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
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Critique Corner 
Thread started 20 Feb 2009 (Friday) 20:59
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Female Wood Duck, sunrise

 
HappySnapper90
Cream of the Crop
5,145 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Feb 20, 2009 20:59 |  #1

Please let me know what you think (watermark aside), the more honest the better. No one improves by being told only "nice photo".




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
GregMik
Senior Member
880 posts
Likes: 13
Joined Aug 2008
Location: Mpls, MN
     
Feb 20, 2009 21:05 |  #2

HappySnapper90 wrote in post #7371211 (external link)
Please let me know what you think (watermark aside), the more honest the better. No one improves by being told only "nice photo".

Honesty?:lol: Is there such a thing anymore?

But this is a great shot. The only thing I see is the DOF was just a tad small. The wing patches are tack, but the crest is a little soft. I wish I could have gotten a shot as good as this!

Greg


Current equipment(Shared between Tasha and I)
1D Mark 2, 40D, 20D, 70-200L F2.8 Non-IS, 100-400L f4.5-5.6 IS, 1.4 extender and 18-55 EF-S Kit lens
www.freewebs.com/gregm​ikk (external link)
www.freewebs.com/gregm​ik (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jgrussell
Looking around nervously
Avatar
18,758 posts
Likes: 11
Joined May 2008
Location: NJ USA
     
Feb 20, 2009 23:27 |  #3

I know you said "watermark aside" but the watermark is really very intrusive and makes it hard to see some of the points that might make a comment helpful.


-- jgr
blog (external link) | gear | my birds (external link)http://photos.jgrussel​l.com/gallery/7381653_​pK9fK (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bill ­ Boehme
Enjoy being spanked
Avatar
7,359 posts
Gallery: 38 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 88
Joined Jan 2007
Location: DFW Metro-mess, Texas
     
Feb 20, 2009 23:40 as a reply to  @ jgrussell's post |  #4

The focus is rather soft and some of the light areas such as the belly area and around the eye lacks detail as though one or more channels may have been clipped. The reddish brown color of the duck does not seem to be quite right (based on many year of duck hunting experience that includes quite a few wood ducks). I do not care for the processing done to the water background, but that is just my personal bias.

The specs and also the reviews on the Sigma 50-500mm lens that you used indicate that it is a bit soft especially at 500 mm and the contrast is somewhat low, but on the other hand, it is quite versatile with its 10:1 zoom range and a good deal for the money. At maximum zoom of 500 mm, a tripod is a necessity (for any lens, not just this one) so if it was a hand held shot, that can have a small effect on image sharpness since the shutter speed was 1/250. The reviews that I read indicate that the image sharpness is best at about f/11 for that lens.


Atmospheric haze in images? Click for Tutorial to Reduce Atmospheric Haze with Photoshop.
Gear List .... Gallery: Woodturner Bill (external link)
Donate to Support POTN Operating Costs

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
HappySnapper90
THREAD ­ STARTER
Cream of the Crop
5,145 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Feb 21, 2009 10:24 |  #5

jgrussell wrote in post #7372039 (external link)
I know you said "watermark aside" but the watermark is really very intrusive and makes it hard to see some of the points that might make a comment helpful.

I'm sorry if you cannot see the big picture beyond the watermark, but I'm not going to put my better work online for anyone to re-use.

bill boehme wrote in post #7372083 (external link)
The focus is rather soft and some of the light areas such as the belly area and around the eye lacks detail as though one or more channels may have been clipped. The reddish brown color of the duck does not seem to be quite right (based on many year of duck hunting experience that includes quite a few wood ducks). I do not care for the processing done to the water background, but that is just my personal bias.

Yes it is a little front focused, but the DOF is more than acceptable. There are no clipped highlights unless it is a result of web browsers. And I did nothing to the water, I never do. I develop my photographs as traditionally as possible. All I did was WB tweak and curves in LR2. It is a bit of a crop from my 5D with Bigma that can make a good 8x10 print.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DAMphyne
"the more I post, the less accurate..."
Avatar
2,156 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 33
Joined Feb 2003
Location: Northern Indiana, USA
     
Feb 21, 2009 12:25 |  #6

The watermark masks a relatively ho-hum picture.
No one wants to "Be Honest" when the critique is dismissed.
Pic looks soft to me too, behind the watermark.
Don't worry too much about someone stealing this image.


David
Digital set me free
"Welcome Seeker! Now, don't feel alone here in the New Age, because there's a seeker born every minute.";)
www.damphyne.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
joedlh
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,313 posts
Gallery: 40 photos
Likes: 452
Joined Dec 2007
Location: Long Island, NY, N. America, Sol III, Orion Spur, Milky Way, Local Group, Virgo Cluster, Laniakea.
     
Feb 21, 2009 13:56 |  #7

DAMphyne wrote in post #7374545 (external link)
The watermark masks a relatively ho-hum picture....
Pic looks soft to me too, behind the watermark.
Don't worry too much about someone stealing this image.

I was thinking the same thing. The good point of the image is that the critter is doing something other than being a "bird on a stick". The poor element is the eye. With few exceptions, a good, in-focus shot of the eye is a cardinal rule. You got this lady when her eye was half open, which makes it look like she's on drugs or something. In addition, the head -- and eye -- are not in focus. I think there could be a little more contrast too.

The watermark borders on the offensive. If you post a low resolution image, nobody is going to steal it and offer it to the Louvre as their own.


Joe
Gear: Kodak Instamatic, Polaroid Swinger. Oh you meant gear now. :rolleyes:
http://photo.joedlh.ne​t (external link)
Editing ok

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
HappySnapper90
THREAD ­ STARTER
Cream of the Crop
5,145 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Feb 21, 2009 16:02 |  #8

joedlh wrote in post #7375029 (external link)
The watermark borders on the offensive. If you post a low resolution image, nobody is going to steal it and offer it to the Louvre as their own.

If the watermark caught your attention, it did its job. You need to think in broader terms as far as protecting your work with a watermark. The size I posted is more than large enough for someone to resize smaller and use on a web site for whatever purpose or reason. I've read many posts in online forums about someone's image being stolen and used for a website, be it personal or commercial, and it's always harder and more difficult to deal with the theft after the face. Just like how the greater majority of home alarm systems are installed after it has been broken into.

Thanks for the comments, all. We'll see how it sells at art shows this summer.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
curiousgeorge
Goldmember
Avatar
3,831 posts
Likes: 57
Joined Feb 2006
Location: London
     
Oct 28, 2009 16:58 |  #9

HappySnapper90 wrote in post #7375744 (external link)
Thanks for the comments, all. We'll see how it sells at art shows this summer.

So, how did it sell?


Photos from Iceland (external link) | London (external link)
Canon EOS 6D | Canon 24-70mm f/4L | Samyang 14mm f/2.8 | Canon 70-200mm f/4L | Speedlite 430EX II | Canon Powershot G9

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kj77263
Senior Member
285 posts
Joined Mar 2009
     
Oct 28, 2009 17:58 |  #10

Where is the shot?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Living ­ Daylight
Senior Member
387 posts
Joined Sep 2009
     
Oct 28, 2009 18:31 |  #11

This is the crankiest OP I have ever seen. Too bad I can't see the shot.


Canon XS; Tamron 17-50 IS; Sigma 55-200; Nifty Fifty; 430EX

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
StudioAbe
BAAAAAAN!!!
Avatar
1,920 posts
Gallery: 31 photos
Best ofs: 7
Likes: 997
Joined Jul 2009
Location: Westchester County, NY
     
Oct 28, 2009 19:53 |  #12

kj77263 wrote in post #8913646 (external link)
Where is the shot?

Living Daylight wrote in post #8913860 (external link)
This is the crankiest OP I have ever seen. Too bad I can't see the shot.

behind the watermark, from what I gather.

The fact 'Curious George' resurrecting the thread asking about the sale had me in stitches. Thanks for the laughs.



If it's in focus, it's pornography, if it's out of focus, it's art.
EOS R 5DSR X-H1 x2 | + gear | StudioAbe (external link) | Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
HappySnapper90
THREAD ­ STARTER
Cream of the Crop
5,145 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Oct 29, 2009 09:23 |  #13

curiousgeorge wrote in post #8913313 (external link)
So, how did it sell?

Twice in 11x14 which is pretty good for the economy here. I remove the image a while ago since I don't like to leave my photos on this site.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

3,137 views & 0 likes for this thread
Female Wood Duck, sunrise
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Critique Corner 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

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

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 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is xemlicham
1057 guests, 242 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, 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.