Golden swan
Posted 24/04/2012 - 09:31
Link
I think the composition works well it would have lost its impact if the thirds rule had been used (anyway rules are made to be broken) lovely shot.
Regards John/Jumbo
Posted 24/04/2012 - 11:40
Link
Beauty!
Cheers Jules...
My viewfinder is 576,000,000 pixels.
My other viewfinder is 5.76,000,000.
www.exaggeratedperspectives.com
My viewfinder is 576,000,000 pixels.
My other viewfinder is 5.76,000,000.
www.exaggeratedperspectives.com
Posted 24/04/2012 - 13:41
Link
As soon as I see the words 'swan' and 'sunset' I reach for my gun, a double barrelled one!
I'm glad I didn't, this is a welcome take on such a tired, hackneyed and cliched subject.
Well done.
I'm glad I didn't, this is a welcome take on such a tired, hackneyed and cliched subject.
Well done.
Ken
“We must avoid however, snapping away, shooting quickly and without thought, overloading ourselves with unnecessary images that clutter our memory and diminish the clarity of the whole.” - Henri Cartier-Bresson -
“We must avoid however, snapping away, shooting quickly and without thought, overloading ourselves with unnecessary images that clutter our memory and diminish the clarity of the whole.” - Henri Cartier-Bresson -
Posted 24/04/2012 - 15:32
Link
How on earth did you light that swan? You were facing the sun, the side of the swan that you saw from your standing point must have been in deep shadow, and presumably you were too far from the bird to use any flash...? To me it almost seems like two images combined.
K-5, K-x, DA* 50-135, DA 70 Ltd, FA50 f1.4, A50 f1.7, Tamron 17-50 & 90 f2.8 Di macro, Sigma 17-50 f2.8 & 10-20, Metz 58 & 48 AF-1
Posted 24/04/2012 - 16:41
Link
Slovak wrote:
How on earth did you light that swan? You were facing the sun, the side of the swan that you saw from your standing point must have been in deep shadow, and presumably you were too far from the bird to use any flash...? To me it almost seems like two images combined.
Shot in RAW used the recovery slider, and than copious amounts of dodging, also slightly de-saturated as there was a blue tint to the swan.
How on earth did you light that swan? You were facing the sun, the side of the swan that you saw from your standing point must have been in deep shadow, and presumably you were too far from the bird to use any flash...? To me it almost seems like two images combined.
Posted 24/04/2012 - 18:49
Link
Wow.... nicely processed
my rule of thumb is if a subject is strong enough to stand on its own ignore the thirds. but I always take double my shots one as I want it and one by the book just in case>
my rule of thumb is if a subject is strong enough to stand on its own ignore the thirds. but I always take double my shots one as I want it and one by the book just in case>
Posted 25/04/2012 - 10:37
Link
matwhittington wrote:
That's rather lovely! The effect of the light on the water is brilliant! Nicely done.
+1 from me.
That's rather lovely! The effect of the light on the water is brilliant! Nicely done.
Colin
“Nobody made a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could do only a little.”
Edmund Burke (1729 – 1797)
[IMG]http://i941.photobucket.com/albums/ad254/weldingblues/K-7userbar-red.jpg[/IMG]
“Nobody made a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could do only a little.”
Edmund Burke (1729 – 1797)
[IMG]http://i941.photobucket.com/albums/ad254/weldingblues/K-7userbar-red.jpg[/IMG]
Add Comment
To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.
2545 posts
17 years
Wakefield
Swan at Sunset by SFB579, on Flickr