PPG results
Posted 21/06/2010 - 18:15
Link
Congrats yet again Tim, and yes I remember voting on the blinds and the buildings, I have to offer my sincer apologies because I think I gave the buildings the thumbs down despite the title I didn't like the blown out sky. But no harm done, it got it anyway
Posted 22/06/2010 - 06:56
Link
At the risk of causing a stir... Actually, in the hope of causing a stir... I don't think any of them should have got in!
As you know Tim I have plenty of respect for your photographic ability, and many of your PPG entries are wonderful and fully deserving of their place there. I also know that you are looking for frank assessments of your images which, like me, you find more helpful than unexacting praise.
I'm not sure that a PPG thread, where someone announces their latest acceptances is the place to get critical. However, I've been quite surprised to see some of the images that have got in of late in these threads (alongside others that have been IMO fully deserving). And I don't see why PPG accepted images should be above criticism, particularly when the benchmark isn't necessarily all that high. And, as I'm wont to point out, debate on images is useful (perhaps especially so when someone has a critical opinion of ones that have been deemed worthy of PPG inclusion).
I've read in various PUF threads that the PPG benchmark has lowered of late. I don't know if this is the case or not as I have only really been paying close attention to it since I started submitting earlier this year. Though from memory my impression was that when I did view PPG entries that people announced here a year or so ago the quality was very high. I was under the impression then that only the very best of my own efforts would get in (if any). I no longer hold this view - in retrospect even I am a little surprised by some of my own that have been accepted since I started submitting. If the PPG standard was as high as some have indicated it used to be then one could have real confidence about the exceptional quality of those images you have had accepted, but as things stand I'm not as pleased by my inclusions as I might be. (Another issue is what PPG rejects, which I sometimes find equally curious - but that is another thread).
Anyway, to get back to these photos (apologies for the lengthy preamble above but I thought it was necessary in the context of a PPG thread that are more usually reserved for congratulations).
Rapeseed tracks is pleasant enough image but doesn't have the wow factor that I think PPG ought to demand
Gobi trails I quite like, and at this size (the perversely small PPG vertical size - one of their odd requirements as it results in images not much larger than some thumbnails!) it no longer betrays the image quality evidence that it has been taken through a plane window (an earlier observation of mine). I'm still uncertain about whether it should cut the PPG mustard.
Sunset walk for me is the weakest of the set. I'm sorry but I really cannot see why this image has been included. For starters shots like these (receding pier, evening sky), while perhaps not a cliche, are not uncommon. This isn't enough to rule it out. However, I don't find the elements included in the picture at all compelling either. It's not killer sharp. The sea's insipid. The sky's pleasant enough though hardly dramatic. I don't find the boats particuarly interesting.
Blown out is the strongest shot IM(H)O. It's a great composition. But it's... erm, blown out! I realise this may be a subjective thing.
Glowing lines is a nice idea and well executed apart from the fact that IMO it lacks the killer sharpness that's required in these kind of shots.
Red polly - even allowing for differences over the merits of bird shots, I don't think this is such a fine example. Technically competent and good colours, yes, but again for me it lacks any wow factor.
Forgive me for starting this here, Tim, but I write this knowing that you are big enough to take it. And I do feel that for the good health of the forum perhaps it's time someone responded to a PPG thread in a more critical way.
As you know Tim I have plenty of respect for your photographic ability, and many of your PPG entries are wonderful and fully deserving of their place there. I also know that you are looking for frank assessments of your images which, like me, you find more helpful than unexacting praise.
I'm not sure that a PPG thread, where someone announces their latest acceptances is the place to get critical. However, I've been quite surprised to see some of the images that have got in of late in these threads (alongside others that have been IMO fully deserving). And I don't see why PPG accepted images should be above criticism, particularly when the benchmark isn't necessarily all that high. And, as I'm wont to point out, debate on images is useful (perhaps especially so when someone has a critical opinion of ones that have been deemed worthy of PPG inclusion).
I've read in various PUF threads that the PPG benchmark has lowered of late. I don't know if this is the case or not as I have only really been paying close attention to it since I started submitting earlier this year. Though from memory my impression was that when I did view PPG entries that people announced here a year or so ago the quality was very high. I was under the impression then that only the very best of my own efforts would get in (if any). I no longer hold this view - in retrospect even I am a little surprised by some of my own that have been accepted since I started submitting. If the PPG standard was as high as some have indicated it used to be then one could have real confidence about the exceptional quality of those images you have had accepted, but as things stand I'm not as pleased by my inclusions as I might be. (Another issue is what PPG rejects, which I sometimes find equally curious - but that is another thread).
Anyway, to get back to these photos (apologies for the lengthy preamble above but I thought it was necessary in the context of a PPG thread that are more usually reserved for congratulations).
Rapeseed tracks is pleasant enough image but doesn't have the wow factor that I think PPG ought to demand
Gobi trails I quite like, and at this size (the perversely small PPG vertical size - one of their odd requirements as it results in images not much larger than some thumbnails!) it no longer betrays the image quality evidence that it has been taken through a plane window (an earlier observation of mine). I'm still uncertain about whether it should cut the PPG mustard.
Sunset walk for me is the weakest of the set. I'm sorry but I really cannot see why this image has been included. For starters shots like these (receding pier, evening sky), while perhaps not a cliche, are not uncommon. This isn't enough to rule it out. However, I don't find the elements included in the picture at all compelling either. It's not killer sharp. The sea's insipid. The sky's pleasant enough though hardly dramatic. I don't find the boats particuarly interesting.
Blown out is the strongest shot IM(H)O. It's a great composition. But it's... erm, blown out! I realise this may be a subjective thing.
Glowing lines is a nice idea and well executed apart from the fact that IMO it lacks the killer sharpness that's required in these kind of shots.
Red polly - even allowing for differences over the merits of bird shots, I don't think this is such a fine example. Technically competent and good colours, yes, but again for me it lacks any wow factor.
Forgive me for starting this here, Tim, but I write this knowing that you are big enough to take it. And I do feel that for the good health of the forum perhaps it's time someone responded to a PPG thread in a more critical way.
Posted 22/06/2010 - 07:14
Link
I'm with Mhuni on this. I am sure a couple of years back I was intimidated by the quality of the images that were in PPG. I can reasonably hope that I have moved on in two years but I am surprised by some images that have been accepted and equally by some that have been rejected so I'm pretty sure it's not me.
It seems to have lowered or possibly changed standards and become a bit of a lottery but that was the impression I had before I gave up visiting PPG whose user interface is so awful I just can't face using it.
Mike
It seems to have lowered or possibly changed standards and become a bit of a lottery but that was the impression I had before I gave up visiting PPG whose user interface is so awful I just can't face using it.
Mike
---------------------------------------------------
You can see some of my shots at my Flickr account.
You can see some of my shots at my Flickr account.
Posted 22/06/2010 - 07:28
Link
I have to say I agree with Dr Nhuni. I go to the PPG to see images to aspire to. I expect to see stunning photos, of the sort you find on 1x.com.
Of late some of the entries to the gallery ,although good or "nice" photos, are lacking the impact I expect for what is supposed to be a world showcase for Pentax equipment and it's users.
I like Gobi trails as it is a well executed photo of a very unusual view, I like Blown out. It is a striking composition. Yes it is blown out but photographs don't have to be technically perfect to be stunning. sometimes you can't get everything perfectly exposed, in fact quite often you don't want to! Look how many grainy old black and white photos are iconic images.
Photography , like art , is a very subjective subject, but many of the recent entries to the Gallery (IMO)are no better and in some cases worse than many of my own images, but I still wouldn't consider my photos worthy of the PPG.
Of late some of the entries to the gallery ,although good or "nice" photos, are lacking the impact I expect for what is supposed to be a world showcase for Pentax equipment and it's users.
I like Gobi trails as it is a well executed photo of a very unusual view, I like Blown out. It is a striking composition. Yes it is blown out but photographs don't have to be technically perfect to be stunning. sometimes you can't get everything perfectly exposed, in fact quite often you don't want to! Look how many grainy old black and white photos are iconic images.
Photography , like art , is a very subjective subject, but many of the recent entries to the Gallery (IMO)are no better and in some cases worse than many of my own images, but I still wouldn't consider my photos worthy of the PPG.
.........all the gear, no idea!
Me super, MX, LX, K5,DA 18-55WR, DA 17-70, DA 55-300, DA40 Ltd, FA50 1.4, Samsung D-Xenon 12-24,Samsung 100mm macro M50 1.7(x3), M28 3.5, M35 2.8, M100macro f4, M135 3.5(+others)
Me super, MX, LX, K5,DA 18-55WR, DA 17-70, DA 55-300, DA40 Ltd, FA50 1.4, Samsung D-Xenon 12-24,Samsung 100mm macro M50 1.7(x3), M28 3.5, M35 2.8, M100macro f4, M135 3.5(+others)
Posted 22/06/2010 - 09:47
Link
I think Dr Mhuni is right. I also think he has expressed himself very well, ie very polite and respectful despite being critical. These are decent shots though Tim, and there is also no doubt you can reach the very high standard which we think PPG ought to be aspiring.
Posted 22/06/2010 - 12:02
Link
Doc, and everyone else, you are MORE than welcome to offer critique on these photos, or indeed anything I post here. I generally agree with you, I was surprised that some of these were accepted, they each have several glaring faults.
Rapeseed tracks was never sharp enough to satisfy me, most especially the lower left section, but it was one of the better results from that day so it got submitted. I was pleasantly surprised it got in.
I will respectfully disagree about Gobi trails which I'm rather fond of, and if I'm honest I was 100% sure it would get accepted As far as I'm concerned shots like this with a stunning subject are almost like cheating , it's easy to take what I personally consider to be a great shot (listen to me, what a bighead ). Almost anyone could have taken that shot if their plane was in the right place! Plus I've gotta say that I think griping about the IQ in this particular shot is kinda missing the point when there is no way to improve said IQ (without being a pilot like AlienGrove and thus having access to better windows). The Online Photographer had a funny critique of the Mars Rover photos recently where they made the same point. If it's a basically unique opportunity, the photo is virtually immune to any criticism since no one can go back to prove you (me) wrong by taking a better photo.
Sunset walk I'm in two minds about. My opinion is that the composition is quite unusual and hopefully a little bit original. I was consciously trying to avoid the typical 'pier into the horizon' shot where the pier is in the centre of the frame. And I felt the boats were nicely balanced. However I do agree it could have been sharper, richer and contrastier (more like one of Prieni's images, in fact). I didn't have a tripod though, even if I was able to emulate Ralf, which is doubtful
Blown out is another funny one. The original actually isn't blown out at all (hopefully you know me better than that ), but the square of sky in the centre is just a dull grey. I was in a whimsical mood while PPing that one and thought blowing it out in that way would give the illusion that the square 'tunnel' was much taller than it actually was. Still undecided there...
Glowing lines is another one that feels a bit like cheating. It's a simple handheld shot of a backlit blind. I saw the blind, and within 5 minutes had taken the photo (and half a dozen others). It all seemed like too little work for a PPG worthy image I do like the effect though. I don't agree about the sharpness in this case. There doesn't seem to much there I could get sharper?
Red Polly is probably my least favourite. Don't get me wrong, I do like it as it was one of my first forays with my old (now sold, boohoo) SMC Tak 135/2.5. Just wish I didn't have that lump of wood in the foreground, and wish the parrot was a bit less bedraggled. However i do take your point that this is a routine, if sharp and colourful, shot of a bird with not much else to recommend it. What can I say, lots of people seem to like birds (I do sometimes wonder why ).
As you know it's not me who controls what gets accepted - I just submit what I think might have a chance. So since some unknown proportion of viewers gave these a yes vote I'm pleased they were accepted even if the voters responsible aren't necessarily the most demanding of judges. I haven't been submitting to the PPG long enough to know if standards are dropping, but I think on the whole they probably are slightly. Part of the problem is that originally the judging wasn't open to the public so you had, presumably, a more 'educated' panel of judges.
There was an intereting thread on PentaxForums last week about what percentage of yes votes people awarded in the PPG. Personally I think I'm pretty tough - I estimate that I vote yes about 10% of the time, but some people in that thread say they are voting yes 80% of the time! Easily pleased, I suppose
Thanks for bringing this up Doc, after posting this set it did cross my mind that some of these are less 'stunning' than they should be. I was wondering if anyone would have the gumption say something about it
Rapeseed tracks was never sharp enough to satisfy me, most especially the lower left section, but it was one of the better results from that day so it got submitted. I was pleasantly surprised it got in.
I will respectfully disagree about Gobi trails which I'm rather fond of, and if I'm honest I was 100% sure it would get accepted As far as I'm concerned shots like this with a stunning subject are almost like cheating , it's easy to take what I personally consider to be a great shot (listen to me, what a bighead ). Almost anyone could have taken that shot if their plane was in the right place! Plus I've gotta say that I think griping about the IQ in this particular shot is kinda missing the point when there is no way to improve said IQ (without being a pilot like AlienGrove and thus having access to better windows). The Online Photographer had a funny critique of the Mars Rover photos recently where they made the same point. If it's a basically unique opportunity, the photo is virtually immune to any criticism since no one can go back to prove you (me) wrong by taking a better photo.
Sunset walk I'm in two minds about. My opinion is that the composition is quite unusual and hopefully a little bit original. I was consciously trying to avoid the typical 'pier into the horizon' shot where the pier is in the centre of the frame. And I felt the boats were nicely balanced. However I do agree it could have been sharper, richer and contrastier (more like one of Prieni's images, in fact). I didn't have a tripod though, even if I was able to emulate Ralf, which is doubtful
Blown out is another funny one. The original actually isn't blown out at all (hopefully you know me better than that ), but the square of sky in the centre is just a dull grey. I was in a whimsical mood while PPing that one and thought blowing it out in that way would give the illusion that the square 'tunnel' was much taller than it actually was. Still undecided there...
Glowing lines is another one that feels a bit like cheating. It's a simple handheld shot of a backlit blind. I saw the blind, and within 5 minutes had taken the photo (and half a dozen others). It all seemed like too little work for a PPG worthy image I do like the effect though. I don't agree about the sharpness in this case. There doesn't seem to much there I could get sharper?
Red Polly is probably my least favourite. Don't get me wrong, I do like it as it was one of my first forays with my old (now sold, boohoo) SMC Tak 135/2.5. Just wish I didn't have that lump of wood in the foreground, and wish the parrot was a bit less bedraggled. However i do take your point that this is a routine, if sharp and colourful, shot of a bird with not much else to recommend it. What can I say, lots of people seem to like birds (I do sometimes wonder why ).
As you know it's not me who controls what gets accepted - I just submit what I think might have a chance. So since some unknown proportion of viewers gave these a yes vote I'm pleased they were accepted even if the voters responsible aren't necessarily the most demanding of judges. I haven't been submitting to the PPG long enough to know if standards are dropping, but I think on the whole they probably are slightly. Part of the problem is that originally the judging wasn't open to the public so you had, presumably, a more 'educated' panel of judges.
There was an intereting thread on PentaxForums last week about what percentage of yes votes people awarded in the PPG. Personally I think I'm pretty tough - I estimate that I vote yes about 10% of the time, but some people in that thread say they are voting yes 80% of the time! Easily pleased, I suppose
Thanks for bringing this up Doc, after posting this set it did cross my mind that some of these are less 'stunning' than they should be. I was wondering if anyone would have the gumption say something about it
Tim
AF - Pentax K5, Sigma 10-20/4-5.6, Tamron 17-50/2.8, Sigma 30/1.4, Sigma 70-200/2.8, Tamron 70-300/4-5.6
MF - Vivitar CF 28/2.8, Tamron AD2 90/2.5, MTO 1000/11
Stuff - Metz 58 AF1, Cactus v4, Nikon SB24, Raynox 150, Sigma 1.4x TC, Sigma 2x TC, Kenko 2x macro TC, Redsnapper 283 tripod, iMac 27, Macbook Pro 17, iPad, iPhone 3G
Flickr Fluidr PPG Street Portfolio site
Feel free to edit any of my posted photos! If I post a photo for critique, I want brutal honesty. If you don't like it, please say so and tell me why!
AF - Pentax K5, Sigma 10-20/4-5.6, Tamron 17-50/2.8, Sigma 30/1.4, Sigma 70-200/2.8, Tamron 70-300/4-5.6
MF - Vivitar CF 28/2.8, Tamron AD2 90/2.5, MTO 1000/11
Stuff - Metz 58 AF1, Cactus v4, Nikon SB24, Raynox 150, Sigma 1.4x TC, Sigma 2x TC, Kenko 2x macro TC, Redsnapper 283 tripod, iMac 27, Macbook Pro 17, iPad, iPhone 3G
Flickr Fluidr PPG Street Portfolio site
Feel free to edit any of my posted photos! If I post a photo for critique, I want brutal honesty. If you don't like it, please say so and tell me why!
Posted 22/06/2010 - 14:25
Link
Nice response, Tim. This is much more interesting than patting backs!
I take your point about the Gobi trails (and to be honest I'm in two minds about that one - at this size in any case), but just because a photo is the best available under the circumstances doesn't necessarily mean it's a worthy image. Though I agree in this case the geography is striking. Where were you on the plane - I always try to get seats towards the back, though I've yet to take an even half decent shot from a plane. You must have been lucky with your window as well as the geography (and light)!
I did spot your off centre composition in Sunset walk, but didn't feel this was enough to set it apart.
In Glowing lines I thought the grain on the blinds seemed a bit soft, but perhaps it's just my eyes as Ralf (the master of this kind of thing) approves. Though I would have thought a tripod for this kind of shot was essential.
Re. PPG entry - is it all based on voting now? I thought the field was winnowed through voting and the final selection arrived at by the Pentax panel.
I take your point about the Gobi trails (and to be honest I'm in two minds about that one - at this size in any case), but just because a photo is the best available under the circumstances doesn't necessarily mean it's a worthy image. Though I agree in this case the geography is striking. Where were you on the plane - I always try to get seats towards the back, though I've yet to take an even half decent shot from a plane. You must have been lucky with your window as well as the geography (and light)!
I did spot your off centre composition in Sunset walk, but didn't feel this was enough to set it apart.
In Glowing lines I thought the grain on the blinds seemed a bit soft, but perhaps it's just my eyes as Ralf (the master of this kind of thing) approves. Though I would have thought a tripod for this kind of shot was essential.
Re. PPG entry - is it all based on voting now? I thought the field was winnowed through voting and the final selection arrived at by the Pentax panel.
Posted 22/06/2010 - 15:49
Link
What gets in and what doesn't has long been a mystery to me. In another thread Tim said that PPG entries should make you take a second look. Some of these do, some don't, for me at least. My last two admissions were both "nice" photographs once more. Pleasing eye candy but essentially unmemorable shots (I'm referring to mine here).
Cheers, Kris.
Cheers, Kris.
Kris Lockyear
It is an illusion that photos are made with the camera they are made with the eye, heart and head. Henri Cartier-Bresson
Lots of film bodies, a couple of digital ones, too many lenses (mainly older glass) and a Horseman LE 5x4.
It is an illusion that photos are made with the camera they are made with the eye, heart and head. Henri Cartier-Bresson
Lots of film bodies, a couple of digital ones, too many lenses (mainly older glass) and a Horseman LE 5x4.
Posted 22/06/2010 - 17:54
Link
Of the images starting this thread, "Blown Out" is by some margin my favourite. It's a strong composition with lots to interest the eye - it makes me wander around the frame to look at the various details, and it's a memorable picture.
I find PPG really hard to predict. They've accepted some of what I thought were my weaker entries, and rejected ones that I really liked. It seems to me to sometimes veer towards the safe and conventional. And I am now tempted to reject all shots of butterflies... and slow shutter speed waterfalls... and seacapes with three rocks or a jetty in the foreground... or black and white shots with one element left in colour.
... but then given that everything has been photographed before, you could end up rejecting the whole lot simply because it's not original, so I think I'm being a bit mean about the whole thing. I vote yes on the photographs that make me react, and that don't have obvious technical faults (eg blurry) or clear over-production (eg too sharp!).
I find PPG really hard to predict. They've accepted some of what I thought were my weaker entries, and rejected ones that I really liked. It seems to me to sometimes veer towards the safe and conventional. And I am now tempted to reject all shots of butterflies... and slow shutter speed waterfalls... and seacapes with three rocks or a jetty in the foreground... or black and white shots with one element left in colour.
... but then given that everything has been photographed before, you could end up rejecting the whole lot simply because it's not original, so I think I'm being a bit mean about the whole thing. I vote yes on the photographs that make me react, and that don't have obvious technical faults (eg blurry) or clear over-production (eg too sharp!).
Posted 22/06/2010 - 17:58
Link
I'm not sure if there is a Pentax panel anymore. It doesn't seem likely to me, for one thing the Premier collection doesn't seem to have had any new additions since I first started submitting 9 months ago. Also on that PF thread someone said there are now about 2100 'artists' in the PPG. I don't know how he figured that out, perhaps he sat there and counted all the names
Regarding Gobi trails: I can see what you're getting at when you say "just because a photo is the best available under the circumstances doesn't necessarily mean it's a worthy image" however I still don't agree While I normally greatly prefer technically sound images, I can think of many cases where the nature of the subject matter relegates technical perfection to a secondary status. The obvious candidates are war photography and street photography, but there are others. The point is that, yes, Gobi Trails could be sharper, less hazy, less noisy and with a greater DR. However to accomplish that with a Pentax camera you'd have to be in a balloon at 40,000 feet, wearing breathing apparatus! So this is as good as it gets, from commercial passenger transportation anyway. By the way I didn't take the photo from my seat, while the weather was clear I camped out near the window in the rear door of a 777, basically it's where you'd queue up for the rear toilets
Kris, the official things to consider are:
* Can you see this image in a traditional photo gallery or printed publication?
* Does this image elicit an emotional response?
* Is this image original?
* Does this image offer a personal perspective of the subject and display the unique vision of the photographer?
* Would this photo stop you if it were hanging in a gallery?
I'm not sure if many photos would satisfy all of those though!
You may also be interest in Flat4's incredible PPG gallery as well. A lot of the sort of stuff you'd like to see accepted I think.
Regarding Gobi trails: I can see what you're getting at when you say "just because a photo is the best available under the circumstances doesn't necessarily mean it's a worthy image" however I still don't agree While I normally greatly prefer technically sound images, I can think of many cases where the nature of the subject matter relegates technical perfection to a secondary status. The obvious candidates are war photography and street photography, but there are others. The point is that, yes, Gobi Trails could be sharper, less hazy, less noisy and with a greater DR. However to accomplish that with a Pentax camera you'd have to be in a balloon at 40,000 feet, wearing breathing apparatus! So this is as good as it gets, from commercial passenger transportation anyway. By the way I didn't take the photo from my seat, while the weather was clear I camped out near the window in the rear door of a 777, basically it's where you'd queue up for the rear toilets
Kris, the official things to consider are:
* Can you see this image in a traditional photo gallery or printed publication?
* Does this image elicit an emotional response?
* Is this image original?
* Does this image offer a personal perspective of the subject and display the unique vision of the photographer?
* Would this photo stop you if it were hanging in a gallery?
I'm not sure if many photos would satisfy all of those though!
You may also be interest in Flat4's incredible PPG gallery as well. A lot of the sort of stuff you'd like to see accepted I think.
Tim
AF - Pentax K5, Sigma 10-20/4-5.6, Tamron 17-50/2.8, Sigma 30/1.4, Sigma 70-200/2.8, Tamron 70-300/4-5.6
MF - Vivitar CF 28/2.8, Tamron AD2 90/2.5, MTO 1000/11
Stuff - Metz 58 AF1, Cactus v4, Nikon SB24, Raynox 150, Sigma 1.4x TC, Sigma 2x TC, Kenko 2x macro TC, Redsnapper 283 tripod, iMac 27, Macbook Pro 17, iPad, iPhone 3G
Flickr Fluidr PPG Street Portfolio site
Feel free to edit any of my posted photos! If I post a photo for critique, I want brutal honesty. If you don't like it, please say so and tell me why!
AF - Pentax K5, Sigma 10-20/4-5.6, Tamron 17-50/2.8, Sigma 30/1.4, Sigma 70-200/2.8, Tamron 70-300/4-5.6
MF - Vivitar CF 28/2.8, Tamron AD2 90/2.5, MTO 1000/11
Stuff - Metz 58 AF1, Cactus v4, Nikon SB24, Raynox 150, Sigma 1.4x TC, Sigma 2x TC, Kenko 2x macro TC, Redsnapper 283 tripod, iMac 27, Macbook Pro 17, iPad, iPhone 3G
Flickr Fluidr PPG Street Portfolio site
Feel free to edit any of my posted photos! If I post a photo for critique, I want brutal honesty. If you don't like it, please say so and tell me why!
Posted 22/06/2010 - 23:37
Link
Congrats Tim - it's good to get shots into PPG in any event.
Posted 24/06/2010 - 09:51
Link
Oooh, got a couple more in:
Another Lantern Bug
Redhead
On an unrelated note I see Flickr are finally upgrading their interface! They now have a 640 wide version, woohoo. Still no 800 wide one though
Another Lantern Bug
Redhead
On an unrelated note I see Flickr are finally upgrading their interface! They now have a 640 wide version, woohoo. Still no 800 wide one though
Tim
AF - Pentax K5, Sigma 10-20/4-5.6, Tamron 17-50/2.8, Sigma 30/1.4, Sigma 70-200/2.8, Tamron 70-300/4-5.6
MF - Vivitar CF 28/2.8, Tamron AD2 90/2.5, MTO 1000/11
Stuff - Metz 58 AF1, Cactus v4, Nikon SB24, Raynox 150, Sigma 1.4x TC, Sigma 2x TC, Kenko 2x macro TC, Redsnapper 283 tripod, iMac 27, Macbook Pro 17, iPad, iPhone 3G
Flickr Fluidr PPG Street Portfolio site
Feel free to edit any of my posted photos! If I post a photo for critique, I want brutal honesty. If you don't like it, please say so and tell me why!
AF - Pentax K5, Sigma 10-20/4-5.6, Tamron 17-50/2.8, Sigma 30/1.4, Sigma 70-200/2.8, Tamron 70-300/4-5.6
MF - Vivitar CF 28/2.8, Tamron AD2 90/2.5, MTO 1000/11
Stuff - Metz 58 AF1, Cactus v4, Nikon SB24, Raynox 150, Sigma 1.4x TC, Sigma 2x TC, Kenko 2x macro TC, Redsnapper 283 tripod, iMac 27, Macbook Pro 17, iPad, iPhone 3G
Flickr Fluidr PPG Street Portfolio site
Feel free to edit any of my posted photos! If I post a photo for critique, I want brutal honesty. If you don't like it, please say so and tell me why!
Add Comment
To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.
4798 posts
17 years
Saffron Walden,
Essex
Rapeseed tracks
Gobi trails
Sunset walk
Blown out
Glowing lines
Red polly
Thanks for looking! And voting, if you did
AF - Pentax K5, Sigma 10-20/4-5.6, Tamron 17-50/2.8, Sigma 30/1.4, Sigma 70-200/2.8, Tamron 70-300/4-5.6
MF - Vivitar CF 28/2.8, Tamron AD2 90/2.5, MTO 1000/11
Stuff - Metz 58 AF1, Cactus v4, Nikon SB24, Raynox 150, Sigma 1.4x TC, Sigma 2x TC, Kenko 2x macro TC, Redsnapper 283 tripod, iMac 27, Macbook Pro 17, iPad, iPhone 3G
Flickr Fluidr PPG Street Portfolio site
Feel free to edit any of my posted photos! If I post a photo for critique, I want brutal honesty. If you don't like it, please say so and tell me why!