Some for C&C

Fajitas!

These are all the one's I've been happiest with since finishing up college for the year... I'm going to link them all to black backgrounds so you can a) see them larger without having to fit them into the forum and b) see them on a black background

The Abandoned Shack
Found this on myself and Roens adventure on Sunday evening. Shot on a 17-40L. I have several other compositions with the right hand side of the shack 'properly' exposed, but it completly unbalances the rest of the image, particularly the menacing sky.

Phil & Claire
A recent camping adventure on Woodstown strand. My 50 1.4 @ 1.4... great lens ( yes, there is a bit of photoshop trickery, and yes, I did overexpose on purpose).

Sinead's Con's
Sinead's converse, taken with my 105mm 2.8.

Church on Irelands Eye
The foreground in this possibly needs to be darker, but I'm not sure.

Let me know what you think anyways.

sineadw

I like my shoe Is that the Sigma macro 2.8?

I was just on Flickr and wondering how you and Roen got such a similar shot of the bath! That would explain it. I like the whole series you both took.

Jealous of them all, as usual..

Fajitas!

Yep, that was the macro Sinead!

Haha, I thought you would have picked up on his Master/Slave comment already!

sineadw

Oh god... I can't believe I knew the lens... my life just flashed before me and shouted 'NERD!' on its way by..

Master/slave? I've only had one cup of coffee so far!

Fajitas!

Well, when I said my Sigma 105 2.8...and Sigma's only 105mm lens is a macro, and the shot was quite close up, it shouldn't have been too hard to tell

I'd be more worried if you didn't know

Morlar

I think the shack one is a bit too dark, the 2nd one has a kind of glowey look that I think it would be stronger without. The third one is probably the strongest and the last one I also thought was a bit too dark. I like the capture though the seagull makes the shot but again it seems quite dark. I agree that the black background helps the presentation but these wouldn't be my favourite shots of yours.

sineadw

Fajitas! wrote:

Well, when I said my Sigma 105 2.8...and Sigma's only 105mm lens is a macro, and the shot was quite close up, it shouldn't have been too hard to tell

I'd be more worried if you didn't know

Yes, but my point is I was normal before I came here! Normal people wouldn't know that! What have you all done to me..

thebaz

as always , stuff is excellent , Al , really like the shack one and the
camping one , nothing against sinead , but the converse one doesn't do much for me .

Rojo

I know you overexposed on purpose, but I find Phil's sleeve a little distracting. Not normally a fan of the glowy feel, but I think it works nicely here!

The sky in Ireland's eye looks greaaat.

bovril

I like the effect in Phil & Claire but my favourite of the above is the abandoned shack. Great pics. Well done.

Roen

Like Ireland's eye the best, probably cos I was out at the shack and it wasn't really as menacing as you or I are making it out to be . Would make the foreground lighter if anything. Inject a bit of a sunburst to it.
I'd leave the side of the abandoned shack as dark as possible though. It suits the image.
Love the Converse too as it's full of vibrant colour.

Phil and Claire is just a bit too odd looking for my liking, as I pointed out yesterday it struck me as v odd straight away.
I won't give the game away though

Fajitas!

I wonder has anybody copped the Phil & Claire thing? If not, I'll be very happy.

Will play with a bit more light in the foreground, but it looks much too unbalanced to have the side 'properly' exposed.

Thanks all!

CONMIKE12

Morlar wrote:

I think the shack one is a bit too dark.

I'd agree with ger on this one , but I've noticed you like your darkness . i would tend to associate it with you and you're style . I REALLY like the phil and Claire shot. It has great atmosphere, a lovely sense of a moment in time captured perfectly. I think it would work either with, or without the glow, it's just a great photograph.That simple element of his hand on her foot , full of emotion. Who cares about technical perfection when you catch something like that (not criticising your technique or anything).

Fajitas!

Hmmm, the one thing I'll say about my darkness, is that it's intended/callibrated for print... I always do process for print, but I guess my screen is very very bright, so the callibration lets me work around the shadows that come out in the printing.

I'm very happy with the Phil & Claire one too, but I'm still waiting for someone to point out what's wrong with it... As I said, if noone notices, I'll be a very happy photoshopper!

I'd also agree with capturing the image is also more important than technical perfection.

Fenster

I love the first!

Ruu_Old

Great work, I love the glowy feel (big fan of those type of shots) as mentioned in Phil and Claire.

ThOnda

You are lucky that I was away so long!
So briefly:
1 - strange dark, I haven't found reason for me to have another look.
2 - nice one, however I put a sheet of paper to the right side and I like it more with cca 1 cm hidden (use scissors)
3 - nice colours, however "why?" It is good, however why you? I was expecting a little more. A bike, for example :-) Truely, I am missing there something. An ant or ladybird on the shoelaces.
4 - nice but the only reason to see the picture is the bird and it is hard to find him.

You are very very very good and I am very very very lazy to post my images. That means that I am very rude. Both in person and in commenting your photos. It's so easy just to comment!