Great Photos Thread
- Thread starter hobie1dog
- Start date
SmokingPipes.com Updates
Watch for Updates Twice a Week
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
Site Sponsors
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
- Status
Good shot! But, there's a great shot in there, to my eye. If you've got the app, experiment with the "crop tool." But, that's simply my preference.
Grenada Lake, Grenada MS. Never noticed the power boat and skier at the bottom of the photo until I developed it. I was concentrating on the composition of the tree. 
I had to crop a little off the bottom already to get rid of my running distance since I didn’t want that in there and I think the bottom park of that still river actually made it look better. But I could see taking a little of the sides to narrow it in.
I like the visual conflict of the boat heading into the tree.
Were you I, and certainly you are not, I'd crop from the bottom so as to move the shoreline so it doesn't cut the shot in half. Maybe just to the reflection of the tree tops. But, that's just my eye. It's well exposed and the juxtaposition of modern technology, the windmills, versus the stark country, grows on me.
This is from a nature park that was logged years ago. You can still see the notch cut into the stump where they put the springboard to stand on when cutting it down.
Both of those shots were with a Nikon D300. The hummingbird was with a 500mm Nikkor f4.
Only contrast and saturation adjustments.
Thought so. You might have adjusted a bit too much to my eye. It happens to me now and then so I regularly have a third party look shots over now and then. It's a tricky, incremental thing. It a bit of saturation is needed, great. Then you add on step too many. I'd dial the saturation back a few steps and then look at again tomorrow. That's the plus and minus of post-shooting manipulation, it can easily be overdone. All that said, in the final analyses your eye and what you are going for is all that matters. Remember I'm seeing it ona monitor. It might look great on matte paper.
That 500 is a wonderful piece of glass. Own one myself.
That 500 is a wonderful piece of glass. Own one myself.
Last edited:
Sort of an aside: How you, and we, have our monitors set also makes a difference. How bright the room at the time, and on and on. On my monitor it's a tetch salturated.
Was the photo shot in the Tetons? And the other two recent ones in the same place?
All of those are right on! Thank you.
Was the photo shot in the Tetons? And the other two recent ones in the same place?
All of those are right on! Thank you.
The mountain pictures were shot in Alberta. One is Mt. Rundle and the other is Wenkchemna (sp?).
Today's post was White Horse Mountain in Washington state.
I confess I like my pictures a trifle saturated, though that seems to help when printing. I guess it reflects my enthusiasm for the scenic beauty I'm experiencing.
This one will be less saturated.
Today's post was White Horse Mountain in Washington state.
I confess I like my pictures a trifle saturated, though that seems to help when printing. I guess it reflects my enthusiasm for the scenic beauty I'm experiencing.
This one will be less saturated.
Catching that bird
with a manual focus 500 was a bit of a challenge!
Wing movements add a bit of dynamic to the shot. You do your best with the equipment at hand, all one can do. I might not print it but, the file would be kept for sure. Frozen wings on a bird, especially a hummingbird just looks wrong unless you are simply shooting what I call an ID photo.
Last edited:
It almost looks like I planned the shot that way doesn't it. I think I'll stick to that story from now on.
I want to iterate, my only purpose in critiquing photos is to assist those wishing to improve their photography. I'll refrain if any of you request. And, again, I'm primarily a wildlife shooter with years of experience. But, I'm only posting my opinions. There are "rules" as to what one should do with horizons, depth of field and so forth. I readily admit these "rules" are made to be broken if such enhances the photo you are trying to create.
One rule I do not, ever, break is to try and capture the image I want when I shoot it. Yes, I do post-shooting manipulation when required. I'd rather be out shooting than sitting in front of a computer though.
Heart disease and other ailments severely limit my forays these days. Two prescriptions reduce my stamina and strength. So, lots of time to critique other shooters as gently and objectively as possible.
One rule I do not, ever, break is to try and capture the image I want when I shoot it. Yes, I do post-shooting manipulation when required. I'd rather be out shooting than sitting in front of a computer though.
Heart disease and other ailments severely limit my forays these days. Two prescriptions reduce my stamina and strength. So, lots of time to critique other shooters as gently and objectively as possible.
My apologies to any and all I've offended or simply irritated. I got out of bed to write this as I thought it important.
Somewhere along the line I find I have appointed myself as the arbiter of what is or isn't a "great photo". Not something I intended to do. I'm generally not that pompous of an ass. But, rereading some of my posts I see I've overstepped. I've morphed into a critic.
If a member shares a photo they the like, more power to them. So, I'm going to refrain from unsolicited criticisms/suggestions in the future. I was thinking entirely from a commercial photographer's standpoint in critiquing of another persons work. All "working" photographers do this and it is best done silently, to one's self. If I "like" or "love" a shot and you want to know why, ask and I will respond.
Again, my apologies. And now, back to a more restful sleep with that off my chest.
Somewhere along the line I find I have appointed myself as the arbiter of what is or isn't a "great photo". Not something I intended to do. I'm generally not that pompous of an ass. But, rereading some of my posts I see I've overstepped. I've morphed into a critic.
If a member shares a photo they the like, more power to them. So, I'm going to refrain from unsolicited criticisms/suggestions in the future. I was thinking entirely from a commercial photographer's standpoint in critiquing of another persons work. All "working" photographers do this and it is best done silently, to one's self. If I "like" or "love" a shot and you want to know why, ask and I will respond.
Again, my apologies. And now, back to a more restful sleep with that off my chest.
After a beautiful day at Panama City Beach, this storm rolled up.
- Status