Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Guest
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Discussion Critique Corner 
Thread started 21 Apr 2012 (Saturday) 17:41
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

Have I gone too far?

 
StaticMedia
Senior Member
875 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Dec 2011
     
Apr 26, 2012 11:31 as a reply to  @ post 14332479 |  #16

I like them both, but I think #2 is my favorite. #1 the (rainbow) edit replicates the color/texture of oil slick on water which creates some interesting values. I like #2 (the original) because you did a good job exposing the rusty steel vs. water. I like the texture-gradient from those two aspects in the raw form. As the water goes from shallow to deep it creates an interesting parallel. I guess in the rainbow c.c. one you dont see the contrast of the water as it goes from shallow to deep as much as in the original. cool shot, I love old rusty junk


P.s. the Op's posts are now : 666:shock:




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
WayneCornish
Member
127 posts
Likes: 1
Joined May 2011
Location: UK
     
Apr 27, 2012 03:11 |  #17

StaticMedia wrote in post #14332826 (external link)
P.s. the Op's posts are now : 666:shock:

666 is just a number the same as 665 and 667, if you are refering to the number of the beast from Revelations 13 in the bible, it is actually 616 but was mis-translated/interpreted probably as 616 didn't sound as good as 666.

Depsite there already being evidence that the number of the beast should be 616 it was thought to be 666 by the majority of theologians, but in 2005 the oldest ever manuscript of Revelation 13 was found and it states the number of the beast to be 616.

Makes me laugh whenever I see someone with 666 tattooed on thier body. I suppose they could add a 1 after and make it 6661, at least that's a prime number.


Currently Using - Fujifilm X-E1 | XF 18-55 f/2.8-4 R OIS || Bodies Owned - Canon 1DS II | 5D MKII | 7D | 50D's | 40D's | 450D | 350D | Lenses Owned - Canon 17-40 f/4L | 24-70 f/2.8L | 24-105 f/4L IS | 70-200 f/2.8L IS MKII | 70-200 f/4L IS | Sigma 85 f/1.4 | Many other lenses and film bodies/lenses.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mattmorgan44
Senior Member
644 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Feb 2012
Location: Gold Coast, Australia
     
Apr 27, 2012 03:26 |  #18

WayneCornish wrote in post #14336987 (external link)
666 is just a number the same as 665 and 667, if you are refering to the number of the beast from Revelations 13 in the bible, it is actually 616 but was mis-translated/interpreted probably as 616 didn't sound as good as 666.

Depsite there already being evidence that the number of the beast should be 616 it was thought to be 666 by the majority of theologians, but in 2005 the oldest ever manuscript of Revelation 13 was found and it states the number of the beast to be 616.

Makes me laugh whenever I see someone with 666 tattooed on thier body. I suppose they could add a 1 after and make it 6661, at least that's a prime number.

Interesting


5D Mark II | 7D
24L II | 50L | 100L Macro
Some other stuff
Can't find a Lee filter holder? - Cokin Modification for wide angle lenses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
crbnfibr
Member
Avatar
89 posts
Joined Apr 2012
Location: albany ny
     
Apr 27, 2012 03:37 |  #19

Cheiri wrote in post #14329472 (external link)
A little of both! Hah, just kidding - there'd be a problem if I urinated rainbows.

Post Processing :)

can you please make another post, 666 makes me nervous


k1000 se, xti, 20d, 7d, 28-200, 75-300 :( , 24-105L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
StaticMedia
Senior Member
875 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Dec 2011
     
Apr 27, 2012 10:20 |  #20

WayneCornish wrote in post #14336987 (external link)
666 is just a number the same as 665 and 667, if you are refering to the number of the beast from Revelations 13 in the bible, it is actually 616 but was mis-translated/interpreted probably as 616 didn't sound as good as 666.

Depsite there already being evidence that the number of the beast should be 616 it was thought to be 666 by the majority of theologians, but in 2005 the oldest ever manuscript of Revelation 13 was found and it states the number of the beast to be 616.

Makes me laugh whenever I see someone with 666 tattooed on thier body. I suppose they could add a 1 after and make it 6661, at least that's a prime number.

Lol interesting, I concur, people who would tatoo 666 are not so bright to research it to begin with. After all, most of what we know was written and re-written by the human hand which is flawed by nature to begin with... so all that we know... is a guesstimate of what we observe and have observed from our birth. All language, taxonomy and the numeric system was created on meaning starting with grunts and motions. So is a number really a number? or just a shape that represents a measure of change that exists in the natural world. Crazy universe!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

3,377 views & 0 likes for this thread, 12 members have posted to it.
Have I gone too far?
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Discussion Critique Corner 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Forums   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset   •  Home

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.58forum software
version 2.58 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is slipper1963
1509 guests, 169 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.