Great street scene! I like the way the foreground is a bit darker than the background. It forces my eye to stay on the main subject. How would it look with more "film" grain? -- -Mike It's much easier to criticize than to create

I'll give it a try...thanks -- Richard Soudershttp://www.flickr.com/photos/rsoud/

thanks, Claus. so i take the first [nt]

Zindanfelwrote:Strong composition, with the lines of cloth folds converging at your concealed face. The tonal range seems good, although I don't see any real black anywhere. A blacker eye, or eyebrow perhaps, might have helped heighten the drama.Overall, the frame seems slightly too tall. All the action is at the top, and there's a bit too much real estate south of there. You might consider a crop off the bottom to lose that small "bunchy" area in the lower left corner.This is a good picture idea, asking important questions, and challenging viewers.Thanks.I think cropping to a different aspect ratio is a good idea. Not sure about changing the contrast much: the idea is to invoke a sense of the ethereal to fit the concept of spirit. --Some people operate cameras. Others use them to create images. There is a difference.http://ikkens.zenfolio.com/http://sarob-w.deviantart.com/

"Dude" added grain A and B(A)(B) -- Richard Soudershttp://www.flickr.com/photos/rsoud/

Claus, the stuff I put up makes your brain quite busy, lately, I guessNice conversion btw. How many layers did you needed for your almost recovery effect?Taking some negative/IR and some maskings and blending options and washing out and some gradients effect, your almost there, etc. I think it's not possible for me to explain it exactly, of course I knew what I did but the story gets to long. Anyway you're quite near with your conversion, except for the colours and...I must say that the abstract frame you've used is very nice. Could or would be so nice to share that frame?An other note, my first version is outdated and after the suggestionfrom Zindanfel and Roel,I've made an other version with stronger colours on a grey basewho suites the desired effect more and an other format and that one will be my final version. See below... and tell what's your impression this time...and don't be negative (lol), just honest.The final version,-Claus Awrote:... after some tone curve mayhem:-)My brain scans it like this:Nice photo (too much cars on the right and a bit busy at the left, though).The number of cars can't be avoid in small town streets.Cheers,Claus.

I think the B version improves on an already fine street shot. Well done. -- -Mike It's much easier to criticize than to create

Mr.NoFlashIt's good to see that you bring the issue back on track, my thoughts:I think you first have to straighten the quay horizontally before you take out a part of the water. Second take out the shortest beatings of the waves to create a peacefull transition from the long waves to the shadow parts and you got yourself a quiet overview in the image. I've seen you got more ideas so try them all.But if you interested I've made and can show you a quick example of nr.2 idea with the content aware option.Problem of nr.2, you create some pano after cutting out a part of the water that means that you probably have to resize the image too.Lou-B: A cut line and cutting out a strip. I will improve the blackness of the line if this picture would be selected: click 2 times to enlage to max.thanks Mr.NoFlash

Not everybody sees this kind of thing.And of those who see it, only the ones with skill manage to bring enough definition in the dark silhouette to make us see the poles.Quite a title too: it makes one expect the sinister, to be surprised by the mundane. -- Roel Hendrickxlots ofimages:http://www.roelh.zenfolio.commy E-3 user fieldreportfrom Tunisian Sahara:http://www.biofos.com/ukpsg/roel.html

and I am glad I did, because this self portrait is quite spectacular. Photographers tend to be, for some reason, often camera-shy. So they devise ways to make themselves obscured in self-portraits. The camera before the eye is the obvious approach. But it is the eye that defines the photographer, so that trick is ineffective.Better to hide everything but the eye, and you have done this here in the most elegant way. The folding of the sheet looks ... well... sexy. It is filled to the brim with possibilities for interpretation. "Terrorist", is only the surface. Scratching deeper, there is religion, and ritual, and maybe even deeper there is small child playing ghost.What I also love, is the simplicity of the fold, where we can recognize hands keeping everything together.And then the icing on the cake: the shape of the hole through which the eye looks, is almost perfectly triangular, like the opposite of classic Rembrandt lighting.One of your best ever, Charles. -- Roel Hendrickxlots ofimages:http://www.roelh.zenfolio.commy E-3 user fieldreportfrom Tunisian Sahara:http://www.biofos.com/ukpsg/roel.html

Your exchange is a nice example of the best that this thread has to offer.The image has been improved vastly, but with respect for the photographer's original idea (and original it surely was).Zindanfelwrote:The strong color treatment is emphatic, and makes your first version seem undecided. This is much more confident. Diagonal sweep of color in the woman's coat draws the eye right to the heart of the picture. I think this version is more interesting and eye-friendly.Make sure you give the B&W a decent burial. -- Zin

Some replies to ideas pitched :1. Seen as an individual picture, the 3:2 crop suggestion definitely makes sense. A 3:2 crop would probably enhance the idea of horizontal layers. But this is part of a series and it would break uniformity of presentation.2. I am not partial to changing the colours or brightness much, because the day was cloudy (on the verge of rain), and I wanted to show that. The figures being hooded fit better with a darker tone.3. Zin's observations on the body language of the three figures is very interesting. Quite frankly: I had not yet looked at them in such detail. The left and middle one are indeed more of a unity, while the third one is different.When I shot this image, I liked the idea of the three figures standing there, and I probably made a bit of a subconscious composition decision involving the Rule of Thirds (or Rule of Three) as per horizontal layering in placement of the Three at roughly one Third of the frame.Cropping off the right most person is not an option IMHO: it would throw the remaining too right against the right-side picture frame.

Antoon Corbijn's movie? This could have been a still from it.Slightly down-oriented view, narrow streets, WB suggesting street lighting, the peeling sign, the lone lantern : it all fits.

Trying out a new camera is always reason for happiness, so the happy puppy must be you (not that the actual dog does not look happy).For the rest, I have to agree with Claus : it's a good test image showing detail, but for a good portrait, you will do your dog more justice with another try, getting on eye level, getting him completely in the frame, and getting rid of distracting stuff like that blue candy wrap.Claus Awrote:Hi,oh, you edited your post (it read 'my first test shot' before...:-))Well, here's my critique:Nice: exposure, detail, focus. Good colors (grass, dog). Nice fur texture. And the pup, of course.Not so nice: the composition (you cut his rear part and one front leg) and the vantage point (shot from above).For a better dog photo you should either have the complete dog in the frame or go for a 'portrait style' head shot. I'd also go lower with the camera for a more natural view. Check the background: the walk on the left is a bit distracting.Good one for a first test shot!Cheers,Claus.

Despite vastly improved zoo management and practice over recent decades, for many people zoos still are unsettling. An issue is imprisonment of innocent beings -- and for life -- which raises serious and troubling questions.So, this photograph was a low-key shot at nosing into that territory. The sign-board (painted as an otter, I think) is a "fake" animal, and I wanted to emphasize its fake-ness by revealing its backside, with post supports.I had hoped the photo could suggest a parallel -- that live zoo animals also are fakes. Many are not at all as they would be in their habitats; they could be likened to the plywood otter -- merely representational.The black backside of the otter cut-out was a bonus to help suggest the "dark side" of zoo confinements.Probably the photograph is too subtle to work as I would like, but of course with a camera we must work with what is in front of the lens.Thank you all for considering and commenting.

Golly, I love those bug images where the eyes pop out at you like some ertra terrestial creature. I can never capture one like that. There seems to be a bit more resolution in the black and white image. They are both good though. -- http://www.pbase.com/waynes6

Zindanfelwrote:Despite vastly improved zoo management and practice over recent decades, for many people zoos still are unsettling. An issue is imprisonment of innocent beings -- and for life -- which raises serious and troubling questions.So, this photograph was a low-key shot at nosing into that territory. The sign-board (painted as an otter, I think) is a "fake" animal, and I wanted to emphasize its fake-ness by revealing its backside, with post supports.I had hoped the photo could suggest a parallel -- that live zoo animals also are fakes. Many are not at all as they would be in their habitats; they could be likened to the plywood otter -- merely representational.The black backside of the otter cut-out was a bonus to help suggest the "dark side" of zoo confinements.Probably the photograph is too subtle to work as I would like, but of course with a camera we must work with what is in front of the lens.Zin,"Too subtle" is not an embarrasment. Better too subtle than too in-your-face. Your title certainly hints at the deeper meaning you wanted us to see.That is why I talked about "sinister", and I liked it how you portrayed it in something mundane.On the subject of zoos, but also double entendres and how images can manage to project emotions that are manipulated by the photograph, may I suggest that you take a look at a very old entry of mine in the Wed. C&C. Look at the photograph, then read the comments, and finally my group reply.Here: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=33589932The embedding of the image is broken, because I probably moved it on Zenfolio. But it is this image :I was able to retrieve that link through here: http://roelh.zenfolio.com/p775804748I remember that Mathias (Mithandir) also at one time showed an infinitely sad zoo picture that played tricks with the mind of the viewer, but I cannot find that anymore.Thank you all for considering and commenting.Always my pleasure.

All was done fine. These kind of perspectives look too "unnatural" though so at least to me they bring a little bit of discomfort.

Thanks all. For Jon: I don't see the softness. Zin: Can't please everyone and thanks for being candid.