Grand Canyon Sunrise
(16)
skotak/Radim (2,796)
|
|
|
from steveheap/Steven (173) 
on March 17, 2012 9:44:32 PM CDT
(4)
Great shot - lovely colors and detail and the red on the cliffs on the right is really intense but realistic. I sat and looked at it for some time wondering if there was anything that I could add. My only comment (for what it is worth) is whether the image would have been even stronger without the bright sun on the horizon. That really means moving to the right when you took the shot and still getting the great exposure on the rocks but not the bright spot in the top...
|
 |
|
|
Fly Me To The Moon...
(2)
lracheed/Rachid (470)
|
|
|
from steveheap/Steven (173)
on March 17, 2012 9:35:18 PM CDT
(1)
Great idea, but it doesn't completely work for me. In the image we can see here, the moon appears to be lacking focus (ie it isn't really sharp). The shutterspeed was high, but the aperture was pretty wide and I wonder if the lens isn't focusing completely correctly at infinity. Some cameras have an ability to fine tune the focusing on a lens by lens basis. I also think the large area of blank sky on the right is a mistake - crop that out to get a stronger composition with...
|
|
|
|
Orchid Festival. New York Botanical Garden
(9)
ssal/Alex (28,452)
|
|
|
from steveheap/Steven (173)
on March 17, 2012 9:28:16 PM CDT
(3)
I just commented on the other orchid shot, and this is much more satisfying. A similar composition, against black, but the buds on the left form a sort of conclusion to the image. Your eye can move back and forwards along the blossoms, but there is something different to latch onto. Steve
|
|
|
|
Eureka Tower reflecting
(4)
gaze/Gary (4,385)
|
|
|
from steveheap/Steven (173)
on March 17, 2012 9:26:22 PM CDT
(2)
Very pleasing capture with great lighting and the reflection of the tower and bird just coming in to land is great. Only thing stopped me from marking it higher - that flash of light from the tall building in the background. If that had been the subject, it would have been good, but as a supporting element, it takes the focus away from what I think you wanted us to look at. Steve
|
|
|
|
Orchid Festival. New York Botanical Garden.
(4)
ssal/Alex (28,452)
|
|
|
from steveheap/Steven (173)
on March 17, 2012 9:24:10 PM CDT
(3)
Very nicely taken and isolated (at time of capture or afterwards? Not sure but it is nicely done). Everything seems to be sharp, very pleasing curve into the picture. Colors are great. Now, why didn't I mark it higher? The curve of flowers doesn't lead to a conclusion. There is good repetition of the shapes, and the eye follows the line of flowers, but then it stops. I'm not sure what the answer is, but I felt that something needed to be different in one of the flowers to...
|
|
|
|
Evening
(16)
lurchi/Ulrich (61,695)
|
|
|
from steveheap/Steven (173)
on March 14, 2012 11:21:41 AM CDT
(7)
Wow - I like it. I've no idea what I am looking at - peeling paint perhaps? - but the texture and colors are very strong. It looks like a landscape a bit as well, almost like an autumn scene over a lake? The breaks in the texture look like branches of a tree. Great work. Steve
|
|
|
|
sunset
(3)
perry/Perry (1,235)
|
|
|
from steveheap/Steven (173)
on March 14, 2012 11:19:24 AM CDT
(0)
The sky is great and the silhouettes of the trees adds nicely to the image by contrasting with the sky. However, I find the building distracting with its just visible side and windows - the car in front of the building on the left is visible as well. I think I would crop it just around the top of the windows of the house on left, darken the lower area to make it black, and if possible, clone another part of a tree over that chimney on the right. That would make it a much...
|
|
|
|
Spring Moss
(1)
pixering/Owen (662)
|
|
|
from steveheap/Steven (173)
on March 14, 2012 11:15:28 AM CDT
(1)
I wondered how the sky had ended up like that - just read your comments. The idea was good - to focus on some rich green foreground objects and have the background fade away, but the background is much too strong - the trees are contrasty and grab the attention, but then they are strangely blurred (perhaps as you tried to blend in the sky?) I think it really needed a darker plainer background to really work. Steve
|
|
|
|
Orange Waves
(3)
poruchik/Andrew (11,980)
|
|
|
from steveheap/Steven (173)
on March 14, 2012 11:12:34 AM CDT
(1)
Funny - I was here just a few weeks back and have this same shot! It is a pity that the light is a bit dull - a cloudy day makes the very red soil look pretty flat unfortunately. I agree that the vegetation hurts the shot a bit, but the white area in the vegetation is a problem. I think this is the next waterfall, but it looks more like a piece of rubbish that is just caught there. I'm not sure you need as much of the foreground as you have - perhaps crop it along the edge...
|
|
|
|
Bodyboarder
(1)
selbnobrega/Sandro (86)
|
|
|
from steveheap/Steven (173)
on March 14, 2012 11:08:47 AM CDT
(2)
I think this could have been a lot more that it is - the positioning is good and the way the water splashes and is backlit is great. But, the subject is not sharp and crisp. This is not easy to achieve but for a successful shot, I think it needs either a faster shutter speed or some panning to keep focus on the board as it moves forward. There is also a dust spot on the sensor in front of the board and in the left center. Steve
|
|
|
|
Just Hangin'
(2)
wgff77/Brian (396)
|
|
|
from steveheap/Steven (173)
on March 14, 2012 11:05:14 AM CDT
(2)
I'm sure critiquing photos of babies is a way to lose friends quickly, but as I am new I may as well try! Overall the image worked - nice crop into a wider landscape format, nice framing with the swing strings and rattles. But - the focus is clearly on the strings and rattles, and not on the baby's eyes. It looks as though the focus point was slightly forward of the face, and particularly the eyes. Steve
|
|
|
|
TIMES SQUARE - HDR PANORAMA.
(21)
kmeta/Kostas (2,198)
|
|
|
from steveheap/Steven (173)
on March 14, 2012 10:30:11 AM CDT
(6)
Great shot. I know how hard it is to blend and create HDR shots when so many things are moving. It must have taken hours to get rid of the moving blurs with the people, flags and cars. Very well seen and executed. I can't think of anything that would have improved it.
|
|
|
|
Normandie Coast
(1)
vicec/Vicentiu (12)
|
|
|
from steveheap/Steven (173)
on March 14, 2012 9:59:51 AM CDT
(2)
It is a nice capture of an interesting location, but I think the framing and maybe exposure could be improved. Overall, it is a little dark and lacking color saturation - lightening the shadows would help. The framing is more difficult to handle - I think there is too much sky without much going on, and so a crop so that the horizon is about 2/3 of the way up the photo would help. The thing I struggle with is where my eye goes when I look at it - it starts bottom right and...
|
|
|
|
lonely cup
(2)
lracheed/Rachid (470)
|
|
|
from steveheap/Steven (173)
on March 14, 2012 9:55:23 AM CDT
(1)
I like the effect - very moody lighting on the mug, interesting pattern, good use of reflections, positioning in the right corner to suggest that something else could be going on that you don't see. Only improvements I would suggest is to darken that red spot on the top right corner as the eye goes there and out of the frame, and perhaps do the same to the one top center, although that is much more debatable.
Steve
|
|
|
|
Autumn
(-3)
raivo/Raivo (15)
|
|
|
from steveheap/Steven (173)
on March 14, 2012 9:52:40 AM CDT
(2)
The idea is good - trying to frame the bright red leaves with something in the foreground. However, the choice of the framing is too complex, especially with the white snow in the bottom. Bright areas draw the eye and the blob of out of focus snow is where the eye ends up before you start to think - maybe I should look at those red leaves. For a blurry frame to work, the actual subject needs to be really clear and obvious, I think.
|
