cheeba wrote:With all the beautiful rays coming down from the sun, I think the tree's almost too obstructive. But then again, that's an awesomely creepy tree, and without it the landscape in the background is a bit odd and boring (what are those in the background? trees without leaves? looks like a bunch of poles).
cheeba wrote:Sunset beach pic
ChrisGrenard wrote:No photoshop involved in this one, just me attempting (at the time) to emulate the general look of Shadow of the Colossus/Ico
Kelric wrote:What I really wanted from the shipwreck was a shot of the entire thing, but we weren't the only group of people there at the time and there were a couple of people buzzing around the landward end of the thing.
Not a bad attempt at all... if you did feel like photoshopping it, some sort of posterisation could probably get you the rest of the way to the Ico feel. And not that I'm anything but an enthusiastic amateur, but before my current D80 my go-to camera was a 1970-era, no-settings Minolta rangefinder. I like like the low-fi look. What did you use to shoot Tokyo? Something with a fish-eye obviously?
Jag wrote:These are amazing. Wouldn't mind seeing what kind of cameras you guys are using.
zinckiwi wrote:Kelric wrote:What I really wanted from the shipwreck was a shot of the entire thing, but we weren't the only group of people there at the time and there were a couple of people buzzing around the landward end of the thing.
I'm actually on a quest not to frame everything the exact way I want. Everything winds up too samey if you have the subject nicely set in the frame with minimal whitespace around it. This shot keeps us guessing about the rest of the ship, how far it extends beyond the frame, how far along it those waves reach, etc.
JC Anejo wrote:A few taken on a lte season fighing trip of Provincetown MA.
zinckiwi wrote:wire, you get the award for the first time in memory that a desaturated-except-for-one-object shot hasn't seemed heavy-handed and contrived -- very nice!
RunningMn9 wrote:Jag wrote:These are amazing. Wouldn't mind seeing what kind of cameras you guys are using.
I'm intrigued by the idea of the SLR cameras, and learning all about photography, but don't have the time or money to get involved. I have the previous version of this guy. Which is most likely garbage compared to what the others here are working with.
Enough wrote:zinckiwi wrote:wire, you get the award for the first time in memory that a desaturated-except-for-one-object shot hasn't seemed heavy-handed and contrived -- very nice!
I was going to say that wagon might be might favorite photo yet posted to this thread. It has great design and agreed that it's not over done as so many of these can be. I've got some friends on flickr who are really into this genre and frankly this image is right there with the best of theirs that I've seen. Very nice work with the camera and a great way to learn it Wire. I also think the pink flower (2nd to last) is wonderful.
wonderpug wrote:Great idea! I just got a nice external flash for my camera that I'm eager to fiddle around with. It's just incredible how much better a simple indoor portrait looks with a real flash.
Enough wrote:cheeba, we can still tell that it's a great photograph even with the scan. Please share some of your other film work if you get the chance, clearly you have a solid eye for composition. Out of curiosity, what was the film used? Since you said the scan is awful I am wary to guess, but based on the saturation I might guess Velvia?
uwatec wrote:frosty goodness
zinckiwi wrote:Cool and creepy... my shoulders itch like mad from a sunburn a few days ago, and that photo ain't helping! Were they munching on that leaf?
Geezer, I love your city shots and if they are jarring then we must need to be poked out of our pretty pictures haze.
Great eye for pattern and I agree with the black and white choice.
Users browsing this forum: zinckiwi and 4 guests