[Rainer.]

Originally Posted by metropolis4

These two seem right up my alley.

< Cloud obsession.

[metropolis4]

Thanks! I've been liking clouds a lot more since I bought that 10-20mm lens

[Cam42]

Just learned how to do this in GIMP. I've wanted to know for a while now, but now I do! How's it look?

[airsoft sniper]

I was playing with gimp this morning so what do you think?

[ripaki]

Any comment ?

[Rainer.]

Tones are okay, though I find the composition rather pedestrian. If repetition is what you were going for, it works, though. I think I'd personally vote for more depth of field in a shot like this, since you're not actually trying to draw your eye to the leaves that are actually in the plane of focus. The grey tones are alright. Overall, it's heavy in the darker midtones, but I don't think you could do much with that lighting anyway.

[Pre-Ex-Girlfriend]

Which way do these two photos look better together? Also, do you think they would look better on black or white? I'm thinking of submitting them as a diptych to a literary/arts journal, so any suggestions are welcome. Thanks.

1


2


3

[bowstaff981]

I went to a state park over the weekend and took some photos. It's the first time I've done any serious shooting in a while, and one of the only times I have taken nature photos. I'm not too happy with the results, but here's a few from the trip (I'll probably post more later). Feel free to blast away with critiques.I haven't done any post processing on these and am also looking for tips on what sort of post processing would be recommended.

[bowstaff981]

Originally Posted by Pre-Ex-Girlfriend

Which way do these two photos look better together? Also, do you think they would look better on black or white? I'm thinking of submitting them as a diptych to a literary/arts journal, so any suggestions are welcome. Thanks.

I think the first option looks the best. Not sure about black and white, but I'm leaning towards keeping them in color.

[Rainer.]

Re: Rachel

I also like the first one. It is a bit more interesting with the points of interest grouped together, instead of a bit disjointed as in the other two options.

[Rainer.]

Attachment 91416

The pattern and shape and motion on the log is interesting, but the eye instantly goes up to that bright sky in the background. Were it me, I would find a way to really bump up the contrast and highlights in the foreground to make the log stand out against the sky, B&W. Either that or crop the sky out entirely. This one has the most potential, IMO.

Attachment 91417

Not as good as the next one.

Attachment 91418

What's the shutter speed and aperture on this? Did you consider using a longer shutter speed and smaller aperture to blur out the water, and get all the trees in focus? It's pretty difficult to get truly interesting lighting in a forest like this, but I think playing with the strong central vertical form of white space you've created could possibly be interesting.

Attachment 91419

Shooting up a tree borders on incredibly cliche, but the shallow depth of field here makes it a bit more interesting. The line made by the plane of focus blends against the rest of the tree, so the eye has no real resting point. It's a bit hectic to look at, I suppose.

[metropolis4]

Originally Posted by ripaki

Any comment ?

I don't know if it's the lense, or the way the leaves are arranged, but this pic feels circular. I like it. I think the shallow depth of field contributes to that to. It feels like there's movement. Like I can see the wind sweeping the leaves up in a cyclone.

I think it would benefit from more contrast and bringing the exposure down just a bit... but that's just me

[SoapbarII]

Originally Posted by metropolis4

I don't know if it's the lense, or the way the leaves are arranged, but this pic feels circular.

Might be the light in the center thats playing a trick on your eyes, but I see it too.