COMMENTS THREAD for Random Photos LI

Mike Litoris

mystic86 wrote: »

Seems very murky?

I like the exposure, I think it would lose its drama if it was brighter. I really like the photo but I thought something could be done with the framing. Then again, I had a play around (hope you don't mind dinneenp!!) and it felt like it lost something.

mystic86

Mike Litoris wrote: »

I like the exposure, I think it would lose its drama if it was brighter. I really like the photo but I thought something could be done with the framing. Then again, I had a play around (hope you don't mind dinneenp!!) and it felt like it lost something.

Not really talking about the brightness, though it is a bit dark for me, I'm talking about the skin tone.

DaireQuinlan

Whammy! wrote: »

My father-in-law just got me this early 18th century buggy to use in photos.
Just trying out a few different ideas. I can never decide between color & black and white.
C&C welcome

Colour, colour every time. You have the most beautiful pastel rendering in most of your shots.

mystic86

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

Colour, colour every time. You have the most beautiful pastel rendering in most of your shots.

Completely agree, I don't know what you are doing in PP but keep doing it! The colours/tones etc are delicious!

Whammy!

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

Colour, colour every time. You have the most beautiful pastel rendering in most of your shots.

mystic86 wrote: »

Completely agree, I don't know what you are doing in PP but keep doing it! The colours/tones etc are delicious!

Thank you both of you

I normally prefer black and white when it comes to photographers I admire. I think I need to approach my photos from a different mindset for black and white to work better.

Thanks for the complements about the colors.
I actually adjust the hues, saturation and brightness of the individual color bands to create the balance I prefer to see. Nothing crazy, but every small adjustment helps the bigger picture.
This is a screen shot of the color bands for the photo.



Every photo I process is adjusted to suit the image so these setting are never the same.

mystic86

Whammy! wrote: »

Can I ask, did you spot he was looking at the fly before you took the photo?

Whammy!

Yeah I did. The fly wouldn't leave her alone
But I forgot to spot remove the fly from the photo.
I have the photo printed out at home and I removed the fly.

Here is a 100% crop of the fly

mystic86

Whammy! wrote: »

Yeah I did. The fly wouldn't leave her alone
But I forgot to spot remove the fly from the photo.
I have the photo printed out at home and I removed the fly.

Here is a 100% crop of the fly

Thanks!

That's lovely detail and sharpness you have there!

FYI I love the fly in the photo, it makes the photo for me

Whammy!

The detail is mainly from the lens so I can't take credit for that :P
It would be even sharper if I didn't shoot wide open.

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

The contrast is gorgeous and rich with glossy shadows.
But most importantly the skin tones are balanced just right.
I'm curious because I normally find it hard to get pleasant skin tones while also having rich blacks and high contrast.

Was it the film type or the scanning/post processing that contributed most towards the tonal balance?

DaireQuinlan

Whammy! wrote: »

The contrast is gorgeous and rich with glossy shadows.
But most importantly the skin tones are balanced just right.
I'm curious because I normally find it hard to get pleasant skin tones while also having rich blacks and high contrast.

Was it the film type or the scanning/post processing that contributed most towards the tonal balance?

Film type for the most part. It's 8x10. Someone was giving out a couple of days ago about a 36ex roll of 35mm costing €15, 8x10 will cost you that PER SHOT :eek: So, given that I'm 1. not made of money and 2. am prone to potentially costly mistakes, I shoot Fuji XRay film. It's slow and contrasty, and blue-green sensitive, hence the skin tones. It does have a certain zing to it if you get it right though :-D

mystic86

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

Film type for the most part. It's 8x10. Someone was giving out a couple of days ago about a 36ex roll of 35mm costing €15, 8x10 will cost you that PER SHOT :eek: So, given that I'm 1. not made of money and 2. am prone to potentially costly mistakes, I shoot Fuji XRay film. It's slow and contrasty, and blue-green sensitive, hence the skin tones. It does have a certain zing to it if you get it right though :-D

I don't understand 99% of what you write, in general, but it's still kinda fascinating and I admire your steadfast dedication to old school methods!

Remind me, I forget, do we request c&c here also?

If so anyone wanna have a go at my recent shots I've posted up? They've all been received pretty badly judging by the thanks

Cheers

Whammy!

mystic86 wrote: »

Remind me, I forget, do we request c&c here also?

If so anyone wanna have a go at my recent shots I've posted up? They've all been received pretty badly judging by the thanks

Cheers

I wouldn't worry about the number of thanks.
The thanks system is great for determining what is popular by the general public (which seems to be mostly high contrast color and/or wide angle landscape). But it should not be used to determine the quality of a photo

magicbastarder

your central bank plaza shot is great. not so sold on the ha'penny bridge one; and i think the mannequin shot (american apparel?) might work better in B&W.

magicbastarder

and FWIW, you've one of the best hitrates of anyone posting to that thread.

mystic86

Whammy! wrote: »

I wouldn't worry about the number of thanks.
The thanks system is great for determining what is popular by the general public (which seems to be mostly high contrast color and/or wide angle landscape). But it should not be used to determine the quality of a photo

true! Though it's all I have to go with from an objective viewpoint because I'm not good at accessing my own stuff.

mystic86

magicbastarder wrote: »

your central bank plaza shot is great. not so sold on the ha'penny bridge one; and i think the mannequin shot (american apparel?) might work better in B&W.

I thought it was a humorous juxtaposition, they are 'totally checking him out'

Any better?

magicbastarder

far be it for me to admit i was wrong, but the mannequins don't pop nearly as much in the b&w version, so you lose that impact.

TheMightyI

I really like this in black and white. Spotted it in the other thread and it didn't click in colour. But i think it works much better in B&W.

M.J.M.C

Whammy! wrote: »

The little guy sporting an old Olympus Pen FT.
Pity I couldn't get the camera more in shot.

Does this kid even shoot manual??!

Joking of course, amazingly beautiful shot.

Whammy!

Thanks
I had to make a little camera strap to fit him

M.J.M.C

Brilliant haha! Never even thought of the size of the stap.
Keep up the good work.

The Black Oil

mystic, do people ever notice you taking shorts of their public displays of affection?

mystic86

squareballoon wrote: »

I just saw a link to your Flickr at the bottom of your post, good god I'm in love with your work, your photos are brilliant, your post processing is really fantastic, I'd love to get my photos looking like that!

Really impressed, well done!!

magicbastarder

where was that photo taken?

squareballoon

Thanks mystic86
It was taken in shanganagh park in shankill where the parks dept have planted an area of wildflowers (just on the sea side of the railway bridge). I've been down there lots recently as you can see from my flickr acc.

M.J.M.C

Great to see you back posting here squareballon
Love your work

squareballoon

M.J.M.C wrote: »

Great to see you back posting here squareballon
Love your work

Thanks so much for that! I had stopped shooting almost completely for about 8 months partly out of feeling rubbish compared to everyone else and partly from going back to work full time.
Now that I'm part time again I need to get the editing side of my freelancing up and running again so I'm back shooting and really enjoying it!

TheMightyI

squareballoon wrote: »

Thanks so much for that! I had stopped shooting almost completely for about 8 months partly out of feeling rubbish compared to everyone else and partly from going back to work full time.
Now that I'm part time again I need to get the editing side of my freelancing up and running again so I'm back shooting and really enjoying it!

That's a lovely shot - well done.

pullandbang

mystic86 wrote: »

I thought it was a humorous juxtaposition, they are 'totally checking him out'

Any better?

I like this in B&W but I think I'd try a much tighter crop - to just above the mannequin's heads - keep the focus on both subjects. I even like the "rubbish" in the foreground.

Whammy!

pullandbang wrote: »

I like this in B&W but I think I'd try a much tighter crop - to just above the mannequin's heads - keep the focus on both subjects. I even like the "rubbish" in the foreground.

I disagree. Regarding the crop that is.
I like the square crop. Keeping part of the architecture in the shot helps with framing. The building frames the mannequins while simultaneously giving them a vantage point, viewing the outside world.
While they are looking down from their throne, the man is dwarfed by the building walls making him seems a little insignificant to them.

Of course I am over thinking things. But to me the photo would draw me in less if the top was cropped off.
It paints a richer picture.