[SI] Shoot-In, Chrome Comments

Mardon arose from his sleep around 1000 GMT, and went to his
computer located at N47º37.832'W052º41.253'(WGS84), to check the
glorious images of bright, shiny, polished chrome that were
scheduled to appear on that holiest of holies, the Pbase SI
gallery. Here is what he found:

Doug Payne
http://www.pbase.com/shootin/chrome
The red is a good compliment to the chrome. Was the red in the
number "6" really a different colour than the red in "PONTIAC" or
does it merely appear that way in this image? For me, that
difference in the reds takes away a small bit from the overall
image. I like geometrical shots, so perhaps this is why I'm fond
of this one. Strangely, the image looks to my eye like it's
rotated slightly too far to the right and yet I put it in PS to
check against the guidelines and it's almost spot on. Odd. God
job of centreing the camera lens both vertically and horizontally
with the centre of the subject.

Rich Pos
http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/67586656
Bonus points for being the best example I've seen of meeting the
mandate without meeting the mandate. I don't know exactly what to
say about the image. I don't get a warm fuzzy feeling from looking
at a guy's bald head. (Sorry about that pun.) The highlights look
blown to me but I'm not completely sure if they really are. I'm
glad it isn't in colour. Thank you for that. The crop is
interesting. Normally I'd say there is not enough head room in
this image but I guess I can't really say that in this case.

Jim Kramer
http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/67586663
Maybe we've both been spending too much time over at BugGuide.net.
When the mandate was posted, I thought about submitting this
archived shot:
http://www.JustPhotos.ca/galleries/m...ges/017209.jpg I'm
glad I didn't. Yours is a much better macro. I like that the
texture of the eyes are visible in this shot. Insects fascinate me
so you have an unfair advantage with me reviewing this image. I
like the composition with the yellow on the bottom. It offsets
what looks to my eye to be a slightly under exposure in the
remainder of the image.

Mardon Erbland
http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/67586924
It was the next to last day for the mandate, so I went out for a
drive with my father-in-law to get a shot of some chrome for the
mandate. A tour bus from Alberta was parked along a downtown
street and this is the result. I should not have 'apologized' for
getting my reflection in the image; I was one among many! Here
was my 2nd choice for a submission:
http://www.JustPhotos.ca/galleries/e...ges/021179.jpg
See, by reviewing my own image I was able to sneak in 2 additional
photos!

Quercus
http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/67586931
Interesting subject matter. My son is going moose hunting with a
bow when the season opens in 2 weeks. Is that really chrome or
just burnished metal? You get a 10 point deduction if it's
burnished metal. I'm curious why you shot aperture priority at f8?
I think I would have preferred wide open to get as much background
blur as possible. The background is quite distracting to my eye.
The image also seems a tiny bit soft. I can't tell if it's a focus
issue or just under sharpened.

Duncan Chesley
http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/67586959
Too bad it wasn't a dog being reflected in the chrome. (Opps.
Twenty lashes for me. I actually like cats but love dogs!) I find
this a rather intriguing image. It seems to have just the right
colour tones for my eye. The only negative is that the horizontal
black bar is not horizontal. The vertical line is fine, so the
picture couldn't be rotated. It would have required a different
viewpoint to correct this problem and that probably wasn't possible
given the location of the cat and perhaps the size of the computer
face plate.

Bowser
http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/67589560
I know your red shirt matched the rest of the image, Bowser, but I
still don't like your reflection in the horn; too overpowering and
distracting. My guess is that you might have actually planned the
reflection as part of the image but I'm not fond of it. Was it
planned? I also am not fond of the orange and the red together.
Sometimes I don't fully know why I like or don't like an image.
Duncan's is an example of one that I like when I'm not sure why and
this is an example of an image that doesn't catch my fancy even
though I'm not entirely sure why. Sorry.

Ken Nadvornick
http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/67594765
Undeniably meets the mandate. I'm glad those plug wires are there
to prevent eye damage from all that bright chrome. Mandate aside,
the image is a bit too congested for my liking. Is that your fill-
flash reflection at the centre of the air cleaner? I wonder how
this image would have looked without the flash. Did you take one
that way by any chance?

On 27/09/2006 7:09 AM, Mardon wrote:

Doug Payne
http://www.pbase.com/shootin/chrome
The red is a good compliment to the chrome. Was the red in the
number "6" really a different colour than the red in "PONTIAC" or
does it merely appear that way in this image? For me, that
difference in the reds takes away a small bit from the overall
image. I like geometrical shots, so perhaps this is why I'm fond
of this one. Strangely, the image looks to my eye like it's
rotated slightly too far to the right and yet I put it in PS to
check against the guidelines and it's almost spot on. Odd. God
job of centreing the camera lens both vertically and horizontally
with the centre of the subject.

Thanks for the comments, Mardon. You have a very keen eye. The image was
indeed taken a bit off-center, and then cropped a bit. You know, I don't
recall if the reds were different or not. It was the grill on a 1939
Pontiac so it's entirely possible that the upper 'Pontiac' red has faded
a bit more than the lower '6' (cylinders) red. It's also in a different
light, not being so shaded as the lower part. The marbled look on the
upper leading edge of the hood is a reflection of the clouds; it was a
very 'bright' cloudy day, so I think it's just a lighting thing. I
picked this shot out of the dozen or so that I came home with because it
didn't show my reflection.

To the rest of you, yeah I know it's my mandate and I should offer some
commentary, but I'm leaving in a couple of hours for a 2+ week canoe
trip, so it'll have to wait until I return on Oct 16. Sorry, just bad
timing. All I'll say now is that I'm a bit disappointed that Ken's isn't
B&W :-)

On Wed, 27 Sep 2006 11:09:09 GMT, Mardon wrote:

It would have required a different
viewpoint to correct this problem and that probably wasn't possible
given the location of the cat and perhaps the size of the computer
face plate.

Mardon,

That's right.

I've been looking at the rug's reflection in the faceplate ever since
I got the new box. I had taken a whole bunch of experimental shots
when Bobby got into one of his "I like SI, too!" moods and plopped
down right in the middle of this shot. I chose this one for the
colors, for the combination of the mechanical and the living, and for
the strange blur of it all. I wish my ceiling wasn't so far away so I
could stopped down more.

As usual the mandate made me try something new.

Thank you for the comments. I'm glad you liked it.

Cheers,
DuncanC

Mardon wrote:


Quercus
http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/67586931
Interesting subject matter. My son is going moose hunting with a
bow when the season opens in 2 weeks. Is that really chrome or
just burnished metal? You get a 10 point deduction if it's
burnished metal. I'm curious why you shot aperture priority at f8?
I think I would have preferred wide open to get as much background
blur as possible. The background is quite distracting to my eye.
The image also seems a tiny bit soft. I can't tell if it's a focus
issue or just under sharpened.


First of all, thanks for the comments, they do help a lot... Now, about
the chrome thing, you make me doubt, but I'm nearly sure that this limb
socket is "chromed", I'll try to find out, 10 point deduction makes a
difference in the field

I shot at f8 because I was shooting other things when I found this
picture... And I forgot changing the aperture :-) In my defense I will
say that I'm in the DSL world from a long time with a -nearly- full
automatic point&shoot... and sometimes I just forget about these
things. But now it is happening less often. About the sharpness...
Well, it was taken with a Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 II, that is not
the sharpest lens in the world. Anyway, I'll check which was the focus
point in this shot. There's a lot of work to do yet with the new
camera, as you can see :-)

"Mardon" wrote in message
. 130...
Mardon arose from his sleep around 1000 GMT, and went to his
computer located at N47º37.832'W052º41.253'(WGS84), to check the
glorious images of bright, shiny, polished chrome that were
scheduled to appear on that holiest of holies, the Pbase SI
gallery. Here is what he found:


Bowser
http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/67589560
I know your red shirt matched the rest of the image, Bowser, but I
still don't like your reflection in the horn; too overpowering and
distracting. My guess is that you might have actually planned the
reflection as part of the image but I'm not fond of it. Was it
planned? I also am not fond of the orange and the red together.
Sometimes I don't fully know why I like or don't like an image.
Duncan's is an example of one that I like when I'm not sure why and
this is an example of an image that doesn't catch my fancy even
though I'm not entirely sure why. Sorry.

Apology accepted. ;-)

OK, the shot isn't really very good, I admit. But there are reasons
(excuses) for it. The shot sux not because of what I had, but because of
what I didn't have:

I didn't have the imagination of Rich and shoot a bald guy.

I didn't have the subject matter of Coug, Quercus, Duncan and Ken.
Especially Ken. Nice shot! I'm not a big fan of small-block Fords, though,
so I deduct points for that alone. If there were points involved here.

I didn't know there were chrome-looking bugs, like you.

I didn't want to shoot a wheel, like Mardon because I thought someone else
would submit a wheel. I was right.

So I found something with some chrome on it, and tried to make the best of
it. And yes, I did include my reflection to try and add something to combat
the flatness of the horn. And I don't like the orange light at the lower
left. But hey, it's chrome, isn't it? I'd score it 3/10. 1 point for getting
chrome in the shot, 1 point for proper exposure, and 1 point for proper
focus. Your scoring may vary.

BTW, thanks for taking the time to look and comment!

"That_Rich" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 27 Sep 2006 18:47:22 -0400, "Kinon O'cann"
Yes.it's.me.Bowser wrote:

I didn't have the imagination of Rich and shoot a bald guy.

Not much imagination.
We've been calling him "Chrome Dome" for years.... that or 7- head,
which is meant to be a play on words.... you know...
7-head / 4-head.

Or, as Buddy Sorrell would say to Mel, "you have enough forehead for four
heads."

As swiped from the Dick van Dyke show...


groan

RP©

"Doug Payne" wrote:

All I'll say now is that I'm a bit disappointed that Ken's isn't
B&W :-)

Embarrassing to be caught in public, but yes, I've been socializing with
that harlot Color again. But only until my true love B&W returns from her
fling with Recalibration...

Ken (who's not quite sure exactly what he just said)

Ken Nadvornick wrote:

Embarrassing to be caught in public, but yes, I've been socializing with
that harlot Color again. But only until my true love B&W returns from her
fling with Recalibration...

Ken (who's not quite sure exactly what he just said)

Maybe you've just been conversing with the wrong type of people?
I'll have you shooting color digital yet!

BTW folks, Ken's newly calibrated B/W lab is now open for business.
And guess who was the first customer?
And now you know the rest of the story.