发表于: 11/10/2004 21:04 发表主题:
引用并回复 快速引用
r418mot 写到:
搞了半天,也没有人愿意伸头挨砖。


OK, mot:

start with this one. I know the lens is better suited for portrait and I don't have a tripod.

Boston Common - raining day


  • r418mot
  • 注册于:2004-09-20
  • 帖子:2787
  • 所在地: 加州
发表于: 11/10/2004 21:10 发表主题:
引用并回复 快速引用
Merits:

1. Nice color.

2. Sharp enough.

Weaknesses:

1. Color saturation is too much.

2. Too many focuses in the frame (3 groups of people).

3. Light poles don't like good in the frame.
发表于: 11/10/2004 21:23 发表主题:
引用并回复 快速引用
r418mot 写到:
Merits:

1. Nice color.

2. Sharp enough.

Weaknesses:

1. Color saturation is too much.

2. Too many focuses in the frame (3 groups of people).

3. Light poles don't like good in the frame.


Mot,

Thanks. I agree with 2 and 3, I hope I have only the people in the center and light poles I could do nothing. But I don't think the color saturation is too much. I tried less saturation, it doesn't look good to me.

How about this one with less people.


  • U-turn
  • 注册于:2004-11-04
  • 帖子:44
发表于: 11/10/2004 21:29 发表主题:
引用并回复 快速引用
Laughing


最后进行编辑的是 U-turn on 11/10/2004 22:20, 总计第 1 次编辑
  • babivivian
  • 注册于:2004-09-20
  • 帖子:1018
  • 所在地: you know
发表于: 11/10/2004 21:29 发表主题:
引用并回复 快速引用
Can I ask a question? What does "Color saturation" mean? oops oops
发表于: 11/10/2004 21:43 发表主题:
引用并回复 快速引用
babivivian 写到:
Can I ask a question? What does "Color saturation" mean? oops oops


Hi Vivian,

Nice to hear from you. Color saturation means how saturated each color is. For example the following picture is the same picture in boston commons but less saturation (or less colorful,you may say), it's close to the color direct from the camera file. Hope this helps.



Mot,

Which one do you think is better? Do you mind the second picture? Should I take it out?
  • r418mot
  • 注册于:2004-09-20
  • 帖子:2787
  • 所在地: 加州
发表于: 11/11/2004 06:28 发表主题:
引用并回复 快速引用
Whitesand,

In my opinion, the 2nd photo is worse. The main weakness is that it has no emphasis at all. You put me in the frame but the size is so small that people can hardly think I am the focus of the frame. The trees on the left are not focus either because with me inside, you can hardly say the trees on the left are focus. To make it worse, people can clearly see the things in the background and they are very distracting. I have to say this is one of the worst photos of yours.
发表于: 11/11/2004 13:54 发表主题:
引用并回复 快速引用
r418mot 写到:
Whitesand,

In my opinion, the 2nd photo is worse. The main weakness is that it has no emphasis at all. You put me in the frame but the size is so small that people can hardly think I am the focus of the frame. The trees on the left are not focus either because with me inside, you can hardly say the trees on the left are focus. To make it worse, people can clearly see the things in the background and they are very distracting. I have to say this is one of the worst photos of yours.


I was trying to focus on both you and the tree behind you, which I think I failed. Lessons learned: don't try to do too much in one photo.
  • suyu1997
  • 注册于:2004-09-20
  • 帖子:495
  • 所在地: Waltham
发表于: 11/11/2004 14:21 发表主题:
引用并回复 快速引用
All big photos with tons of details look horrible after getting compresses to ~400x600, but whitesand obviously does a much better job than I do. I am sure this photo is quite sharp at its original size.

I do not think there are too many focuses; what I feel is that Bostonians are enjoying the colors.

My monitor is horrible, so I can coment only on composition.


r418mot 写到:
Merits:

1. Nice color.

2. Sharp enough.

Weaknesses:

1. Color saturation is too much.

2. Too many focuses in the frame (3 groups of people).

3. Light poles don't like good in the frame.

  • r418mot
  • 注册于:2004-09-20
  • 帖子:2787
  • 所在地: 加州
发表于: 11/11/2004 16:48 发表主题:
引用并回复 快速引用
砖头很重,希望不要介意. support

Whitesand 写到:

I was trying to focus on both you and the tree behind you, which I think I failed. Lessons learned: don't try to do too much in one photo.

发表于: 11/11/2004 18:20 发表主题:
引用并回复 快速引用
r418mot 写到:
砖头很重,希望不要介意. support

Whitesand 写到:

I was trying to focus on both you and the tree behind you, which I think I failed. Lessons learned: don't try to do too much in one photo.


Not at all : ) You know me better. I do think the 70-200mm IS is good for street shooting and portraits than landscaping. I think the 18 - 55mm is doing a reasonable job, but I need a tripod for it.

I am thinking about a tripod now, what is a good choice, everybody out there?
发表于: 11/11/2004 21:04 发表主题:
引用并回复 快速引用
Lapsing autumn




I need some bricks :!: :!: :!:
  • suyu1997
  • 注册于:2004-09-20
  • 帖子:495
  • 所在地: Waltham
发表于: 11/12/2004 08:47 发表主题:
引用并回复 快速引用
John Shaw and Art Wolfe, both are well-known nature photographers, say 70-200mm zoom is a must for nature work.


Whitesand 写到:
do think the 70-200mm IS is good for street shooting and portraits than landscaping.

  • r418mot
  • 注册于:2004-09-20
  • 帖子:2787
  • 所在地: 加州
发表于: 11/12/2004 09:19 发表主题:
引用并回复 快速引用
同意.

事实上,绝大多数我今年拍的得到一些夸奖的红叶照片是用我的Sigma 70-200/2.8镜头(小黑)拍的.

suyu1997 写到:
John Shaw and Art Wolfe, both are well-known nature photographers, say 70-200mm zoom is a must for nature work.


Whitesand 写到:
do think the 70-200mm IS is good for street shooting and portraits than landscaping.

  • r418mot
  • 注册于:2004-09-20
  • 帖子:2787
  • 所在地: 加州
发表于: 11/14/2004 00:12 发表主题:
引用并回复 快速引用
Ok, give you some really heavy ones!

1. The contrast looks very bad and you haven't adjusted it well in Photoshop.

2. The leaf on the right really looks ugly.

3. Doesn't make sense to use shallow depth of field.

4. There are plenty of views with much better color. Why shoot this one with very dull colors?

colder98 写到:
Lapsing autumn




I need some bricks :!: :!: :!: