limit for ETTR to improve noise levels, and others suggested 800 or even higher. It sometimes works for me and sometimes gets noisy even above 400. In this case, there was just barely noticable color noise in the most shadowed feathers, and seemed like only small spots were affected.
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 6181


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #10 on: February 23, 2013, 01:21:19 PM »
ReplyReply

I am with Arejukas, I would rather get a sharp image than a "perfect" ISO. Noise can be dealt with (if at all), motion blur hardly.
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
Chris Calohan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2082


Editing Allowed


« Reply #11 on: February 23, 2013, 01:29:30 PM »
ReplyReply

I agree with the noise issue. It was the time of day shot which threw me initially. I didn't catch that part, thus my query.
Logged

What! Me Worry?

Life is about a little kid driving a Mini...
gerafotografija
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 224



WWW
« Reply #12 on: February 23, 2013, 01:41:48 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for the comments guys, I appreciate it. Now I'm off to click the shutter some more.
Logged

dmerger
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 686


« Reply #13 on: February 23, 2013, 02:05:33 PM »
ReplyReply

Oh, hypocrisy, thy name is...

Slobodan?  Undecided
Logged

Dean Erger
walter.sk
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1332


« Reply #14 on: February 25, 2013, 09:49:56 AM »
ReplyReply

I find the shot very pleasing, especially the abstract quality of the water and light.  I wonder if a bit of judicious dodging, burning and an increase of clarity on the bill could bring the bill out of the background a little more?
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad