[SI] Sports and Games is posted
Bowser
http://www.pbase.com/shootin/sports__games
My favorite is the hockey shot since I'm a hockey fan, and I've got to
admire the guy who shot it.
Enjoy...
Nervous Nick
The diving silhouette and the chess board photo had the most potential
to me, but could have been much better composed. Storage space is
cheap. Inspiration is rare.
--
YOP...
George Kerby
On 12/7/09 6:22 PM, in article 6s6rh51gt1qdgnsp4...@4ax.com,
"Bowser" <Ca...@Nikon.Panny> wrote:
Dittos! Dudley has my vote.
Tim Conway
"Bowser" <Ca...@Nikon.Panny> wrote in message
news:6s6rh51gt1qdgnsp4...@4ax.com...
I agree. Well done, Dudley.
Annika1980
What plugin is it that gives that effect in the "Checkers" shot?
I see it used by lots of local photographers these days and it almost
makes me puke.
The milder post-processing in your "Old Farts" shot is less
objectionable.
I liked both of Bowser's football pics as well as his cross-country
pic (which i might have cropped a bit tighter to remove the
spectators).
Dudley's hockey shot gets the Special Commendation.
But the real stunner to me is Calvin's cyclist shot. It's hard to
tell whether the little girl is doing a trick, jumping off, or what.
But who cares? It's a little girl on a bike!
Troy Piggins
I did enjoy this set. Some great photos in there. My brief
thoughts:
Alan Browne 2 (gokart): Maybe trying to depict speed by allowing
the motion blur, but I'd much rather see the kart sharp and the
BG blurred.
Calvin S (cycling): This shot is fantastic, my fav of the
mandate. Sport, action, focus, contrast - it's got it all. Love
it.
Calvin S (diving): Another cracker. Like the silhouette against
plain sky.
Calvin S (swimmer): Bit noisy and dark for me.
Alan B (chess): Really like this one. Sharp as. Great
composition. Really pops.
Tim C (jigsaw puzzle): Hmm, nothing wrong with the shot, but it
doesn't grab me.
Tim C (what the?): I have no idea. Looks like someone had fun
:)
Tim C (golf): I'd like this to be taken much closer.
Russell D (snowboarder): Great action, really like it.
Russell D (card games): Nice family snapshot, but doesn't grab
me.
Troy P (cricket): I suck at sports photography. While kind of
capturing the action, I just couldn't make this pop. And what's
with the weird bokeh this 100-400 lens gives?
Tony C (parachuter): Great action. Like it a lot.
Tony C (checkers): Guess the PP treatment was to accentuate the
older guys skin and other textures? Didn't mind it too much.
Savageduck (tag): Some action, but guess it would mean more to me
if I knew the kids and there was some emotional appeal to the
shot.
Savageduck (stadium): First thing I thought of when I saw this
was to give it that fake tilt-shift lens treatment where you PP a
blur gradient in front and behind the subject to give it the feel
of a model stadium or something. Like this:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/salvadorortola/4161306702/in/pool-tilt-shift-fakes
Tony C (bowls): I dig it. Not lawn - gravel? Like the way you
can see the path of the bowls. Yeah, really like it.
Tony C (old farts): Yep. They're old farts. :) Nicely done.
Bowser (autumn run): Action all over the place. Plenty to look
at. Rich colours in the leaves, action of kids running, then as
you look closer you notice a couple falling over in the middle.
Well done. Another pick of the bunch.
Bowser (football catch): Good action, but would like faster
shutter to really freeze that motion.
Bowser (flying footballer): Yeah, frozen action like that! Love
it. Shame about the busy BG, but you can't do much about that
from this angle.
Dudley H (ice hockey): Well done! Great action and exposure. I
don't mind the tilted horizon, kind of adds to the action in a
way.
--
Troy Piggins
tony cooper
<annik...@aol.com> wrote:
>Hey Tony Cooper,
>What plugin is it that gives that effect in the "Checkers" shot?
>I see it used by lots of local photographers these days and it almost
>makes me puke.
Thanks for your comments, Brett. That was shot last year and
processed in CS4 in Lab Color. At the time, I didn't have any
plug-ins downloaded. I had trouble with lighting in taking the image
because it was shot under an overpass in the Parramore section of
town. I had to stand in very bright sunlight and shoot to a very
shaded area. I forgot my lens hood that day and was worried about
flare. There was some post-processing editing to remove some trash
from the concrete.
Since then I've downloaded my first plug-in: the Topaz Re-Mask trial.
I couldn't figure out how to make work effectively, and my trial has
now expired.
>The milder post-processing in your "Old Farts" shot is less
>objectionable.
I guess it's better to be noticed than to be ignored.
All my photos are sharpened using Luminosity Sharpening. I'd be glad
to share technique with you if you'd like.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Annika1980
>
> All my photos are sharpened using Luminosity Sharpening. I'd be glad
> to share technique with you if you'd like.
I'd like.
I've been using Photokit Sharpener for so long, I've forgotten most of
the the other methods of manual Sharpening like just using the
Lightness channel in LAB mode or your Luminosity method.
tony cooper
month. I like "people shots" and I like the mix of sports and games.
Alan Browne's go-cart image doesn't do it for me. It looks like a
missed shot. His chess photo is one of the best of the bunch, though.
I kinda wonder about the cropping, but that in-focus/out-of-focus
style really works with this where it didn't work with the go-carts.
Calvin's girl and bicycle is a great shot. Great action capture. I'm
truly impressed with the divers. No so much with the swimmer because
of the excessive noise.
Tim Conway's puzzlers show that he's thinking outside of the normal
box for "sports and games". I like that. I do not understand the
SPO/three men. There has to be something I'm missing that will be
explained by someone else. The golf shot is missing a central point
of interest.
I really like Russell's snowboarder. Like Tim, he's gone outside of
the box with the lodge shot.
Troy has the best capture of the group. It barely noses out Calvin's
bicycle girl, but the ball on the bat catch is perfect. I'd square
crop and lose the right side of the photo, though. I shot a cricket
game here and didn't get one image even close to this.
The Duck's game of tag is not really a great capture, but has a lot of
human interest. Nice shot, nice color, of the stadium.
Bowser's runners are right up there with my favorites, but I'd crop
the spectators. Either have a group of spectators or no spectators.
Three is just something else in the frame. Oddly enough, I like the
idea of only four spectators in the football catch image.
While I admire Dudley's efforts, the hockey photo doesn't make it.
Nothing's sharp, nothing's the focal point. Rarely does the back of
someone make a good shot...especially in a sports action shot.
Bowser, did you forget to upload Brett's shots? We all know that
Brett does some really great basketball shots. He pukes over my shot,
but I was looking forward to seeing another good one from him.
tony cooper
<usene...@piggo.com> wrote:
>Tony C (bowls): I dig it. Not lawn - gravel? Like the way you
>can see the path of the bowls. Yeah, really like it.
It's a permanent Lawn Bowling court in Mt Dora, Florida. The courts
(called "rinks") are concrete with what I think is some sort of fabric
layed on. The court is dusted with a sand-like substance before the
day's matches.
I went up there to photograph the players, but I picked this shot
because I liked the pattern of the ball marks. The ball is
elliptical, rather than round, and all bowls curve out and then in
towards the target (the white ball, called the "jack").
Talking to one of the members, I found that purists feel the game
should be played on natural grass but the Florida courts are used
year-round and grass wouldn't hold up. Also, the costs of keeping it
up would be too high.
tony cooper
I use the Unsharp Mask set at Amount 25, Radius 1, and Threshold 3 and
then apply the Fade Unsharp Mask under EDIT. I set the Fade Unsharp
Mask to somewhere between 50% and 100% opacity with the mode set to
Luminosity. I have an Action set to do this at 50%, and will
sometimes apply the Action twice.
In LAB, I'll pull the curve top and bottom in the A and B channel, but
leave the Lightness channel alone.
Savageduck
> * Bowser wrote :
>> Sports and Games is posted and available for viewing here:
>>
>> http://www.pbase.com/shootin/sports__games
>>
>> My favorite is the hockey shot since I'm a hockey fan, and I've got to
>> admire the guy who shot it.
>>
>> Enjoy...
Agreed. Dudley has done well.
>
> I did enjoy this set. Some great photos in there. My brief
> thoughts:
> ----
> Calvin S (cycling): This shot is fantastic, my fav of the
> mandate. Sport, action, focus, contrast - it's got it all. Love
> it.
A winner!
>
> Alan B (chess): Really like this one. Sharp as. Great
> composition. Really pops.
Nice Alan!
> Savageduck (tag): Some action, but guess it would mean more to me
> if I knew the kids and there was some emotional appeal to the
> shot.
Neighbor's kids. The opportunity for the shot was just there.
>
> Savageduck (stadium): First thing I thought of when I saw this
> was to give it that fake tilt-shift lens treatment where you PP a
> blur gradient in front and behind the subject to give it the feel
> of a model stadium or something. Like this:
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/salvadorortola/4161306702/in/pool-tilt-shift-fakes
That is the new Green Point Stadium in Cape Town, South Afric, just
nearing completion for the 2010 World Cup.
>
> ---------------
> Dudley H (ice hockey): Well done! Great action and exposure. I
> don't mind the tilted horizon, kind of adds to the action in a
> way.
Once more, good work Dudley.
--
Regards,
Savageduck
Tim Conway
"tony cooper" <tony_co...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:l8irh5l94d4i2ncl9...@4ax.com...
> Overall, in my opinion, some of the best photos of the year this
> month. I like "people shots" and I like the mix of sports and games.
>
>
> box for "sports and games". I like that. I do not understand the
> SPO/three men. There has to be something I'm missing that will be
> explained by someone else. The golf shot is missing a central point
> of interest.
>
part of the mandate.
Thanks for your comments.
Bowser
I didn't receive any shots from Brett.
MC
"Cycling" is by far the best. The rest range from mediocre to poor and
one or two are just plain awful.
MC
Dudley Hanks
"Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
news:2009120721061316807-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom...
Thanks, guys, appreciate the support...
When I took the pic (and the other one of the guy taking a shot), I wasn't
thinking of the SI; I was just seeing if I could get anything with my
defective lens.
I should have switched the two shots around, and posted the other one for
the contest... It sounds like it had a bit more going for it.
That shot of the bike sounds pretty cool... If somebody could post a brief
description of it, explaining what's in the shot and how it's laid out, I'd
really appreciate it...
Take Care,
Dudley
tony cooper
A girl leaping onto a racing bicycle and caught by the camera mid-air
a few inches above the seat.
Good thing it was a girl. A male with that trajectory of descent
would be in for a painful landing.
Reminds me of being young, standing up to pedal my bicycle, and what
happened if the chain slips.
George Kerby
On 12/8/09 10:18 AM, in article 5tush51gh9g8iicgs...@4ax.com,
"tony cooper" <tony_co...@earthlink.net> wrote:
OUCH! That was a memory that I didn't need to relive.
Bowser
<usene...@piggo.com> wrote:
>* Bowser wrote :
>> Sports and Games is posted and available for viewing here:
>>
>> http://www.pbase.com/shootin/sports__games
>>
>> My favorite is the hockey shot since I'm a hockey fan, and I've got to
>> admire the guy who shot it.
>>
>> Enjoy...
>
>I did enjoy this set. Some great photos in there. My brief
>thoughts:
>
Thanks for commenting!
>
>Bowser (autumn run): Action all over the place. Plenty to look
>at. Rich colours in the leaves, action of kids running, then as
>you look closer you notice a couple falling over in the middle.
>Well done. Another pick of the bunch.
I think I'd crop it closer, like others have recommended. The front
runner fell after slipping on some wet leaves. A cold wet day for that
race, but it makes the colors pop.
>
>Bowser (football catch): Good action, but would like faster
>shutter to really freeze that motion.
I was shooting in aperture priority mode when the runner moved,
quickly, from sun to shade. The shutter dropped (a lot) and here's the
result. But I like the catch. And the receiver's mom really liked the
pic so she sent it to a local paper who carried it big on the front of
the sports page.
>
>Bowser (flying footballer): Yeah, frozen action like that! Love
>it. Shame about the busy BG, but you can't do much about that
>from this angle.
Another very cold and wet day. Temps in the 30s, driving rain, and I
was freezing. The runner just completed a very impressive 51 yard run,
was clipped at the 10 yd line, and managed to stumble into the end
zone. Unfortunately, the good guys lost by a point due to a botched
extra point. This shot is cropped from full frame by about 40%.
Dudley Hanks
Thanks, Tony, that gives me a good idea of what's there. Sounds like a
great shot.
Take Care,
Dudley
Alan Browne
> I did enjoy this set. Some great photos in there. My brief
> thoughts:
>
> Alan Browne 2 (gokart): Maybe trying to depict speed by allowing
> the motion blur, but I'd much rather see the kart sharp and the
> BG blurred.
I liked making them blurred. More movement. I'll send another from
that set to Bowser to post. that will meet your needs. Maybe.
> Alan B (chess): Really like this one. Sharp as. Great
> composition. Really pops.
Thanks. There are a couple errors in there, I should have put a black
sheet on the table behind the white pieces. There's a bit of light
leaking into the clock face from the right causing an image on that
glass. Both could have been avoided.
Alan Browne
Oops: light leak is from the left.
Calvin Sambrook
news:sMuTm.56695$PH1.24568@edtnps82...
>
> Thanks, guys, appreciate the support...
>
> When I took the pic (and the other one of the guy taking a shot), I
> wasn't thinking of the SI; I was just seeing if I could get anything with
> my defective lens.
>
> I should have switched the two shots around, and posted the other one for
> the contest... It sounds like it had a bit more going for it.
>
> That shot of the bike sounds pretty cool... If somebody could post a
> brief description of it, explaining what's in the shot and how it's laid
> out, I'd really appreciate it...
>
> Take Care,
> Dudley
>
I've just posted my comments on this months photos then read this which made
me google your blog site. If I've understood correctly you're completely?
blind - right? I thought your ice hockey photo was good anyway but now I'm
humbled. I have two working eyes and I'd not have made such a good job of
that one.
Anyway, the cyclist is mine so I'll have a go at describing it.
The shot is vertical (portrait) format with a racing bicycle coming towards
and slightly to the left of you. On the left of the shot is a hedge. The
rider is a 10 year old girl in a swimming costume with a race number and is
getting onto the bike in a sort of flying mount, her hands are on the
handlebars but her feet are in the air behind her. She's looking down at
the bike or ground so you see the top of her helmet but don't really see her
face properly. The bike and the rider are in sharp, crisp focus with lots
of intricate detail in areas like the pedals and cables and clothing/shoes.
The background is in soft focus and is rather messy and distracting with a
plastic marshalling fence, lighting poles and housing in the distance.
For completeness I'll also describe my other two shots.
Diving is a silhouette of three outdoor diving platforms with the city of
Barcelona in the background. The diving platforms are on the left, facing
to the right and the right hand half of the photo is essentially empty sky
with the iconic Sagrada Familia in the bottom right. On each of the boards
are a number of divers in various non-diving positions, all silhouetted.
Only on the middle one, in the very centre of the image is a diver actually
doing anything serious, a nicely executed armstand. Many of the other
divers are partially cropped, losing parts of their heads or their legs. A
banner on the very left says "Barcelona" in quite bright blue.
Swimming is a grainy shot of a breast stroke swimmer at the highest point of
his stroke (I'm told it's too high) so that his head is well out of the
water. Water is draining from his head and face and the slow shutter speed
has made it blur. In the top left is a potion of coloured lane rope.
Hope that helps,
Calvin
tony cooper
<csam...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>I've just posted my comments on this months photos then read this which made
>me google your blog site. If I've understood correctly you're completely?
>blind - right? I thought your ice hockey photo was good anyway but now I'm
>humbled. I have two working eyes and I'd not have made such a good job of
>that one.
>
I feel like the bad guy for not liking Dudley's shot. I try to
critique the photograph, not the photographer. I'm quite impressed
with Dudley's perseverance in overcoming a major handicap for a
photographer, but that doesn't mean I'll give the photograph bonus
points for who is behind the camera.
MC
You are correct to say a photograph should, indeed, be judged on what
the photograph is and not by the person who took it. A crap photograph
does not suddely become good because the photographers disability put
them at a disadvantage when taking it. I personally thought the photo
was one of the poorest of a mediocre bunch on many fronts. Bad
composition, lack of focal point, badly focused, exposure and contrast
issues are a few points that make this photo poor and it is not fair to
patronise the photograher by saying otherwise.
MC
Dudley Hanks
"Calvin Sambrook" <csam...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:hfme6h$u6s$2...@news.eternal-september.org...
Yep, that helps a lot... It's enough for me to form a mental image...
They all sound like great pics, especially the bike shot.
Re: my vision. I see light and dark, in certain situations. No real
detail.
About the only time I use my vision for shots is portraits, as long as the
lighting is appropriate. Everything else is shot by sound.
Take Care,
Dudley
Dudley Hanks
Hey, Tony, no worries...
I take all critiques seriously, especially those that give me something to
work on.
Heck, I've even picked up a few pointers from my biggest critic, the
resident troll. And, I've sifted through his BS just to find what's useful.
Your comment that "nothing is sharp," is where I'll be directing a bit of
effort in the future. I want to find out whether my soft shots are due to
lens / sensor rendition of scenes, or whether it's something I'm doing...
ie. focus, camera shake, lighting.
I'm hoping to take a few still images in such a way that a crisp image
should result, and I'm hoping the feedback will enable me to get crisper
images -- keeping in mind I'm working with basic, entry level equipment.
Take Care, and thanks for your help, Tony,
Dudley
Calvin Sambrook
I'm with you on critiquing the photograph not the photographer and I always
write my review from a first look at the photos without reading anyone
else's comments. That doesn't stop me being extra impressed when someone
who's at a natural disadvantage wrt photography produces something which is
good.
Look again at the photo. Don't you think it looks cold? Don't you think
the off vertical adds power and tension? You may not like the shot but
which aspects do and don't work in your opinion?
Someone else commented that it lost something for being a shot of someone's
back. In retrospect I think that's true although I didn't spot it at the
time and I'm not sure how you'd go about taking a shot of an ice hockey
player from the front.
I have to acknowledge that if I'd been behind that lens I'd probably have
exposed it "properly" and as a result it would have had blacks and whites
and a greyscale in between and it would have been a poorer shot for it. To
be honest that's something I hope I've learned this month, now all I need to
do is learn to use it.
Calvin Sambrook
> the off vertical adds power and tension? You may not like the shot but
> which aspects do and don't work in your opinion?
> Someone else commented that it lost something for being a shot of
> someone's back. In retrospect I think that's true although I didn't spot
> it at the time and I'm not sure how you'd go about taking a shot of an ice
> hockey player from the front.
>
I know it's bad form to reply to my own post but I've just found your
critique - I don't know how I missed it, sorry.
So it was you who said that a shot of someone's back isn't good. I agree,
thanks for pointing it out.
I'm not sure about the lack of absolute sharpness though. I think it's
sharp enough and that the slight edge of softness adds to that cold look.
Once again, sorry for overlooking your original comments.
tony cooper
<csam...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>"tony cooper" <tony_co...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>news:gtfth59bnnjdg83f1...@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 8 Dec 2009 18:11:38 -0000, "Calvin Sambrook"
>> <csam...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>>
>>>I've just posted my comments on this months photos then read this which
>>>made
>>>me google your blog site. If I've understood correctly you're completely?
>>>blind - right? I thought your ice hockey photo was good anyway but now
>>>I'm
>>>humbled. I have two working eyes and I'd not have made such a good job of
>>>that one.
>>>
>> I feel like the bad guy for not liking Dudley's shot. I try to
>> critique the photograph, not the photographer. I'm quite impressed
>> with Dudley's perseverance in overcoming a major handicap for a
>> photographer, but that doesn't mean I'll give the photograph bonus
>> points for who is behind the camera.
>>
>
>I'm with you on critiquing the photograph not the photographer and I always
>write my review from a first look at the photos without reading anyone
>else's comments. That doesn't stop me being extra impressed when someone
>who's at a natural disadvantage wrt photography produces something which is
>good.
I am impressed with Dudley. I was not impressed with this particular
photo. What impresses me most about Dudley is his willingness to put
his ass on the line and post his photos even though his vision doesn't
allow him to really see what he's taking or what he's posting. I am
not impressed with the people who are critical of photos but don't
have the balls to put their own up for review.
>
>Look again at the photo. Don't you think it looks cold? Don't you think
>the off vertical adds power and tension? You may not like the shot but
>which aspects do and don't work in your opinion?
When I posted my comments I *did* say what I thought were the
problems. There is no central point of interest. Nothing draws the
eye. The photograph isn't at all sharp. I was the one who commented
that the back of person is seldom a good shot. (Exceptions, of
course, when there is something of interest in the back view.)
Yes, the image looks cold. The off-vertical is very acceptable. But,
neither imparts anything to this particular image.
>Someone else commented that it lost something for being a shot of someone's
>back. In retrospect I think that's true although I didn't spot it at the
>time and I'm not sure how you'd go about taking a shot of an ice hockey
>player from the front.
The same way you photograph any sport...wait until a player is facing
you. All players will eventually face every point of the rose.
>I have to acknowledge that if I'd been behind that lens I'd probably have
>exposed it "properly" and as a result it would have had blacks and whites
>and a greyscale in between and it would have been a poorer shot for it. To
>be honest that's something I hope I've learned this month, now all I need to
>do is learn to use it.
Bowser
I'm weak. I know Dudley can't do what many of us take for granted, and
that absolutely influences my opinions of his shots. But that's why I
don't offer critiques; I'm easily influenced.
Besides, I want to do nothing but encourage him to keep shooting for
selfish reasons; I love rubbing our troll's nose in it.
tony cooper
One of the reasons that I feel comfortable in critiquing Dudley's
shots is that I don't feel that he particularly *needs* encouragement.
He's a self-starter. With the kind of strength he has, he can take
critical comments in stride.
There are others here - far better photographers - who can't handle
criticism. They turn venomous when they review the works of those who
criticize them. Or, in the case of one particular poster, ignore the
work of those who criticize them. That's their weakness.
Dudley Hanks
"Bowser" <Ca...@Nikon.Panny> wrote in message
news:nhrth59ce3k3uukgo...@4ax.com...
So do I ... :)
Take Care,
Dudley
BobS
My favorite is your Sports-Checkers shot - great detail. You mentioned
you have the Topaz filters. Did you use the Detail filter on this shot?
Bob S.
tony cooper
No. I downloaded the trial Topaz filters long after this photo was
taken and processed. The trial is now expired.
I did like the Topaz detail filter plug-in for some things, but I was
out-of-state for most of the trial period so I really didn't get much
good out of it. If I could have gotten the hang of the Re-Mask filter
I would have purchased the set.
Bruce
>Sports and Games is posted and available for viewing here:
>
>http://www.pbase.com/shootin/sports__games
>
>My favorite is the hockey shot since I'm a hockey fan, and I've got to
>admire the guy who shot it.
>
>Enjoy...
The one I enjoyed most was the grossly incompetent, puerile snapshot
of the kart - the first image on the page, and one that the vast
majority of photographers would be utterly ashamed of, even those
shooting with their $80 P+S digicams.
But not Alan Browne. The idiot is probably quite proud of it. ;-)
Bruce
I agree. The quality of entries to the SI has gotten steadily worse
and worse over the years.
Some of the early entries were good, but the most of the competent
photographers left the SI (and this newsgroup) a long time ago.
Occasionally there is a shot or two worth looking at, but all too
often the SI plumbs the depths of mediocrity. This particular crop of
entries is probably the worst ever.
Bowser
wrote:
Well, thank God you're here. We can all learn from the photos you
post, can't we?
Do you even own a camera?
MC
With all due respect, one can enjoy or not enjoy a slice of cake
regardless of whether one is able to bake. One can enjoy or not enjoy
a piece of music regardless of whether one is able to play an
instrument or sing. It is silly to say that one can only like or
dislike something if they are able to produce something comparable
themselves.
If a photographer produces a photo for others to look at surely he/she
would do so regardless of whether the viewer has photographic ability
or not. Surely the said photo would not only be for the viewing
pleasure of fellow photographers...or would it?
MC
tony cooper
No one's questioning the ability of the non-photographer to critique
the photographs of others. What is being questioned is the substance
of a critique that states only "this is the worst ever".
Since this is a newsgroup that assumedly appeals only to
photographers, we would expect that anyone posting here is able to
critique with some degree of expertise and provide reasons why he/she
thinks the posted photographs are lacking.
I don't think all followers of this group are expected to enter the
SI, but I do think that people who are very critical of others without
providing some substance in their criticism should be willing to be
judged themselves.
Robert Coe
: Sports and Games is posted and available for viewing here:
:
: http://www.pbase.com/shootin/sports__games
:
: My favorite is the hockey shot since I'm a hockey fan, and I've got to
: admire the guy who shot it.
:
: Enjoy...
I think my favorite is Russell Durtschi's snowboarder about to take out the
picnic table (an optical illusion, one hopes), closely followed by Bowser's
own shot of the touchdown catch(?).
But what message is sent when one of the arguably best pictures is submitted
by a photographer who's nearly blind? I guess it's that sports photography is
NOT easy and that anybody but a serious pro may ultimately have to rely on
that lucky shot.
Tony Cooper, can't you get some of those old geezers interested in
photography? Surely that would be more intellectually satisfying (and maybe
even better exercise) than shuffleboard or bocce.
Bob
Robert Coe
wrote:
: Overall, in my opinion, some of the best photos of the year this
: month. I like "people shots" and I like the mix of sports and games.
:
: Alan Browne's go-cart image doesn't do it for me. It looks like a
: missed shot. His chess photo is one of the best of the bunch, though.
: I kinda wonder about the cropping, but that in-focus/out-of-focus
: style really works with this where it didn't work with the go-carts.
I think I might have put the focus point on the black pieces, though. Leaving
them blurry emphasizes the point that black is the underdog when good players
are evenly matched. But the board is shown from black's side, and most
pictures work better when the foreground is in focus. I guess the smart thing
is to try it both ways. (Which Alan may indeed have done. I usually find him
to be careful with composition, even when I don't agree with the results.)
: Calvin's girl and bicycle is a great shot. Great action capture. I'm
: truly impressed with the divers. No so much with the swimmer because
: of the excessive noise.
:
: Tim Conway's puzzlers show that he's thinking outside of the normal
: box for "sports and games". I like that. I do not understand the
: SPO/three men.
Me neither.
: There has to be something I'm missing that will be
: explained by someone else. The golf shot is missing a central point
: of interest.
:
: I really like Russell's snowboarder. Like Tim, he's gone outside of
: the box with the lodge shot.
:
: Troy has the best capture of the group. It barely noses out Calvin's
: bicycle girl, but the ball on the bat catch is perfect.
Agreed. Note the excellent management of the background.
: I'd square crop and lose the right side of the photo, though.
That's an interesting suggestion. My first reaction was that I wouldn't do
that, since that's where the ball will be in a few milliseconds. But if you
cover up everything to the right of the tree, it does seem to look better.
Maybe one of those cases where knee-jerk application of the usual rules of
composition isn't best.
: I shot a cricket game here and didn't get one image even close to this.
:
: The Duck's game of tag is not really a great capture, but has a lot of
: human interest.
It needed fill flash. (And I'm sure the Duck has already noticed that.)
: Nice shot, nice color, of the stadium.
Yeah, what's the vantage point? Is it an aerial shot, or was it taken from a
nearby tall building?
: Bowser's runners are right up there with my favorites, but I'd crop
: the spectators. Either have a group of spectators or no spectators.
: Three is just something else in the frame. Oddly enough, I like the
: idea of only four spectators in the football catch image.
:
: While I admire Dudley's efforts, the hockey photo doesn't make it.
: Nothing's sharp, nothing's the focal point.
More to the point, nothing's really going on. The player with the puck isn't
about to shoot; note that he's positioned in front of his own team's goal
cage.
: Rarely does the back of
: someone make a good shot...especially in a sports action shot.
:
: Bowser, did you forget to upload Brett's shots? We all know that
: Brett does some really great basketball shots. He pukes over my shot,
: but I was looking forward to seeing another good one from him.
Don't be catty, Tony. ;^)
Bob
Robert Coe
wrote:
: Hey Tony Cooper,
: What plugin is it that gives that effect in the "Checkers" shot?
: I see it used by lots of local photographers these days and it almost
: makes me puke.
You may want to increase yuor intake of Pepto-Bismol, Bret. Tony's picture
didn't have that effect on me at all.
: The milder post-processing in your "Old Farts" shot is less
: objectionable.
But you're a good enough photographer that you must surely have noticed that
"Checkers" is a much better picture
: I liked both of Bowser's football pics as well as his cross-country
: pic (which i might have cropped a bit tighter to remove the
: spectators).
:
: Dudley's hockey shot gets the Special Commendation.
:
: But the real stunner to me is Calvin's cyclist shot. It's hard to
: tell whether the little girl is doing a trick, jumping off, or what.
: But who cares? It's a little girl on a bike!
Before the next race she may want to look into what those straps on the pedals
are for.
Bob
Annika1980
>
> I take all critiques seriously, especially those that give me something to
> work on.
Dudley shows us that the ability to "see" in photography is unrelated
to one's eyesight.
The ability to see comes from the brain, not the eyes.
Annika1980
> :
> : Bowser, did you forget to upload Brett's shots? We all know that
> : Brett does some really great basketball shots. He pukes over my shot,
> : but I was looking forward to seeing another good one from him.
>
> Don't be catty, Tony. ;^)
>
> Bob
I haven't been able to get out much sports since the accident.
tony cooper
Speaking of bocce, I tried to add bocce to my sports captures. The
bocce courts that I know about are closed until January. They're
doing some refurbishing, and the usual crowd doesn't come down to
Florida until after Christmas. I did find some beach bocce players,
but didn't get an interesting shot.
"Old Farts" are not all male:
http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Sports/Rugby/OldFartesses/736347257_hPwwy-L.jpg
Annika1980
>
> The one I enjoyed most was the grossly incompetent, puerile snapshot
> of the kart - the first image on the page, and one that the vast
> majority of photographers would be utterly ashamed of, even those
> shooting with their $80 P+S digicams.
>
> But not Alan Browne. The idiot is probably quite proud of it. ;-)
Well Tony,... oops, I meant "Bruce" ....why don't you post some of
your award-winning train shots to show everybody how it's done?
Robert Coe
Dudley takes pictures because he enjoys it and because it keeps him focused on
what he can do rather than on what he can't. I suspect that he's pretty much
oblivious to any negative influence from us or from the Troll (whose own
personality disorders may be as disabling in their way as is Dudley's
blindness).
Bob
tony cooper
>: Bowser, did you forget to upload Brett's shots? We all know that
>: Brett does some really great basketball shots. He pukes over my shot,
>: but I was looking forward to seeing another good one from him.
>
>Don't be catty, Tony. ;^)
I can't resist a dig here and there, but never mistake my digs at
Brett for a lack of appreciation for his talents as a photographer.
He's rather petty and infantile in his postings, but the photographs
are usually excellent.
Brad Sanders
wrote:
>On Dec 8, 5:14�pm, "Dudley Hanks" <dha...@blind-apertures.ca> wrote:
I guess that means you have neither brain nor eyes. Interesting. Your
snapshots finally make sense.
Savageduck
> On Mon, 07 Dec 2009 23:06:17 -0500, tony cooper <tony_co...@earthlink.net>
> wrote:
> :
> :
> : The Duck's game of tag is not really a great capture, but has a lot of
> : human interest.
>
> It needed fill flash. (And I'm sure the Duck has already noticed that.)
Yup.
>
> : Nice shot, nice color, of the stadium.
>
> Yeah, what's the vantage point? Is it an aerial shot, or was it taken from a
> nearby tall building?
From the side of "Signal Hill" Alt. 338m, GPS info included in EXIF and
you can locate shoot site from the SI posting.
--
Regards,
Savageduck
Calvin Sambrook
news:cehvh5lgu9r5dth5e...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 07 Dec 2009 19:22:31 -0500, Bowser <Ca...@Nikon.Panny> wrote:
>
> But what message is sent when one of the arguably best pictures is
> submitted
> by a photographer who's nearly blind? I guess it's that sports photography
> is
> NOT easy and that anybody but a serious pro may ultimately have to rely on
> that lucky shot.
>
Sports photography is not easy, agreed. Luck plays a big part, agreed. But
there are things you can do to make luck more likely, most sports have times
when things are relatively predictable and even action sports have points
where the action is slowed or stationary. Look at bowser_sg-1 or
Sports-Bullseye-TonyCooper for two examples of situations where knowledge of
the sport has been used to help the photographer get lucky.
And with a mandate like this there's always the opportunity to be creative.
There's no luck involved in SI_Games_Alan_Browne_I or
Sports-Checkers-TonyCooper
Given that to some extent we make our own luck I'd argue that
sports-dudley-hanks is the result of someone putting themself in the right
place and having the situational awareness to recognise that this is the
right time to press the shutter. Whether by luck or judgment he has managed
to introduce elements which IMO make this a good shot but then I think that
could be said for most good photos I've ever taken - an element of skill and
an element of serendipity.
For me a large part of the SI is observing techniques and skills use by
others, both positive and negative. This month I've learned that one way to
make a shot look cold is to lift the blacks and over expose the snow/ice.
I'll probably try that for myself if we get much snow this winter, I'll
certainly try to keep it in my mental toolkit for possible use at any time
in the future.
Alan Browne
> I think I might have put the focus point on the black pieces, though. Leaving
> them blurry emphasizes the point that black is the underdog when good players
> are evenly matched. But the board is shown from black's side, and most
> pictures work better when the foreground is in focus. I guess the smart thing
> is to try it both ways. (Which Alan may indeed have done. I usually find him
> to be careful with composition, even when I don't agree with the results.)
The emphasis was on the clock face reflection. The original idea was
straight from the front with both sides reflected in the clock face and
the hands of the clock pointing at each side. But the reflection of the
black pieces was not contrasty enough.
I often put FG objects OOF and BG in focus for composition. Just asks a
different question. As the scene was deliberately dark, emphasizing the
black pieces would have required colored gels on the strobes (say blue
or red) to lift them off the BG. That would have taken more time to set
up and I don't have gels that fit my new light in any case.
As to the go-cart, I had to put up at least one more shot. I
deliberately put up a "shaky" version because it goes against the grain
and common shot of frozen action. It was a fairly old shot dredged from
the archive. I like it as it emphasizes movement and vibration which is
what those little carts are all about.
I've sent another one to Bowser, but he hasn't put it up yet.
Dudley Hanks
"Annika1980" <annik...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:da467108-1b9b-42ab...@u1g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
Thanks, Brett, appreciate your comment...
As I've said in the past, "Beauty is in the mind of the beholder, not the
eye."
Take Care,
Dudley
Calvin Sambrook
> No one's questioning the ability of the non-photographer to critique
> the photographs of others. What is being questioned is the substance
> of a critique that states only "this is the worst ever".
>
> Since this is a newsgroup that assumedly appeals only to
> photographers, we would expect that anyone posting here is able to
> critique with some degree of expertise and provide reasons why he/she
> thinks the posted photographs are lacking.
>
> I don't think all followers of this group are expected to enter the
> SI, but I do think that people who are very critical of others without
> providing some substance in their criticism should be willing to be
> judged themselves.
>
That's a hugely philosophical point and one which I've become very
interested in recently. There has been a lot of behavioral research over
the years which seems to indicate that we perceive things very quickly using
an "emotional" part of our brain and then go on later to "justify" and shore
up our emotional response with logic and reason. Once our emotional
response is set (in about 0.3 seconds) it then takes a seriously large
amount of contrary data to force our rational brain to overturn it.
While researchers have gradually unearthed the mechanism which I've tried to
outline above there is a quite separate issue as to what the emotional
triggers are and what is the balance between hard-wired and sociological
responses. We've all come across "golden rules" of any artistic pursuit, in
photography these are things like "rule of thirds" or
complimenting/contrasting colours and I guess these are formalisations of
underlying emotional responses.
Photographers, or indeed any artists, will typically use a mixture of two
approaches when generating their images. One approach is to rely on a
"feeling" that something works and the other is to consciously know and
apply a set of rules. I'm sure we'd all like to use the former but in the
end if you haven't got it you must learn it.
And finally to the point. The same logic must surely apply to those who
criticise photos. Everyone is entitled to feel that they do or do not like
a photo, their point it perfectly valid even though they may not know *why*
they feel that way or be capable of expressing it. As photographers we can
only improve our art by understanding why people respond to photos the way
they do so a critique which doesn't attempt to tell us that isn't much use.
For me it's all about trying to understand the mechanism.
All of that of course assumes that the critisiser isn't simply being a
vexatious prat but I like to feel they are easy to spot and ignore. Like
this one.
Dudley Hanks
"Calvin Sambrook" <csam...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:hfoop4$o7p$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
A couple of things:
First, I was pleased to read your observation on how to make a shot look
cold. In an earlier post, somebody stated that my shot looked cold, and he
wasn't being complimentary -- but seemed to mean it more of a criticism of
the flat lighting.
When I read it, I thought to myself, "Hmmm, should a hockey shot look warm?"
Indeed, the arena was cold, and the determination of the players equally so.
So, I took the statement as an endorsement of what I was trying to portray.
Second, I'd like to go on record as saying that shooting sports has more to
do with technique and knowledge of the game than it does on luck.
Certainly, there is a bit of random fate to what happens after the shutter
is pressed. Will you catch the puck as it comes off the stick as in my "Bad
Lens" shot? or will it be caught in mid air in the middle of the goal, as in
the "Hockey Night in Edmonton" pic I posted earlier?
But, if you know your sport, and you are patient, you can set yourself up
for a good shot every time you pull out your camera. (Unless, of course,
you are attending a dead boring game.)
When I still had sight, I shot a ton of hockey games, and I had my technique
fairly well worked out. I could set a couple of cameras up on tripods, and
trigger them remotely without actually viewing what was happening through
the lenses. I'd end up with a pic published every time.
For the last year or so, I've been trying to work out how my camera responds
in different situations, when set to its various modes. I'm getting more
comfortable with that, so I'm more able to zero in on actually capturing a
good image. My lack of sight has little impact in this respect, except I've
had to shoot a lot of practice shots from various angles to enable me to
judge what angle will capture what image the best.
I'm slowly training my muscles to react appropriately to the various
acoustic stimuli I'm listening for, and I'm quite certain you'll see some
improved framing in the future.
Moreover, now that I'm producing some semi-acceptable results, I feel
confident enough to start setting up a bit of lighting equipment. I'll
start with a basic camera mounted flash, and work my way up to something
that will produce a bit more stark portrayals of the sport.
Given that I have to shoot through plexiglass or netting, it's going to take
a few practice trips to get the placement and angles down, but it's all
great fun working out the details.
I'm just very thankful some of you take the time to honestly critique my
work. You all seem to catch different factors for me to work on, but the
proof of your assistance is starting to show in my shots.
Greatful Thanks to each and every one of you,
Dudley
Dudley Hanks
"Alan Browne" <alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
news:isidnaojXYoleoLW...@giganews.com...
Hey, is it too late for me to send in my "Bad Lens" pic of the player taking
the shot?
I didn't submit it since I'd already posted it on the group, but if nobody
objects, that one might show I can take a pic with a focal point... :)
Take Care,
Dudley
tony cooper
Why is my name here? I never post under another name. I do post my
shots. I don't recall ever photographing a train.
Robert Coe
wrote:
What accident? Did I miss something? I hope you weren't seriously injured.
Which reminds me: Has anyone heard from DMac lately? The last I knew, we were
concerned that his bad back may have put him in the hospital again, and that
was a while ago.
Bob
Alan Browne
> All of that of course assumes that the critisiser isn't simply being a
> vexatious prat but I like to feel they are easy to spot and ignore. Like
> this one.
MC seems similar to "Bruce" who, emulating _very_ accurately past SI
detractor" Tony Polson", has a singular mission to defame the SI and its
participants, esp. those who have asked him to "Put up or shut up".
Tony Polson attacked the SI from the moment of its suggestion by Lisa.
I suspect that is because Tony Polson could no abide a system by which
rpe35mm posters actually put up photos related to a theme and in which
he felt ill equipped to match.
Esp. when a few photos came up that were taken by Tony and posted
elsewhere that showed why he would be so reluctant.
Pity, since Tony Polson claims to have shot a cover for the wide
distribution Paris Match. You would think that he would not only have
no reason to denigrate the SI, but that he could participate with little
effort.
I think he doth protesteth too much.
And for good reason. This likely applies to "MC" as well.
Atheist Chaplain
probably a reference to Tony Polson rather than you :-)
--
[This comment is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Church of
Scientology International]
"I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. They are so unlike your
Christ." Gandhi
tony cooper
<abu...@cia.gov> wrote:
>"tony cooper" <tony_co...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>news:bbsvh5lg9l972ro2r...@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 09:10:33 -0800 (PST), Annika1980
>> <annik...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Dec 9, 4:03 am, Bruce <docnews2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The one I enjoyed most was the grossly incompetent, puerile snapshot
>>>> of the kart - the first image on the page, and one that the vast
>>>> majority of photographers would be utterly ashamed of, even those
>>>> shooting with their $80 P+S digicams.
>>>>
>>>> But not Alan Browne. The idiot is probably quite proud of it. ;-)
>>>
>>>Well Tony,... oops, I meant "Bruce" ....why don't you post some of
>>>your award-winning train shots to show everybody how it's done?
>>
>> Why is my name here? I never post under another name. I do post my
>> shots. I don't recall ever photographing a train.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
>
>probably a reference to Tony Polson rather than you :-)
Ah, that's what happens when a person is so egotistical that they
think they are the only "Tony" of note.
Atheist Chaplain
As I was once told by someone far smarter than I
"The most important word in any language is a persons name" :-)
That's why used car salesmen and the like all want to know your name when
you first walk on the lot.
tony cooper
<usene...@piggo.com> wrote:
>Troy P (cricket): I suck at sports photography. While kind of
>capturing the action, I just couldn't make this pop. And what's
>with the weird bokeh this 100-400 lens gives?
>
Take heart. You still did better than I did. My cricket photograph
http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Photography/Miscellanea/cricket/493575861_2A7gt-L.jpg
has the ball well off the bat and the background far too sharp.
John McWilliams
> On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 07:44:09 +1100, "Atheist Chaplain"
> <abu...@cia.gov> wrote:
>
>> "tony cooper" <tony_co...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>> news:bbsvh5lg9l972ro2r...@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 09:10:33 -0800 (PST), Annika1980
>>> <annik...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> Well Tony,... oops, I meant "Bruce" ....why don't you post some of
>>>> your award-winning train shots to show everybody how it's done?
>>> Why is my name here? I never post under another name. I do post my
>>> shots. I don't recall ever photographing a train.
>>>
>> probably a reference to Tony Polson rather than you :-)
>
> Ah, that's what happens when a person is so egotistical that they
> think they are the only "Tony" of note.
Or writes about himself in the third person as John McWilliams is wont
to do.....
--
john mcwilliams
John McWilliams
I like the bat and ball postions, and, yes, bg could well be blurred,
maybe the bowler, too. IAE, it's a good shot.
But, hey, you still gots bales on yo wickets dere.
--
john mcwilliams
MC
> On 09-12-09 13:32 , Calvin Sambrook wrote:
>
> > All of that of course assumes that the critisiser isn't simply
> > being a vexatious prat but I like to feel they are easy to spot and
> > ignore. Like this one.
>
>
> MC seems similar to "Bruce" who, emulating very accurately past SI
> detractor" Tony Polson", has a singular mission to defame the SI and
> its participants, esp. those who have asked him to "Put up or shut
> up".
Eh? I only said that there was only one photo out of a mediocre bunch
that was any good. Are you a little annoyed that the photo I chose
over all the others was not yours? I click on link to invite viewers
to a page containg photos, aired my point of view regarding the quality
of the pictures and then get accused of all sorts. Nice.
MC
John McWilliams
Hmmmm: They don't look like ruggers.....
--
john mcwilliams
tony cooper
Does this look more like rugby?
http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Sports/Rugby/2/496130929_CT6Cw-XL.jpg
The SmugMug gallery that is now "Sports" was originally "Rugby".
Evidently, even though I changed the gallery name, the word stays in
the links.
Troy Piggins
That's a great shot! Lovely colours.
--
Troy Piggins
John McWilliams
Oh, yeah. Now, that's a nice shot of a very composed player who's about
to have his leg pulled....
--
john mcwilliams
BobS
"Dudley Hanks" <dha...@blind-apertures.ca> wrote in message
news:CQRTm.55431$Db2.33164@edtnps83...
Have you ever considered shooting with your camera tethered to a PC, a
laptop or a netbook. Advantages should be tremendous for someone with
limited sight - larger picture, and the camera can be controlled from
the computer.
Bob S.
Dudley Hanks
"BobS" <no-...@noplace.com> wrote in message
news:hfprl2$tiq$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
Actually, for me, it doesn't work...
RP reduces the field of vision to a very small area, usually in the center.
Thus, the limited region I can detect light is less than the size of the LCD
on the back of my XSi, probably about 1/8th of the area.
That is why I cannot look at my LCD and take in all of the pixels at once,
but must "work the edges" so that I can roughly center the darker (or
lighter portion if background is dark) of the image on the lighter backdrop.
The larger computer monitor exaggerates the problem...
I have, however, hooked up my Rebel to my laptop in order to shoot directly
to the hard drive. Also, I am trying to develop an application that can
take an image I've shot and audibly tell me how much of the picture is
properly exposed, and where any over / under exposed spots are situated in
relation to the overall image.
Besides, you guys over estimate how difficult it is to shoot at sound cues.
With practice, it's becoming quite an interesting endeavor, which is
affording me quite a bit of enjoyment...
Take Care,
Dudley
John McWilliams
Does the viewfinder work for you? Perhaps there's an attachment that'd
make a much higher contrast image out of what's there in the optical finder?
--
john mcwilliams
Dudley Hanks
"John McWilliams" <jp...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:hfq2nk$co2$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
In certain situations, yes, it does. I can actually take in a larger
portionof the viewfinder than I can of the LCD, although, still not the
entire image.
However, the image in most viewfinders isn't as bright as the LCD, so the
situations it is useful tends to be few and far between.
RP is really strange... There seems to be a certain level of ambient light
which yields just the right amount of light to my retina to trigger the
optical cells in a way I can make use of the information. Too much light,
and everything gets whited out. Too little light, and I just see snow...
I never really see black, because the optical cells tend to misfire in a way
I can only relate to the "ghost" pains an amputee feels in a limb which is
no longer there. This is to say that, even in total darkness, with my eyes
closed, I "see" something very similar to the snowy screen of an old black
and white television with no reception (as was seen back in the days prior
to the blue screen sets now default to).
The LCD is most useful to me in situations where, either there is a bright
subject against a dark background (as in a concert), or in an evenly
eluminated room roughly equivalent to a livingroom lit by a small lamp or
two. Any brighter than that, and I can't distinguish much on the LCD, any
darker than that and the camera can't pick up an image.
I'd REALLY like to try out something like a D3 or 5D2, since I believe the
camera's better ISO range would greatly increase the range of situations I'd
be able to actually compose an image visually.
As for the viewfinder, it comes in handy in situations such as concert type
environments, as well as constantly eluminated rooms a bit brighter than
work with the LCD. The limiting factor with the viewfinder though, is that
I always need extremely dramatic contrast levels between the subject and
background.
Of all the pics I shoot, I probably use my residual vision for less than
10%; the rest are strictly point and shoot.
Take Care,
Dudley
whisky-dave
Thought it was about time I commented on photos for a change....
I liked the girl jumping on the bike Cycling by Calvin Sambrook.jpg because
it made me think about what was happening and I liked the idea
behind -LawnBowling-TonyCooper.jpg but personally I;d have got down on my
kness to take the shot from a lower angle hoping all those nice tracks left
by the balls would make a better pattern.
I also liked, sports-dudley-hanks.JPG but would have liked a bit more
contrast and the angle rotated about 10 or so degs more clockwise to get an
even more angled shot.
It's so much easier criticising and saying what you'd do to others peoples
photos than doing
things with your own :-)
"Bowser" <Ca...@Nikon.Panny> wrote in message
news:6s6rh51gt1qdgnsp4...@4ax.com...
whisky-dave
>
> As I've said in the past, "Beauty is in the mind of the beholder, not the
> eye."
Oh, I always thought it was "Beauty is in the mind of the beer holder"
and applied to the chances of getting laid after a nights drinking :)
Russell D.
> Bowser wrote:
>
>> Sports and Games is posted and available for viewing here:
>>
>> http://www.pbase.com/shootin/sports__games
>>
>> My favorite is the hockey shot since I'm a hockey fan, and I've got to
>> admire the guy who shot it.
>>
>> Enjoy...
>
> one or two are just plain awful.
>
> MC
MC, your point is taken and I don't completely disagree. Technically
there were not any great photos in this lot. But, for me, there were a
lot of interesting and enjoyable stories in those photos. This mandate
does not call for "technically beautiful" photos. It seems to me it is
more photo journalism. Not that photo journalism can't be technically
beautiful, it often is, but it often is not as well.
For me the SI is a chance to learn. I'm not a very good photographer.
But, I really enjoy it and want to get better. I enjoy submitting a
photo to SI and then have other photographers critique it and tell me
what I could have done to make it a better photo.
However, I find I learn as much or maybe more by looking at other
photographers work critically. I just wish I had more time to write in
my reviews the things I see.
I also enjoy the fact that most of what is submitted to the SI is posted
by peers, others who are trying to learn just as I am (though I wish I
knew half of what some of these guys know).
I know it is a lot of work, but what would be helpful is if your were to
take a minute to tell us why a photo is mediocre/poor/awful.
Just my two cents worth.
RD (Russell Durtschi)
Who is not afraid of Usenet.
Russell D.
> On Tue, 08 Dec 2009 13:37:03 GMT, "MC"<a...@any.any> wrote:
>
>> Bowser wrote:
>>
>>> Sports and Games is posted and available for viewing here:
>>>
>>> http://www.pbase.com/shootin/sports__games
>>>
>>> My favorite is the hockey shot since I'm a hockey fan, and I've got to
>>> admire the guy who shot it.
>>>
>>> Enjoy...
>>
>> "Cycling" is by far the best. The rest range from mediocre to poor and
>> one or two are just plain awful.
>
>
> and worse over the years.
>
Bruce, I'm afraid I'm one of the late comers that has watered down the
talent. I apologize lessening the enjoyment of the SI for you.
> Some of the early entries were good, but the most of the competent
> photographers left the SI (and this newsgroup) a long time ago.
>
Are you one of the competent that has stuck around or are you just one
of us?
> Occasionally there is a shot or two worth looking at, but all too
> often the SI plumbs the depths of mediocrity. This particular crop of
> entries is probably the worst ever.
>
See my reply to MC's post above. I enjoy learning from great photography
as well as mediocre work. Why don't you submit a photo or two to the
next mandate and show us how it's done.
Russell
Who never found whining appealing.
Russell D.
>
> It's so much easier criticising and saying what you'd do to others peoples
> photos than doing
> things with your own :-)
Isn't that the truth! What bugs me is sometimes when someone points out
something that could have been improved in one of my photos it's like,
"Duh, why didn't I see that?"
Russell
Dudley Hanks
"whisky-dave" <whisk...@final.front.ear> wrote in message
news:hfqvgt$d3c$1@qmul...
That's true too ... :)
Take Care,
Dudley
Bruce
>
>I enjoy learning from great photography
>as well as mediocre work. Why don't you submit a photo or two to the
>next mandate and show us how it's done.
I greatly value critique and actively seek it on a regular basis from
competent photographers who I can learn from.
I'm sorry, that kind of rules you out, and all your friends in the SI
as well. If I should ever feel the need to seek your comments on my
work, it will be time for me to give up photography and do something
else for a living - something completely unrelated to photography.
Bruce
>
>MC, your point is taken and I don't completely disagree. Technically
>there were not any great photos in this lot. But, for me, there were a
>lot of interesting and enjoyable stories in those photos. This mandate
>does not call for "technically beautiful" photos. It seems to me it is
>more photo journalism.
First, it isn't a mandate. It isn't even a theme. It is a very loose
category that allows people to submit from a wide range of subjects.
Whenever more specific themes have been tried the SI participants have
really struggled. Broadening the scope of entries was a desperate
ploy to keep the SI alive, when it had been dead for a very long time.
If you want to improve your photography, there are plenty of web sites
where you can get useful critique for your images.
The SI is merely a means of avoiding critique. It is a mutual
admiration society with rock bottom standards. Any old crap is
acceptable, so that's what people submit..
Alan Browne
Speaking of mediocrity, here is something to learn from:
http://abpr.railfan.net/abprphoto.cgi?september98/09-24-98/d9000a.jpg
by Tony Polson
http://abpr.railfan.net/abprphoto.cgi?september98/09-24-98/d9000b.jpg
by Tony Polson
http://abpr.railfan.net/abprphoto.cgi?september98/09-24-98/d9000c.jpg
by Tony Polson
http://abpr.railfan.net/abprphoto.cgi?september98/09-24-98/d9000d.jpg
by Tony Polson
and http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6688626
by Tony Polson
We have to thank Tony for providing this "learning" material, I suppose,
but we'd rather see anything worthy from him instead.
As to "Bruce" we haven't seen a shred of ability either. With his
comments resembling Tony Polson's to a tee, one has to wonder how
closely related they are. Perhaps twins separated at birth?
Savageduck
<alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> said:
"Bruce" seems to have the flavor of a certain P&S advocate.
--
Regards,
Savageduck
Russell D.
Oh, sorry Bruce, maybe you misread what I meant. I didn't mean to imply
that I would critique your work. Goodness, how could I?? What I meant
that maybe you could possibly show us some of your work so that we can
see how to do it correctly.
Always trying to learn.
Russell
Who ain't holdin' his breath.
Alan Browne
Not the same, I'm quite sure.
Alan Browne
Wise.
Troy Piggins
So why are you here in this group then?
--
Troy Piggins
Russell D.
> On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 08:00:20 -0700, "Russell D."<r...@sfcn.org> wrote:
>>
>> MC, your point is taken and I don't completely disagree. Technically
>> there were not any great photos in this lot. But, for me, there were a
>> lot of interesting and enjoyable stories in those photos. This mandate
>> does not call for "technically beautiful" photos. It seems to me it is
>> more photo journalism.
>
>
> First, it isn't a mandate.
Oops, my bad!
> It isn't even a theme. It is a very loose
> category that allows people to submit from a wide range of subjects.
>
That's very astute and probably correct.
> Whenever more specific themes have been tried the SI participants have
> really struggled.
Did you ever struggle with a specific SI theme or did you have it nailed
every time? Can you refer me to some of your work in earlier SI mand . .
., uh, er, themes where others struggled but you were able to capture
the very essence of the theme.
> Broadening the scope of entries was a desperate
> ploy to keep the SI alive, when it had been dead for a very long time.
>
Well, maybe that had me in mind and wanted to include me. I'm kinda slow
ya know.
> If you want to improve your photography, there are plenty of web sites
> where you can get useful critique for your images.
>
Could you list a few? But don't list photo.net or flikr? You don't get
useful critique from them.
> The SI is merely a means of avoiding critique. It is a mutual
> admiration society with rock bottom standards. Any old crap is
> acceptable, so that's what people submit..
>
While I admit this is sometimes true, the SI is the only place that I
have submitted photos and received good, honest criticism. The other
places have just praised the crap out of whatever I submitted. You know
better than anybody, having seen some of my work, that anybody who
praises any photo of mine is not worthy to own a camera.
Ever grateful for expert help and advice,
Russell
Russell D.
>
> Russell D (snowboarder): Great action, really like it.
>
Thanks.
> Russell D (card games): Nice family snapshot, but doesn't grab
> me.
Snapshot, true enough. I almost didn't submit it but decided to when I
noticed that there were two games going on. The card game and my sister
and her husband playing catch. It is only lit by the pop up flash on my
40D and the room lights.
Anyway, it was just for fun.
Russell
Bruce
I thought it was hilarious.
Incompetent *and* hilarious. Well done. ;-)
Robert Coe
<whisk...@final.front.ear> wrote:
:
: It's so much easier criticising and saying what you'd do to others peoples
I agree, up to a point. But I really had little idea of what to look for in
others' photos until I had spent a *lot* of time editing my own.
Bob
Annika1980
> :
> : I haven't been able to get out much sports since the accident.
>
> What accident? Did I miss something?
The Tiger Woods accident. Since he backed over that fire hydrant and
hit that tree, I've been too distraught to do much serious shooting.
Robert Coe
wrote:
Well... I have a hard time coming up with much sympathy for Tiger. I do feel
bad for the fire hydrant, though.
Bob
Bill Graham
"Robert Coe" <b...@1776.COM> wrote in message
news:mfm5i59ld1m2po5b8...@4ax.com...
Yes.....That was my dog's favorite......