[SI] More Sounds Posted

Sid sent a few, so please take a look at the three new entries:

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

On Sun, 26 Sep 2010 18:06:36 -0400, Bowser wrote:

Sid sent a few, so please take a look at the three new entries:

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


All three are nice, sharp photos and good choices of subject matter
for the mandate. It might help his composition to not place the
center of attention in the vertical center of each image, though. If
centering works the best, do it. However, thinking what might work
better at the cropping stage may lead to better compositions.

I'm not crazy about the sky treatment in the second two. Dramatic,
but the people are what these photographs are about and the sky
competes with the primary subject. That sky treatment works best with
a landscape where the scenery is the subject.

One other point is that all three use depth-of-focus very well. In
the biker image the depth goes on forever and gives a feeling of the
biker having traveled very far. The background is a little softer in
the other two because it's not part of the story.

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

"Bowser" wrote in message
...
Sid sent a few, so please take a look at the three new entries:

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

Some comments:

babbling brook
Nice tranquil scene. You must've been standing on a rock.

racing
Beautiful light. Beautiful scenery. A slower shutter speed might've been
nice to show motion, but then the rider/subject wouldn't have been as sharp;
and the background too. I think you did right. I really like this.

sceaming girls
This is good sound of summer. Perhaps placing the people on the right third
would make a better composition. It's good positioning of the girl admidst
the guys, but it would have been nice to see her expression too.

On Sun, 26 Sep 2010 19:07:06 -0400, tony cooper
wrote:
: On Sun, 26 Sep 2010 18:06:36 -0400, Bowser wrote:
:
: Sid sent a few, so please take a look at the three new entries:
:
: http://www.pbase.com/shootin/seasonal_sounds
:
:
: All three are nice, sharp photos and good choices of subject matter
: for the mandate. It might help his composition to not place the
: center of attention in the vertical center of each image, though. If
: centering works the best, do it. However, thinking what might work
: better at the cropping stage may lead to better compositions.

I don't get your point. Neither the bridge nor the biker is at the vertical
center. Indeed, if you lop off some sky in the second picture, which you seem
to be suggesting in the next paragraph, the biker moves closer to the vertical
center.

: I'm not crazy about the sky treatment in the second two. Dramatic,
: but the people are what these photographs are about and the sky
: competes with the primary subject. That sky treatment works best with
: a landscape where the scenery is the subject.

I might shorten the sky a bit in the bike picture, but only to make the sky
less dominant geometrically, not to make it less dramatic. And in the third
picture I think the dramatic sky is essential to the composition. Note how the
purple in the clouds is picked up by the similar coloring of the water on the
beach.

: One other point is that all three use depth-of-focus very well. In
: the biker image the depth goes on forever and gives a feeling of the
: biker having traveled very far. The background is a little softer in
: the other two because it's not part of the story.

I agree.

Bob

On Sun, 26 Sep 2010 21:02:37 -0400, Robert Coe wrote:

On Sun, 26 Sep 2010 19:07:06 -0400, tony cooper
wrote:
: On Sun, 26 Sep 2010 18:06:36 -0400, Bowser wrote:
:
: Sid sent a few, so please take a look at the three new entries:
:
: http://www.pbase.com/shootin/seasonal_sounds
:
:
: All three are nice, sharp photos and good choices of subject matter
: for the mandate. It might help his composition to not place the
: center of attention in the vertical center of each image, though. If
: centering works the best, do it. However, thinking what might work
: better at the cropping stage may lead to better compositions.

I don't get your point. Neither the bridge nor the biker is at the vertical
center. Indeed, if you lop off some sky in the second picture, which you seem
to be suggesting in the next paragraph, the biker moves closer to the vertical
center.

The vertical center is the center when a (vertical) line is drawn from
the top of the picture to the bottom of the picture midway between the
left and right side. If you lop off sky, it doesn't affect how the
subject is in relation to the vertical center. Lopping off sky
affects the position of the subject in relation to the horizontal
center.

I didn't suggest lopping off any sky, by the way.

: I'm not crazy about the sky treatment in the second two. Dramatic,
: but the people are what these photographs are about and the sky
: competes with the primary subject. That sky treatment works best with
: a landscape where the scenery is the subject.

I might shorten the sky a bit in the bike picture, but only to make the sky
less dominant geometrically, not to make it less dramatic.

My reaction to the sky is treatment, not the amount of sky. I like
the sky as it is as far as how much sky is shown. I think the
treatment is so dramatic, though, that it takes away from the biker.

If it was a photo of a biker on a rain-slick city street, that ominous
sky might work. You could make a case with this photo that the
threatening sky is making the biker hurry on his way, but I really
don't think you need that story. The bike and the setting is story
enough.

And in the third
picture I think the dramatic sky is essential to the composition. Note how the
purple in the clouds is picked up by the similar coloring of the water on the
beach.

It's a matter of personal choice...I don't like secondary elements
competing with the main element of the photograph unless the secondary
element adds something needed. In the beach photo, all you need is
sea, sand, and people to get across the sound in the mandate. That
sky has a drop-in look to it to me. Drop-in as the real sky was flat
blue and Sid dropped that out and used the sky from some other
picture. Not that I'm saying he did, but it has that look.

: One other point is that all three use depth-of-focus very well. In
: the biker image the depth goes on forever and gives a feeling of the
: biker having traveled very far. The background is a little softer in
: the other two because it's not part of the story.

I agree.

Bob

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

On Sun, 26 Sep 2010 22:12:03 -0400, tony cooper
wrote:

On Sun, 26 Sep 2010 21:02:37 -0400, Robert Coe wrote:

On Sun, 26 Sep 2010 19:07:06 -0400, tony cooper
wrote:
: On Sun, 26 Sep 2010 18:06:36 -0400, Bowser wrote:
:
: Sid sent a few, so please take a look at the three new entries:
:
: http://www.pbase.com/shootin/seasonal_sounds
:
:
: All three are nice, sharp photos and good choices of subject matter
: for the mandate. It might help his composition to not place the
: center of attention in the vertical center of each image, though. If
: centering works the best, do it. However, thinking what might work
: better at the cropping stage may lead to better compositions.

I don't get your point. Neither the bridge nor the biker is at the vertical
center. Indeed, if you lop off some sky in the second picture, which you seem
to be suggesting in the next paragraph, the biker moves closer to the vertical
center.

The vertical center is the center when a (vertical) line is drawn from
the top of the picture to the bottom of the picture midway between the
left and right side. If you lop off sky, it doesn't affect how the
subject is in relation to the vertical center. Lopping off sky
affects the position of the subject in relation to the horizontal
center.

I didn't suggest lopping off any sky, by the way.

: I'm not crazy about the sky treatment in the second two. Dramatic,
: but the people are what these photographs are about and the sky
: competes with the primary subject. That sky treatment works best with
: a landscape where the scenery is the subject.

I might shorten the sky a bit in the bike picture, but only to make the sky
less dominant geometrically, not to make it less dramatic.

My reaction to the sky is treatment, not the amount of sky. I like
the sky as it is as far as how much sky is shown. I think the
treatment is so dramatic, though, that it takes away from the biker.

If it was a photo of a biker on a rain-slick city street, that ominous
sky might work. You could make a case with this photo that the
threatening sky is making the biker hurry on his way, but I really
don't think you need that story. The bike and the setting is story
enough.

And in the third
picture I think the dramatic sky is essential to the composition. Note how the
purple in the clouds is picked up by the similar coloring of the water on the
beach.

It's a matter of personal choice...I don't like secondary elements
competing with the main element of the photograph unless the secondary
element adds something needed. In the beach photo, all you need is
sea, sand, and people to get across the sound in the mandate. That
sky has a drop-in look to it to me. Drop-in as the real sky was flat
blue and Sid dropped that out and used the sky from some other
picture. Not that I'm saying he did, but it has that look.

: One other point is that all three use depth-of-focus very well. In
: the biker image the depth goes on forever and gives a feeling of the
: biker having traveled very far. The background is a little softer in
: the other two because it's not part of the story.

I agree.

Bob

These "astute" observations about composition being brought to you by the
very same delusional psychotic who thinks he read some usenet-post about a
rare moth image being posted on the internet but neither of which, post nor
photo, ever existed.

Now that's someone's opinion that's worth trusting and knowing!

ROFLMAO!

On Sun, 26 Sep 2010 18:06:36 -0400, Bowser wrote:

Sid sent a few, so please take a look at the three new entries:

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

First off, that's no "babbling brook". It's stagnant puddles of water where
water flows once in a while and hasn't for quite some time.

Without motion-blur the biker could be standing there with the motor turned
off, propped up with his leg hidden behind the bike. No indication of any
sounds being made.

The face of the girl is hidden. There's no evidence of anyone making any
noises in that image. There's not even enough wave action to suggest that
even that is making any noise.

All three crapshots fail the mandate. Not to mention the ****ty
snapshooter's poor composition in all of them. All others' assessments of
these images also fail for their suggesting there's anything redeeming in
any of them. Is that any surprise when their own submissions are just as
****ty? How would they know what constitutes useful photography when they
can't even create their own.

"tony cooper" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 26 Sep 2010 18:06:36 -0400, Bowser wrote:

Sid sent a few, so please take a look at the three new entries:

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


All three are nice, sharp photos and good choices of subject matter
for the mandate. It might help his composition to not place the
center of attention in the vertical center of each image, though. If
centering works the best, do it. However, thinking what might work
better at the cropping stage may lead to better compositions.


I am more concerned with placemnt on the horizontal center.


I'm not crazy about the sky treatment in the second two. Dramatic,
but the people are what these photographs are about and the sky
competes with the primary subject. That sky treatment works best with
a landscape where the scenery is the subject.

To me the sky adds a little drama to the lone biker. Though I would have
liked to see the biker comming into the scene.

I can hear the girl giving a phoney scream as she is about to get dunked.
However the entire image on the right of the action is wasted.


One other point is that all three use depth-of-focus very well. In
the biker image the depth goes on forever and gives a feeling of the
biker having traveled very far. The background is a little softer in
the other two because it's not part of the story.


Good point


--
Peter

On Mon, 27 Sep 2010 12:15:42 +0100, Bruce
wrote:

Robert Coe wrote:
On Sun, 26 Sep 2010 19:07:06 -0400, tony cooper
wrote:

: One other point is that all three use depth-of-focus very well. In
: the biker image the depth goes on forever and gives a feeling of the
: biker having traveled very far. The background is a little softer in
: the other two because it's not part of the story.

I agree.


You agree?

Do neither of you know the difference between depth of focus and depth
of field?

I should have written depth-of-field. Dunno why focus came out.

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

"Bruce" wrote in message
...
Robert Coe wrote:
On Sun, 26 Sep 2010 19:07:06 -0400, tony cooper

wrote:

: One other point is that all three use depth-of-focus very well. In
: the biker image the depth goes on forever and gives a feeling of the
: biker having traveled very far. The background is a little softer in
: the other two because it's not part of the story.

I agree.


You agree?

Do neither of you know the difference between depth of focus and depth
of field?



Another helpful contribution.

--
Peter