A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Photo Equipment » 35mm Photo Equipment
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

[SI] Looking Up/Looking Down is UP!



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old March 19th 13, 12:20 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm,rec.photo.digital
Bowser
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 265
Default [SI] Looking Up/Looking Down is UP!

Some nice shots this month, so please take a look:

http://www.pbase.com/shootin/looking_up_down

More mandates will be posted this week. I've received some good
suggestions which will, hopefully, be a little more inclusive. So far,
over the last two months I've asked for shots of steeples from people
who have none even close, and shots from on high from people living in
the flatlands, and other places with no tall structures. So I need to
break this rut and select mandates with more broad appeal.

Help me out!
  #2  
Old March 19th 13, 01:10 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm,rec.photo.digital
otter
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 114
Default Looking Up/Looking Down is UP!

On Mar 18, 6:20*pm, Bowser wrote:
Some nice shots this month, so please take a look:

http://www.pbase.com/shootin/looking_up_down

More mandates will be posted this week. I've received some good
suggestions which will, hopefully, be a little more inclusive. So far,
over the last two months I've asked for shots of steeples from people
who have none even close, and shots from on high from people living in
the flatlands, and other places with no tall structures. So I need to
break this rut and select mandates with more broad appeal.

Help me out!


No time to work on SI. Here is a picture which doesn't fit the
mandate, but I was reminded of it:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/billkes...ream/lightbox/
  #3  
Old March 19th 13, 01:39 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm,rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default Looking Up/Looking Down is UP!

On 2013-03-18 17:10:41 -0700, otter said:

On Mar 18, 6:20*pm, Bowser wrote:
Some nice shots this month, so please take a look:

http://www.pbase.com/shootin/looking_up_down

More mandates will be posted this week. I've received some good
suggestions which will, hopefully, be a little more inclusive. So far,
over the last two months I've asked for shots of steeples from people
who have none even close, and shots from on high from people living in
the flatlands, and other places with no tall structures. So I need to
break this rut and select mandates with more broad appeal.

Help me out!


No time to work on SI. Here is a picture which doesn't fit the
mandate, but I was reminded of it:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/billkes...stream/lightbo
x/


That fits the mandate perfectly. ;-)

--
Regards,

Savageduck

  #4  
Old March 19th 13, 07:30 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm,rec.photo.digital
Rob
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 236
Default Looking Up/Looking Down is UP!

On 19/03/2013 11:10 AM, otter wrote:
On Mar 18, 6:20 pm, Bowser wrote:
Some nice shots this month, so please take a look:

http://www.pbase.com/shootin/looking_up_down

More mandates will be posted this week. I've received some good
suggestions which will, hopefully, be a little more inclusive. So far,
over the last two months I've asked for shots of steeples from people
who have none even close, and shots from on high from people living in
the flatlands, and other places with no tall structures. So I need to
break this rut and select mandates with more broad appeal.

Help me out!


No time to work on SI. Here is a picture which doesn't fit the
mandate, but I was reminded of it:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/billkes...ream/lightbox/



I do like that and it does demonstrate the mandate. Even better with
image it has some animal/human interest and interaction, that draws one
attention.
  #5  
Old March 20th 13, 07:07 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm,rec.photo.digital
otter
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 114
Default Looking Up/Looking Down is UP!

On Mar 19, 1:30*am, Rob wrote:
On 19/03/2013 11:10 AM, otter wrote:









On Mar 18, 6:20 pm, Bowser wrote:
Some nice shots this month, so please take a look:


http://www.pbase.com/shootin/looking_up_down


More mandates will be posted this week. I've received some good
suggestions which will, hopefully, be a little more inclusive. So far,
over the last two months I've asked for shots of steeples from people
who have none even close, and shots from on high from people living in
the flatlands, and other places with no tall structures. So I need to
break this rut and select mandates with more broad appeal.


Help me out!


No time to work on SI. *Here is a picture which doesn't fit the
mandate, but I was reminded of it:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/billkes.../photostream/l...


I do like that and it does demonstrate the mandate. Even better with
image it has some animal/human interest and interaction, that draws one
attention.


Thanks, but strictly speaking I think the mandate was to shoot
something while looking up or looking down, not to shoot something
which was looking up or down. Also, it is a lot easier to pull that
out of the archive, though, than to go out and shoot something
interesting on demand that fits a mandate. But I thought people would
like it, anyway.

Here is a shot from what was keeping me busy, SXSW:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/billkes...5529/lightbox/
  #6  
Old March 20th 13, 08:45 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm,rec.photo.digital
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,611
Default Looking Up/Looking Down is UP!

On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 23:07:19 -0700 (PDT), otter
wrote:

On Mar 19, 1:30*am, Rob wrote:
On 19/03/2013 11:10 AM, otter wrote:









On Mar 18, 6:20 pm, Bowser wrote:
Some nice shots this month, so please take a look:


http://www.pbase.com/shootin/looking_up_down


More mandates will be posted this week. I've received some good
suggestions which will, hopefully, be a little more inclusive. So far,
over the last two months I've asked for shots of steeples from people
who have none even close, and shots from on high from people living in
the flatlands, and other places with no tall structures. So I need to
break this rut and select mandates with more broad appeal.


Help me out!


No time to work on SI. *Here is a picture which doesn't fit the
mandate, but I was reminded of it:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/billkes.../photostream/l...


DAMN!

Another URL amputated by Google.

Try
http://www.flickr.com/photos/billkes...ream/lightbox/

I do like that and it does demonstrate the mandate. Even better with
image it has some animal/human interest and interaction, that draws one
attention.


Thanks, but strictly speaking I think the mandate was to shoot
something while looking up or looking down, not to shoot something
which was looking up or down. Also, it is a lot easier to pull that
out of the archive, though, than to go out and shoot something
interesting on demand that fits a mandate. But I thought people would
like it, anyway.


I don't qute agree with you. I think you are being overly literal. The
mandate is looking up and down but it doesn't say who or what is
looking up and down. I think that this shot epitomises the mandate
perfectly.

Here is a shot from what was keeping me busy, SXSW:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/billkes...5529/lightbox/


Ear plugs! Where are my ear plugs?
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens
  #7  
Old March 20th 13, 09:03 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm,rec.photo.digital
Rob
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 236
Default Looking Up/Looking Down is UP!

On 20/03/2013 6:45 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 23:07:19 -0700 (PDT), otter
wrote:

On Mar 19, 1:30 am, Rob wrote:
On 19/03/2013 11:10 AM, otter wrote:









On Mar 18, 6:20 pm, Bowser wrote:
Some nice shots this month, so please take a look:

http://www.pbase.com/shootin/looking_up_down

More mandates will be posted this week. I've received some good
suggestions which will, hopefully, be a little more inclusive. So far,
over the last two months I've asked for shots of steeples from people
who have none even close, and shots from on high from people living in
the flatlands, and other places with no tall structures. So I need to
break this rut and select mandates with more broad appeal.

Help me out!

No time to work on SI. Here is a picture which doesn't fit the
mandate, but I was reminded of it:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/billkes.../photostream/l...


DAMN!

Another URL amputated by Google.

Try
http://www.flickr.com/photos/billkes...ream/lightbox/

I do like that and it does demonstrate the mandate. Even better with
image it has some animal/human interest and interaction, that draws one
attention.


Thanks, but strictly speaking I think the mandate was to shoot
something while looking up or looking down, not to shoot something
which was looking up or down. Also, it is a lot easier to pull that
out of the archive, though, than to go out and shoot something
interesting on demand that fits a mandate. But I thought people would
like it, anyway.


I don't qute agree with you. I think you are being overly literal. The
mandate is looking up and down but it doesn't say who or what is
looking up and down. I think that this shot epitomises the mandate
perfectly.

Here is a shot from what was keeping me busy, SXSW:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/billkes...5529/lightbox/


Ear plugs! Where are my ear plugs?



I must be like you, can't stand the way modern music has to be so ramped
up that its fully distorted.

Have to laugh when they recommend that people who go to these venues
should wear ear protection.


  #8  
Old March 23rd 13, 03:43 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm,rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 703
Default [SI] Looking Up/Looking Down is UP!

On 3/18/2013 7:20 PM, Bowser wrote:
Some nice shots this month, so please take a look:

http://www.pbase.com/shootin/looking_up_down

More mandates will be posted this week. I've received some good
suggestions which will, hopefully, be a little more inclusive. So far,
over the last two months I've asked for shots of steeples from people
who have none even close, and shots from on high from people living in
the flatlands, and other places with no tall structures. So I need to
break this rut and select mandates with more broad appeal.

Help me out!

I always appreciate women.

--
PeterN
  #9  
Old March 23rd 13, 03:44 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm,rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 703
Default Looking Up/Looking Down is UP!

On 3/18/2013 8:10 PM, otter wrote:
On Mar 18, 6:20 pm, Bowser wrote:
Some nice shots this month, so please take a look:

http://www.pbase.com/shootin/looking_up_down

More mandates will be posted this week. I've received some good
suggestions which will, hopefully, be a little more inclusive. So far,
over the last two months I've asked for shots of steeples from people
who have none even close, and shots from on high from people living in
the flatlands, and other places with no tall structures. So I need to
break this rut and select mandates with more broad appeal.

Help me out!


No time to work on SI. Here is a picture which doesn't fit the
mandate, but I was reminded of it:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/billkes...ream/lightbox/

I think it does fit the mandate. Nicely done

--
PeterN
  #10  
Old March 25th 13, 02:12 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm,rec.photo.digital
Robert Coe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,901
Default [SI] Looking Up/Looking Down is UP!

On Mon, 18 Mar 2013 19:20:32 -0400, Bowser wrote:
: Some nice shots this month, so please take a look:
:
: http://www.pbase.com/shootin/looking_up_down

My comments; sorry they're so late:

Cooper Lighthouse
What's not to like? It's a workmanlike shot of the sort that anyone who lives
near the shore captures from time to time. I might have Siskerized the sky a
bit, but it's a sharp picture with everything in its place.

Cooper Looking Down
Very well done. Exactly wht the mandate evvisioned, I guess I'd have to say.

Cooper Looking Up
Compositionally, I don't think this quite matches the previous shot, but I
like the colors. Again it's an excellent match for the mandate.

Bob Coe 1 & 2
These pictures capture the gloominess of the day, possibly to an extreme. When
I took them, I was thinking only of the "looking down" aspect of the mandate.
If I had if to do over, I'd make the "looking up" picture show more of the
reservoir and a better angle on the dam. Quite honestly, I left a bit sooner
than I might have, because I was alone, the area was deserted, and the two
strangers seemed just a bit too eager to engage me in conversation without
showing any actual interest in what I was doing. Probably an overreaction on
my part. I guess it's worth mentioning that the pictures tend to illustrate
the limitations of an APS-C camera for landscape photography. While the Tokina
11-16 is one of the best WA lenses available for this type of camera, it's not
the sharpest lens in my bag. With a FF camera, you have more options at the
wide end.

Bob Coe 3
It's an understatement to say that this one wasn't a hit with the group. My
excuse is that I liked the colors, the shadows, and the lines created by the
ramp and the skylight. I watched that elevator being built for a good two
years and always wanted a chance to photograph it. The station is in
Cambridge, so the picture goes into my stock photos of Porter Square.

Martha Coe 1 & 2
Martha didn't get many opportunities to get out and shoot this month, so she
settled for a couple of shots in the nieghborhood. They're nice pictures, but
I can see why some said they don't meet the mandate very well.

Martha Coe 3
Martha has always liked the pictures we took at the Whaling Museum a couple of
years ago, and this one does meet the mandate. Someone suggested that it might
have been better as a WA shot, which strikes me as a good suggestion. If we
get down there again, we'll give it a try.

Bowser 1
This is about as good a shot out of an airplane window as I've ever seen.
(Well, some of the Savage Duck's air show pix probably match it.) I poked
around Google Maps and a AAA road atlas to try to locate the site, but without
success. On the assumption that it was taken on Bowser's way to Las Vegas, I
think statistical probabilities place it near Farmington, NM, a location often
mentioned by pilots explaining their flight plans to their passengers. I
surmise that Farmington is the site of a major navigational beacon.

Bowser 2a
This one sort of leaves me cold. I guess I've seen too many good pictures of
the real SOL for this one to make much of an impression. I might feel
differently if some obvious Las Vegas kitch were included.

Bowser 3
Well, here's the Las Vegas kitch, but little else. It feels very constrained.
Fisheye shots were once Bowser's specialty, and I suspect that this could have
been a good one, had he had the proper equipment at hand.

Anonymous Reflection
I forget who took credit for this. It's an OK shot, but seems intended for one
of last year's mandates. I rather like the colors. I'd probably have tried to
normalize the orange out, which I suspect would have been a mistake.

Rob's Stairwell
Not as elegant as Tony's two, but an interesting picture nevertheless. I don't
think it helps that some of it is OOF, but that may have been unavoidable.

Rob's Trees
I kind of like this, for no good reason. The blue looks highly artificial,
though I'm sure it isn't. I guess its abstract qualitity is what makes it
work; if the picture came from Peter Newman, I'd assume that was done
intentionally. What accounts for the odd shadow(?) in the upper right corner?
I think I have to knock off a couple of points for that.

Savageduck 1-3
Three nice landscapes that serve the mandate well. The third one, in
particular, has an understated, painterly quality about it that may or may
not have been intentional. Like some of the Duck's previous work, these look
like they've been worked over in post-processing, but to good artistic effect.
And like last time, he'll probably tell me they haven't. I don't think it
really matters: I'm not at all opposed to artistic post-processing, although I
don't do it very well myself. And the Duck is certainly a good enough
landscape photographer to know when a picture needs work and when it doesn't.

Tim Conway 2
This one doesn't work. It suffers acutely from the obvious comparison with
Rob's trees, but it's technically defective even without the comparison. I
don't recall exactly what Tim said about this picture and his other one, but I
believe he indicated that at least one of them was done in by a mis-adjusted
scanner.

Tim Conway Old
This one came out horribly noisy, as others have pointed out. I suspect the
picture might have been a bit bland anyway, but will give it the benefit of
the doubt. The technical problems preclude a rational assessment of the
composition and color.

Bob
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:57 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.