Glow 51inch deep umbrella with an xplor 600
THIS IS A LOW QUALITY PREVIEW. Please log in to see the good quality stuff.
THIS IS A LOW QUALITY PREVIEW. Please log in to see the good quality stuff.
Feb 11, 2018 22:20 | #11041 Glow 51inch deep umbrella with an xplor 600 Image hosted by forum (899601) © Osa713 [SHARE LINK] THIS IS A LOW QUALITY PREVIEW. Please log in to see the good quality stuff. Image hosted by forum (899602) © Osa713 [SHARE LINK] THIS IS A LOW QUALITY PREVIEW. Please log in to see the good quality stuff. LIGHT>LENS>BODY
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Feb 12, 2018 09:44 | #11042 Nice, but I would raise the light about a foot. Ray
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Feb 12, 2018 22:36 | #11043 Ray Marrero wrote in post #18562021 Nice, but I would raise the light about a foot. Thanks, I wanted a little moody lighting on her face hence the positioning... LIGHT>LENS>BODY
LOG IN TO REPLY |
vk2gwk Cream of the Crop 13,359 posts Gallery: 332 photos Likes: 1836 Joined Jun 2009 Location: One Mile Beach, NSW 2316, Australia More info | Feb 13, 2018 02:18 | #11044 Osa713 wrote in post #18562498 Thanks, I wanted a little moody lighting on her face hence the positioning... Understand where you are coming from, but now it is too bright on the central part of the body. My name is Henk. and I believe "It is all in the eye of the beholder....."
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Feb 13, 2018 05:45 | #11045 vk2gwk wrote in post #18562571 Understand where you are coming from, but now it is too bright on the central part of the body. Thanks but I didn’t post the setup for feedback/critique, it looks good to me and I achieved my goal. LIGHT>LENS>BODY
LOG IN TO REPLY |
agedbriar Goldmember 2,657 posts Likes: 398 Joined Jan 2007 Location: Slovenia More info | Feb 13, 2018 07:20 | #11046 So, is it all in the eye of the beholder, or not?
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Osa713 Goldmember More info Post edited over 5 years ago by Osa713. | Feb 13, 2018 09:18 | #11047 Lol. I don’t mean to come off rude and everyone is entitled to their own opinion so it’s all good. LIGHT>LENS>BODY
LOG IN TO REPLY |
ImageMaker... looks like I picked a bad week to give up halucinagens More info | Feb 13, 2018 13:44 | #11049 idsurfer wrote in post #18562932 I tend to agree that if a person is not asking for feedback than it's best to say nothing. Most threads are just for sharing. Was wondering why folks here are so nice... Nikons, Rolleiflexes, Elinchroms, Broncolor Paras, Billinghams
LOG IN TO REPLY |
DaviSto ... sorry. I got carried away! More info Post edited over 5 years ago by DaviSto. | Feb 13, 2018 14:01 | #11050 idsurfer wrote in post #18562932 I tend to agree that if a person is not asking for feedback than it's best to say nothing. Most threads are just for sharing. That's true ... but a thread set up on the basic premise that you show both the shot and how it was set up absolutely cries out for comment and discussion. Otherwise ... what's the point of it? David.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
PhotosGuy Cream of the Crop, R.I.P. More info | Feb 13, 2018 14:08 | #11051 DaviSto wrote in post #18562939 If a posting is in "JUST KIDS 20##... Let's see them grow and learn", it's a different matter. Unless you have something nice to say about an image of someone's son or granddaughter, perhaps just keep it to yourself! OTOH, if you're willing to accept a "Great shot!" comment, you should also be willing to accept a, "You cut her ear in half!" comment, no? FrankC - 20D, RAW, Manual everything...
LOG IN TO REPLY |
DaviSto ... sorry. I got carried away! More info Post edited over 5 years ago by DaviSto. (2 edits in all) | Feb 13, 2018 14:13 | #11052 PhotosGuy wrote in post #18562947 OTOH, if you're willing to accept a "Great shot!" comment, you should also be willing to accept a, "You cut her ear in half!" comment, no? Personally, I have absolutely no problem with that. In fact, I don't have a problem with well-delivered critique anywhere on POTN. I just think discretion is the better part of valour when it come to people's children. It's just too easy to stray into territory where people feel you're remarking on their 'fat ugly baby' ... even if all you are saying is that they might have considered a less wide-angled lens and not shot quite so close. David.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
ImageMaker... looks like I picked a bad week to give up halucinagens More info | Feb 13, 2018 14:30 | #11053 DaviSto wrote in post #18562953 Personally, I have absolutely no problem with that. In fact, I don't have a problem with well-delivered critique anywhere on POTN. I just think discretion is the better part of valour when it come to people's children. It's just too easy to stray into territory where people feel you're remarking on their 'fat ugly baby' ... even if all you are saying is that they might have considered a less wide-angled lens and not shot quite so close. It’s all perspective... Nikons, Rolleiflexes, Elinchroms, Broncolor Paras, Billinghams
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Feb 13, 2018 14:37 | #11054 I did not intend to start a debate but from my stand point the user posting the image is the artist. I see a lot of people throwing in comments throughout this thread masked as CC when in the end it doesn’t benefit anyone. No one learns or improves their photos from some of the unwarranted comments. LIGHT>LENS>BODY
LOG IN TO REPLY |
agedbriar Goldmember 2,657 posts Likes: 398 Joined Jan 2007 Location: Slovenia More info | Feb 13, 2018 14:41 | #11055 I posted that because it's the critics belief, as stated in their signature.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
![]() | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in 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!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member is Niagara Wedding Photographer 1299 guests, 116 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||