Critiques
This photo currently has 6 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 wolli/Ian (56,879)  
on November 20, 2009 3:16:55 AM CST
(1)
I like the tones & the effect on the sky Sheila but I didn't pick this as an IR shot.
The effect of the strong horizontal & vertical lines is dissipated by the scruffy, irregular grape vine(?) branches.
Regards, Ian.
Reply
Show ratings
|
 |
|
| | |
|
|
from baba/David (38,576)
on April 22, 2009 8:24:46 AM CDT
(6)
I am quite torn on this photo, but decided to bite the bullet with the rating. As an infrared photo, you didn't really take advantage of what makes an infrared photo interesting or unique. The are no green leaves that would turn white in infrared. The sky is totally overcast and you don't get the influence of infrared with dark blue skies and white clouds. While the geometry of the lattice work is the strongest aspect of the photo, I find the lilacs not really adding to what could have been a better repeating pattern of the lattice, if it was the lattice alone. Maybe a different time of year with more leaves or a better sky would possibly improve the photo for me. The subject matter definitely has potential.
Reply
Show ratings
|
|
From tvernuccio/Sheila (37,104)
on April 22, 2009 10:26:45 AM CDT
good morning, David, and thanks so much for the feedback. :) You're absolutely right that in not shooting green leaves and shooting with little sunshine that I didn't take advantage of what makes an infrared unique. I knew that prior to shooting, but I couldn't resist trying...even under these conditions. :) I will probably go back later this afternoon or tomorrow before work and see how the blooms look with the sun hitting them. :) Thanks again! Cheers! sheila
Reply
|
|
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
from arturdy/Artur (40,359)
on April 22, 2009 3:12:34 AM CDT
(5)
First I saw on Your photo, Sheila - and I'd ask You if the fog blot out of the leaves:!) Then I red Your comment and... all is clear:)! I saw many photos done with IR technique, but Your is just perfect! Why? Because uncoloured elements take small part of the photo increasing its naturality. 3TUs for unorthodox using of the technique mainly, but artistical side of Your photo is fantastic, too! Rgds, Artur
Reply
Show ratings
|
|
From tvernuccio/Sheila (37,104)
on April 22, 2009 10:18:35 AM CDT
thanks so much, Artur. I really appreciate in your input. :) Cheers! sheila
Reply
|
|
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
from yellowgrey/Barbro (15,839)
on April 22, 2009 3:06:26 AM CDT
(6)
hi Sheila. Reminds me of steel/metalconstruction of 2 unfinished towers turning up in the forest and workers just stop building of some reason we dont know. The colourtones suit very well of this forgotten steelmonument. The clouds adds that emotion too. /barbro
i dont know much of infrared, so i wrote on feeling. :)
Reply
Show ratings
|
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
from quisqualis/JULIE (3,600)
on April 21, 2009 10:27:21 PM CDT
(5)
Nice geometry and contrast. A good monochrome conversion. I like the darkening sky in the lower portion of your photo. I want to crop off a bit from the top! PS: I did not read your note. Lucky you with a converted camera. I loooove IR!
Reply
Show ratings
|
|
From tvernuccio/Sheila (37,104)
on April 21, 2009 10:38:16 PM CDT
Thanks, Julie. :) I like the dark clouds in the lower part of the image too; in fact, that's my favorite part. :) Thanks also for the crop suggestion. I did try that and didn't care for it, but maybe I'll try it again in a few days and see if it doesn't grow on me.
I love infrared too, and my husband gave me the perfect gift by converting that camera! I'm just not getting enough light because it seems like every day we have off to go out shooting it's overcast and rainy. Hopefully soon we'll get some more sunshine on our days off! :)
Reply
|
|
|
From quisqualis/JULIE (3,600)
on April 22, 2009 12:07:50 AM CDT
Sheila, I'm curious. With a converted camera, do you need a tripod to shoot in overcast weather? What sort of exposure times are you using? I have a 707 that may need surgery soon!
Reply
|
|
|
From tvernuccio/Sheila (37,104)
on April 22, 2009 10:15:30 AM CDT
hi Julie, Sometimes I use a tripod and sometimes I don't. For this photo, which I took at 1/80 second, I did not. Exposure times will vary based on the subject, whether or not it's moving, whether or not you want motion blur, and based on the light.
The most challenging aspect for me is using the infrared filter. When I use that, in combination with the infrared-converted camera, I'm capturing the full spectrum of infrared light; however, the filter makes it difficult for me to see what's in my frame because it's so dark.
If you do end up converting your camera, you will have so fun seeing how the world looks in infrared. :)
Reply
|
|
|
From quisqualis/JULIE (3,600)
on April 22, 2009 2:11:25 PM CDT
Even without a conversion, some of those liitle older cams do IR pretty well. I can hand hold the Panasonic LC40 with an R72 filter in sunny conditions, but the c2000z with a darker filter needs the tripod in the same conditions. Conversion represents my dream of hand-held IR on a cloudy day.
Reply
|
|
|
From tvernuccio/Sheila (37,104)
on April 23, 2009 12:09:55 AM CDT
hi Julie, The problem with our 717 (and most others cameras) is that unless they're converted, most of the infrared spectrum is blocked with hot mirror. It seems like with the better-quality cameras, the hot mirrors are better quality and more efficient.
What happens is that when you put an infrared filter on an unconverted camera, the filter itself blocks visible light, but at the same time, the hot mirror is blocking part of the infrared spectrum so what you have left is a very narrow part of it which is equal to very low light conditions...in which case there's a lot of noise in image (exposure times have to be much longer than normal).
By removing the hot mirror and replacing it with a piece of glass cut to fit, you can get much broader part of infrared spectrum and therefore eliminate the use of a tripod because you're getting more light. You are also going to have more accurate infrared images.
Reply
|
|
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
from joeyfishes/Joe (1,510)
on April 21, 2009 10:06:59 PM CDT
(6)
Terrific composition and shapes in this image. I also like the color. Very interesting and creative shot
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
There are no comments on this photo.
Return to photos
|
