Critiques
This photo currently has 20 conforming critiques.
Since there are already at least three conforming critiques, if you write a conforming critique for this photo, then you will receive only the usual one critique point every time another user rates your critique helpful.
Write a critique
If you find one of these critiques especially helpful--or especially unhelpful--then please take a moment to register your opinion by clicking one of the buttons to the right of the critique.
|
|
from rbhelle/Roar (407) 
on June 18, 2006 1:56:31 PM CDT
(1)
Again, a perfect landscape photo in my eyes. The one thing that really strike me is the coors in this photo. They are just outstanding and what shaprness! It really is good for hearts and minds looking in your portfolio. How about hte technique? It looks like use of some filters and the pic is taken at dawn?
Reply
Show ratings
|
From timecatcher/Patrick (3,529)
on June 18, 2006 2:04:18 PM CDT
Well I strongly beleive in getting as close to the final result as I can on the field so I use ND, ND Grads and Polarizers to acheive this. Always wait for the right light light. This was taken early morning ion Costa Rica
Reply
|
|
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
from eagleeyes/Jeremy (657)
on March 20, 2006 11:13:46 PM CST
(3)
This one stood out to me. Most photos on this site are repetitive and boring, but this photo is not. I especially like the island sticking up with a tree growing on it. I see nothing wrong with this shot at all.
Eagle Eyes
Reply
Show ratings
|
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
from bartbies/Bartek (2,182)
on March 20, 2006 4:03:58 PM CST
(5)
beautiful composition as great as we can looking at your portfolio. Light abd colours are excellent, view point too
Reply
Show ratings
|
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
from smaceslin/Scott (2,814)
on March 20, 2006 2:05:40 PM CST
(7)
Patrick,
You have another winner here, as I am sure you are well aware. Often times the best pictures are a combination of talent (which you have), good equipment (which you also have) and being in the right place at the right time (luck?). Nice picture overall. It would be nice if your ratio of critiques/photos was higher, but ...
Thanks for sharing.
Regards,
Scott
Reply
Show ratings
|
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
from guygerstner/Guy (468)
on March 20, 2006 1:00:33 PM CST
(7)
fantastic photo . great coloring and technicallity all around, something almost perfect about the composition, very good execution , thanks for sharing. 3tu
Reply
Show ratings
|
|
|
| | |
|
|
from sar00nas/Sarunas (0)
on March 20, 2006 12:35:04 PM CST
Unique... amazing..
Reply
|
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
from linda77/Linda (683)
on March 20, 2006 5:43:57 AM CST
(9)
what can i say? perfect perspective and excellent leadlines! the color balance in faultless, also the position of the rock, and more the touch of warm sun light completes the masterpiece
Reply
Show ratings
|
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
from magpiemafia/Matthew (808)
on March 20, 2006 1:51:49 AM CST
(7)
Nice shot Patrick! I like the DOF and sharpness!! Maybe just could make it landscape shot next time! :P Keep Shooting - Regards Matt :D
Reply
Show ratings
|
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
from deleted199107/deleted (7,493) 
on March 20, 2006 1:49:48 AM CST
(8)
Very nice, looks like the weather was working on your side on this. Nice job of balaning the main subject with the reflection in the puddle. Sky looks great. Nice clean light, details, color, and moving composition. Nice work.
Reply
Show ratings
|
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
from alishokri/Ali (6,650)
on March 20, 2006 1:00:17 AM CST
(10)
bravo patrick , great photo captured of view beautiful scene . perspective is amazing . this colors are really . tones and composition is excellent . this reflex is very well . this cloud model is great . this photo is perfect thanks for share ................
Reply
Show ratings
|
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
from pfgaecke/Paul (2,166)
on March 20, 2006 12:08:11 AM CST
(9)
Wow! This is an interesting composition--something that you don't see very often. It draws the viewer right into the picture to "see what's going on". You exposure values are perfect and as I said, I love the composition.
Reply
Show ratings
|
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
from dorothy/Dorothy (1,093)
on March 19, 2006 9:49:12 PM CST
(11)
As usual Patrick, you don't dissapoint. You manage the most magnificent color and light in your work. It is always a joy to see your, Marc, Francis and the other photographers involved with timecatcher.
I love the diagonal lines in this. It draws you in, but also proides an almost dizzing sense of speed for me. Juat awesome.
Reply
Show ratings
|
|
From timecatcher/Patrick (3,529)
on March 19, 2006 10:50:00 PM CST
Thank you sooo much Dorothy.. I am happy to hear that you are enjoying the TimeCatcher team..I have put a lot of time and effort into creating this team and it really means a lot when people leave me comments like yours. Have a great day
Reply
|
|
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
from jthphotography/John (9,902)
on March 19, 2006 9:45:27 PM CST
(8)
I love the leading lines, textures, and color saturation. It is a very pleasing verticle landscape composition that seems to pull you into the frame. Your photography is excellent. I enjoy your images very much. Thanks for sharing.
Reply
Show ratings
|
|
From timecatcher/Patrick (3,529)
on March 19, 2006 10:48:49 PM CST
Thank you John for this awesome comment. Getting comments like this one keeps me going :)
Reply
|
|
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
from marshall/Marshall (11,997)
on March 19, 2006 9:10:45 PM CST
(10)
You have many excellent shots, and this one is among the more dramatic because of the strong diagonal leading lines the pull us so quickly into the shot and the great clouds around the rock formation which keep us in the frame. The polarization is a little uneven in the sky, but overall I think the saturation is excellent (so I must disagree with Wog on that score). The ND grad has done its job well here, and it seem that you have excellent detail to work with throughout the scene. Perhaps the darker areas of the foreground need to be brought down a touch to be more in line with the shadow areas on the upright rock formation to create a more unified whole, but overall this is really excellent work. [Maybe I'm being nit-picky to make it a 2 instead of 3 because of the foreground shadow values, but your work has such generally high quality I guess I sometimes am picky.]
Reply
Show ratings
|
|
From timecatcher/Patrick (3,529)
on March 19, 2006 9:21:47 PM CST
Thanks a lot Marshall for yet another great critic... Have a great day :)
Reply
|
|
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
from kanadan/Majo (4,470)
on March 19, 2006 8:40:05 PM CST
(8)
no qestion abaut compo I love it, I gues zoom in abaut 20-24mm? but light was too strong for my taste , maybe in BW,this shot shout have better contrasts...hard to say nice one anyway.... and I like your style also..
Reply
Show ratings
|
|
From timecatcher/Patrick (3,529)
on March 19, 2006 9:23:23 PM CST
Thank you Majo...actually it was 17mm but I cropped a bit off the sky .. I see what you mean about the brightness :)
Reply
|
|
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
from metalman/Dan (7,658)
on March 19, 2006 7:52:38 PM CST
(7)
Nothing much to change on this shot I like the colors and saturation , You made good use of the wide angle lens also.
Dan
Reply
Show ratings
|
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
from sheracer/T. S. (34,593)
on March 19, 2006 7:49:46 PM CST
(9)
This is one stupendous shot. I love all the elements in this brilliant and bold composition. I do, however, wish there was less foreground and more sky.
Reply
Show ratings
|
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
from tonyken/Tony (1,928)
on March 19, 2006 7:38:33 PM CST
(8)
wonderful atmospheric shot. My only nit pick is the land mass on the middle left. Gives the impression that there is more behind the 'destination'. perhaps cloning it out would give the impression of 'finality', with nothing left to go onto.
great shot
regards
tony
Reply
Show ratings
|
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
from deleted194386/deleted (53,403)
on March 19, 2006 7:31:19 PM CST
(9)
Very good foreground deplicition via light and detail. Pic looks overproduced and geared to eye pop rather than viewing enjoyment and fails to draw me in and envolve me in scene...or speak. Perhaps teckno perfect but feel no soul here. Too much contrast i think Pat. cheers, wog.
Reply
Show ratings
|
|
From timecatcher/Patrick (3,529)
on March 19, 2006 7:35:06 PM CST
Thank you Paul...not too sure why this looks over saturated on the upload...I will try to resubmit
Reply
|
|
|
From lightningstrike/William (10,312)
on March 20, 2006 12:10:04 AM CST
I as said before I dont think it is over saturated, sometimes diffrent monitors or monitors that need ajusting will make it look that way. The image is perfect Patrick...Thanks for sharing
Reply
|
|
|
From deleted194386/deleted (53,403)
on March 20, 2006 4:26:42 AM CST
Not the sat Pat but the contrast...no big issue just an adjust and sorry i forgot to click the thumb choice in all the excitement but set her straight....cheers.
Reply
|
|
|
From chipper/Stuart (2,399)
on March 20, 2006 8:51:31 AM CST
William...just wondering why you are answering on behalf of the photographer, both here, and in the 'comments' section below? Stu.
Reply
|
|
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
from senaatis/Sassan (16,999)
on March 19, 2006 7:29:31 PM CST
(9)
Very nice image. Wonderful wide angle, sky, exposure, DOF and colors. The only nit-pick is for that green area on the top right that I would like to see cloned, yet nothing to reduce a point. Thanks sharing, Sassan.
Reply
Show ratings
|
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
from miswach/Maitham (2,345)
on March 19, 2006 7:28:17 PM CST
(8)
This kind of Images ,when i first looking at it ,i say: WAW!
good job Patrick, the image is so brilliant ,quality,coloures,techniqes,place
welldone ,,Regards
Reply
Show ratings
|
|
|
Comments
Comments are different from critiques. Comments carry no rating, you may write more than one comment per photo, and you may comment on your own photos. If you want to rate this photo, then you should write a critique instead.
Add a comment
From sheenawilkie/Administrator (0) 
on March 19, 2006 11:41:31 PM CST
You take great photos I think it's such a shame you don't share your knowledge with our community. Your submissions feel more like advertising for your site than anything else.
Reply
|
|
From lightningstrike/William (10,312)
on March 20, 2006 12:17:22 AM CST
Oh I dont think it is advertising I am glad that people with such RAW talent put photos up like this. A least it make me want to try hard to produce images such as these....
Reply
|
|
|
From timecatcher/Patrick (3,529)
on March 20, 2006 1:19:32 AM CST
Hi Sheena...I Do photography because it is a passion, some often ask if I give workshops or courses but the thing is I don't even feel up to it..I feel like I still have a lot to learn before be able to teach others or criticizing people's work. I remember a few times giving my honest opinion on a few images on this site or another photo site and got the photographers replying to my suggestion with an angry comment. I have since then learned that if I comment only on the images that strikes me and that I like everyone is happy. I come here to share my images like everyone else and even pay for a premium membership for 2 years in a row to support this great community and website.
Reply
|
|
|
From baba/David (38,582)
on March 20, 2006 11:25:50 AM CST
Cheap advertising I would guess. My observations on this site show pretty consistently that people who get their lovely images to the main page, but don't critique much, have links to their photography sites either in their comments or their profile. If you read this Patrick, a little hint for you. You can save 25 dollars a year by letting your premium status lapse and then you will have one free upload every three days as the memberships currently stand.
Reply
|
|
|
From timecatcher/Patrick (3,529)
on March 20, 2006 7:00:14 PM CST
Sheena I am curious to know why did you pick me when there is hundreds just like me that dont post comments...do you spend time writing to each one of us? Just wanted to know if this is standard practice on your part.. this is no complaint just wondering how you manage the site.....also you are curious why I post on this site...well I still enjoy viewing nice images like everyone else so not because I dont comment on others work means that I dont enjoy viewing their images. At the same time I post my images and if some enjoy viewing them well perfect if not they dont have to... Also is it illegal to advertise our sites?? again this is not a complaint just wondering if it is ok with you or not to include a link to our sites. Sometime it can be hard to write a message when you dont actually hear the person talk. It might look like I am angry depending on which tone you give it when you read it but these are only questions I ask myself.
Reply
|
|
|
From timecatcher/Patrick (3,529)
on March 21, 2006 12:06:22 AM CST
yes I did ....well I still enjoy viewing nice images like everyone else so not because I dont comment on others work means that I dont enjoy viewing their images. At the same time I post my images and if some enjoy viewing them well perfect if not they dont have to...
Reply
|
|
|
From baba/David (38,582)
on March 20, 2006 10:44:18 AM CST
And I quote..... I feel like I still have a lot to learn before be able to teach others or criticizing people's work....... I have since then learned that if I comment only on the images that strikes me and that I like everyone is happy. If everyone on this site had your same rule when it comes to doing critiques, there wouldn't be many written and all those that were written would only be three thumbs up based on your current style of critiquing. There are probably few people on this site who don't have "a lot to learn", me included, and yet they go and give it their best shot and critique. Sorry but the BS meter went off the scale with that remark, Patrick.
Reply
|
|
|
From timecatcher/Patrick (3,529)
on March 20, 2006 5:08:38 PM CST
Funny how people get upset angry or annoyed over such little things in life. BTW I know that I can still submit without paying but I like to contribute money to the people who work hard on making these great site. I also know that I can download music for free but I prefer to buy my own CD's and let the artist have a share of what they are entitled to. David where does it say I have to critic images that I am not drawn to. If I want to only say Bravo to the ones I like what is wrong with that also. Can I feel the way I want or you will tell me how I should feel. I hate critizing people work what is wrong with that. I think YOUR BS meter is way off the scale...instead of getting frustrated for thing like that I would suggest you to go out in nature and enjoy life...try it, I am sure you will like it. Life is too short to be angry at the world for nothing :)
Reply
|
|
|
From baba/David (38,582)
on March 20, 2006 6:24:10 PM CST
There goes that meter again. Go to the Main Page and click on the "About" link. The first sentence is "photoSIG is a community of photographers and photography enthusiasts, ranging from amateurs to working professionals. photoSIG members may critique photos that have been submitted by other users and may also submit their own photos for review by the community. Seems to me that critiquing is the primary reason for this site. Good community members are active critics. I am not angry at the world. I do go out into nature to enjoy. I admit my job keeps me from taking full advantage of the wonderful area I live in, but I do the best I can. While at work inbetween times of work, I do enjoy this site as well. Believe me, I know the value of life. I try to save lives every day.
Reply
|
|
|
From deleted199107/deleted (7,493)
on March 20, 2006 7:40:09 PM CST
That's a shame, I think you have a lot of extensive knowledge you can share. I share a lot of my knowledge with people, sometimes it can be a little harsh but I am 99% of the time very well received by people. I think its best to give back more than you receive.
Reply
|
|
|
From lamarnix/Lamar (44,825)
on March 20, 2006 9:07:17 AM CST
It would be good to know how he gets his reflections to be brighter than the object which is reflected ; e.g. the rocky "thimble" here. Seems a contradiction in physics.
Reply
|
|
|
From deleted194386/deleted (53,403)
on March 20, 2006 9:38:18 AM CST
Selective brightning/levels of course Lamar but the end result is an unatural light balance. Natural contrasts take much longer for the depths to be felt but at the same time pull the viewer in to see more and more. To live with a version on the wall the answer is clear.
I dont find any difference between an ND filter and selective brightening and both defy the natural conditions of balance the eye sees on site. Looking at horizon and without shifting eyes the foreground is quite dark. Maybe the question is is a photograph a deplicition of what the eye actually sees or a best case senerio of the space involved within the framing....matrix metering.
Reply
|
|
|
From marshall/Marshall (11,997)
on March 20, 2006 9:52:59 AM CST
In many scenes, there is a massive difference between using an ND grad and selective brightening later. If the detail exceeds that which the film or sensor can capture, it's gone. There's no way to bring it up without inventing detail without either an ND filter or taking multiple exposures to combine later.
In this image, I do feel like the ND grad brought up the foreground shadow values too much (though only a little). But it provides great detail in the digital negative to work with in order to get to a great final print.
Reply
|
|
|
From lamarnix/Lamar (44,825)
on March 21, 2006 6:32:12 AM CST
Well, a graduated n.d. filter is designed to better convey what the eye sees, provided it is used correctly. Since Patrick did not list having used a filter or any sort here, and did not respond to my comment, I will go a little farther and say that judging by the depth of the shadows along the water and the dark rim around the perimeter of the thimble, this image to my eye is a composite of more than one exposure, though I could be wrong - Patrick , please correct me if I am.
Reply
|
|
|
From deleted194386/deleted (53,403)
on March 21, 2006 7:21:30 AM CST
I believe an nd is a given in these formula seascapes of this professional crowd and doubt a sandwich but whatever the end result is unatural and imbalanced and rather than CSI it will leave it at that....what i did mean above though Lamar was looking at this scene with the eye we see only a tiny space and as they move around they re-expose the new territory so looking at one gulp like this i wonder how that equates to human vision onscene ....ah nevermind its too confusing lol....cheers.
Reply
|
|
|
From timecatcher/Patrick (3,529)
on March 21, 2006 5:39:44 PM CST
This is only one exposure brought in adobe Raw converter and then into photoshop using adjustement curve layers to dodge and burn, contract, saturation and sharpness. Yes I did use ND Grad filter a 2 stop hard for the top and a 1 stop soft reversed for the bottom...also a 105mm polarizer was using for the reflection. All this was done using the Lee filters. All togethere I had 3 different filters mounted on my camera. This permitted me to get detail where I wanted for final processing.
Reply
|
|
|
From randomfellow/Sean (859)
on April 16, 2006 12:10:53 PM CDT
All this fighting, I think this is all Sheena really wanted from you. Is to share some of your steps for creating this photo. Now that wasn't so hard. Maybe next time you won't get harrased if you just put this info in your comments with the photo. Sean PS Very nice photo.
Reply
|
|
Return to photos
|
