[SI] #4 Comments
Alan Browne
there are 31 images in ... (Thanks always to Bret "Annika" Douglas for
the posting work).
My comments. I've added a "Water mandate" score (1..10) as many shots,
to me, were not concentrated on water, but simply had water in them.
This is perhaps beyond what the mandator mandated, he said "So, for this
week, there should be some water in your photographs. What form it is in
and what it is doing is up to you," but I'm taking a more literal
interpretation that the shot should say "water" in some definite
fashion. Sue me.
REF: http://www.pbase.com/shootin/water
Warning: I'm being a bit hard on some people here; and I'm being
painful about whether "water" is the subject of the shot.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Mike Benveniste's dam in the field...
The first thing that hits (at thumbnail level too) is of course the
magic hour light of this shot. The rich gold colors and the deep blues
of the water. This shot (too small on the screen by the way) makes us
want to see more of the scene and to take a walk there. I like this one
a lot, but wonder if it has been cropped right (detail at top).
Water mandate: 10
Bowser's pond
I was quick on the draw to want to damn this shot, but a more careful
look a the reflection of the sky in the fore area, clouds in the middle
and the far shore trees reflected in the back area of the shot made me
re-evaluate this. Very good shot, lot of dimension in the plane of the
water, with the long grasses in the corner as punctuation.
Water mandate: 9 ---the lilly pads dominate.
Alan Browne's water, ice and steam.
I almost succeeded in these shots in geting what I had envisionned. As
stated previously I limited myself to a short roll of film. The
composition could be better, but out of the lot, this one at least shows
the steam, albeit not as much as I wanted. I should have used a pure
black tabletop instead of glass .... (in other shots, the glass worked,
but not the steam...)
Water mandate: 10
George (aka CARBUFF) wet leaves.
Leaves with water drops. At least the water drops are large enough that
we see them for water... The leaves still dominate. Too much glare off
of the leaves.
Water mandate 8 (maybe 7)
Ken Cashion's "my wife left me for my best friend and took the dog, my
pickup truck and my rifle on the day I go fired." shot.
The glass may contain water (as dilution for the cheap whiskey) , but
this shot, which has a great composition (if depressing subject) does
not shout "water". Dehydration us more like it.
Ken will say, "Alan! Exactly!!!! Thanks!!!" (sigh).
Scan sucks or was from an underexposed shot.
Water mandate: 6
Matt Clara's "Have you seen my water?" shot
A good still life with emphasis on the STILL LIFE. The water, she be
gone laddy! Harsh lighting gives nice pattern to the dry mud (it is dry
mud, right?). Water mandate: 0 or a qualified 9 for the fact that water
has been here and the patterns well caught... (DISCUSS).
Dallas Dahms night abstract of water droplets.
I like this a lot for the hot colours in the back being caught and
reflected by the drops hanging on to.... ?
A stark and simple composition.
Water mandate: 10
Al Denelsbeck's blowing bubbles
At least I'm beginning by spelling Al's name right. The wonders of cut
and paste. Don't soapbox us Al, where's the water!!! Cool shot for the
effect and the colors. Definitely not top of Al's game.
Water mandate: 6 ...I don't see water!!! Makes me think of the joke
about a male duck named Bubbles.
Bret Douglas' Crane shot by the water.
I am betting that this is a rulz breaker for the 9 day rule 'cause of
past 'displays'. In any case a nice shot of a big bird with its yawp
open with water for a background. Water mandate: 7. Background does
not cut it; the bird totally dominates the image and is not itself
involved with the water at the time.
Martin Djernaes river in the hills.
While the foregound is water, we are thinking more about the
surroundings and the water in the stream is just a foreground. The scan
appears dull to me. Overall composition is nice, if typical for such a
shot.
Water mandate 8.
Martin Francis' water drop.
A frozen shot of water dropping (or reacting to a drop). Nice
reflections and patterns, perhaps underexposed a stop? Almost looks
like some kind of sea creature is in there... Use of some color (or
black) panels to reflect some color (or black) into the water might have
been nice.
Water mandate 10.
Rudy Garcia's sea scape
Again an image that does not yell out water. There is a lot of sky in
the shot. This shot says: "BIG SKY" or "OCEAN" more than water. The
simple composition is ruined by the blown out sun in the clouds and
reflected on the water. Careful use of a pol might help.
Water mandate: 9
David Griffiths waterfall
A wonderful B&W of the ole tried, tested and true slow shutter at f/22
type. The whites are a bit blown out in the middle. Good motion.
Branches in front are borderline distracting (rather than adding
dimension)... but the rocks in front and far shore are great "frames"
for it. FWIW a judge at a photo comp last year told me that when there
is too much white water in a water fall shot, that is what ruins it...
(in his not humble opinion) your shot is more an exception to his opinion.
Water mandate: 10
Bob Hickey's dunes shot
I guess with Isabel on her way away, this shot is appropriate. The
beach certainly says ocean; but the hard to discern waves make the
mandate hard to see... Otherwise this is a wonderfull seascape shot in
many layers.
Water mandate 7.
Lisa Horton's frozen parrot dinner.
At first I thought, that does it! Lisa's frozen a poor bird in ice as
her contribution to the shootin. Where is the SPCA????
Neat shot, composition and color's here. Bird looks like a
co-conspirator... the water is so abstract as hard to see for what it is.
Water mandate 8. (The bird dominates)
Amber Hutcherson Lilly pond
A pond for sure, the lilly pads dominate over the water itself.
Scan sucks. Composition is not strong.
Water mandate 8.
Carl Hutcherson's lake side.
Water is not the main thing here as much as the vista. This shot does
have a lot of depth in the sense of ground and flowers in front and the
many layered composition to the sky far off. Partial mirrors in water
are good.
It is not level.
Exposure was obviosly tough to get.
Water mandate 7. Water is not dominant here.
Nick James' glacier
Lots of water in this shot, although it takes a moment to have it sink
in. The composition is powerful, although dark. The boat is a nice and
neccesary point of reference and helps balance the image and give the
glacier DIMENSION. Glacier's are "cool" so to speak, but up close at
the bottom they are always gritty and ugly...
Water mandate: 10
Jim Kramer's waterfall
A good plain ole waterfall shot. No too creamy and we get a better
notion of what it would look like in real life than David Griffith's
water shot. Dull scan.
Water mandate: 10
Simon Lee's faucet.
Like Bob Hickey's shot last week, this shot makes one head for the
bathroom! Crisp bubbles of air in the water give this fantastic
dimension, and the bubbles themselves each have bubbles inside them or
stuck to them. Nice macro. Nice light. Background should have been
taken care of.
Water mandate: Are you kidding, I need to tell you?
Lionel's waterspout in the garden.
Again a shot that does not immediately say water. Wetness abounds, but
at first we're asking "what's the subject?" The dark space in the
middle doesn't help. Finally, 'cause we know we're looking for it, we
see the water on the leaves and below the spout.
Water mandate: 7
Vic Mason's park lake promenade
A shot with a lot of dimension that has some water in it. The graceful
curve of the promenade is nice, especially as it is accented by its own
return into the image on the far shore. Bench, grass, far trees, sky
dominate. Water is in the shot, but is not the shot.
Water mandate 7.
Dennis O'Connor's wet night street
At least some seeming evidence that it was done in the past 9 days.
Very cool night shot with the colors and reflections. We're drawn more
to the street action and lights ... the drops of water on the
windshield are distraction more that subject.
Date in the image, ugh.
Water mandate 8.
Doug Payne's ... ?
Wonderful composition and use of negative space in what is really an
environmental statement? Patterns in the slime are interesting...
Water mandate 10.
Pete's ... water shot.
Yep that's water. Weird shot, we're not sure what is giving the
water's surface it's shapes and forms. Sunlight glinting is good as are
the weeds and stones on the bottom.
Water mandate: 10
Rich Pos' seascape.
This shot does say seascape more than water, but it is a cool shot
indeed with two bodies of water, two very different looking sandy beach
areas and the sky with a nice yellow glow at the horizon. Like it.
Water madate: 8, sorry 'bout that.
Relics ... (name or title)
Spectacular sunset shot with a reflection on a pond.
Water mandate: 6
John Riegle's seagulls by water
Okay, I'm tired of saying by now. This shot has water in it, but the
shot is not about water!!!!
Water mandate 7.
Brent Schneeman's water pump.
This is a subtle, simple and eye pleasing shot. The relationship of the
windmill to pumping water may not be obvious to some. I'm not sure if
I'm looking through misted glass or a reflection.
Water mandate 8 (DISCUSS).
Simon Stanmore's portrait of a girl dribling water from her mouth...
As compositions and use of light go, this is one of the best in the
whole shootin. The skin tones and texture are recorded beautifully; the
rim lighting very effective against the background.
Water mandate 9 ...the girl is too appealing!
Glenn Travis' fountains.
Overall as an image this is very, very nice. In fact I've had a copy of
this in my "OPP" folder since Glenn first put it up over a year ago (so,
so much for the rulz.) The simple two color on black shot makes it very
strong and the exposure of the fountains is ...perfect. The dead space
above the building is unfortunate, but the power of the overall image
convincing. Water does not dominate the shot, but is clearly part of
it...and the detailed rippled reflections in the water help give the
image depth.
Water mandate 8.
Alan
Lionel
forum, Alan Browne <alan....@videotron.canospam> said:
Firstly, thanks for commenting, Alan. I really appreciate both praise &
criticism of my work.
>Lionel's waterspout in the garden.
>Again a shot that does not immediately say water. Wetness abounds, but
>at first we're asking "what's the subject?" The dark space in the
>middle doesn't help. Finally, 'cause we know we're looking for it, we
>see the water on the leaves and below the spout.
>Water mandate: 7
I deliberately used the dark space (a gully trap, in fact) in an attempt
to create a certain amount of mystery. The theory behind the composition
was that people would notice the water droplets on the ivy leaves first,
& then their eyes would be drawn to the murky dark area, where they'd
see the water flowing down the drain. (Dunno if anyone noticed, but I
used the traditional waterfall/river 1/2 second exposure as a bit of a
visual joke to reward photographers when they finally saw the stream of
running water.) I guess I should've brightened the shot up a little to
make the drain more obvious, but I wanted to make it hard to tell that
it /was/ a drain.
PS: I'm kicking myself over the shot I chose for the 'motion'
assignment. Closely looking over some other shots I took on the same
night, one that looked crap in the preview turned out to be perfect on a
real screen. I'm definitely going to put up a web page with my
'hindsight' picks for this competition.
--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
The Dave©
Nice critique job by Alan, too, btw. I enjoy your comments.
Martin Djernæs
Alan Browne wrote:
> Martin Djernaes river in the hills.
> While the foregound is water, we are thinking more about the
> surroundings and the water in the stream is just a foreground. The scan
> appears dull to me. Overall composition is nice, if typical for such a
> shot.
> Water mandate 8.
Thank you for your comments. Well yes I do agree that the picture is a
bit dull somehow in the colors and contrast .. the scan didn't make it
much better and I feel that the edges of the picture show that, but I do
have the same feeling with the picture itself (4x6 developed by the
local "1h"). It was taken with a tripod, but the f/32 and the 80mm was
the absolute extreme for my lense ... do you thnk that also could be a
part of the issue?
You're death on when you say that the stream is just the foreground and
the picture is more about the surroundings. To be honest with you I
didn't think about that when I submitted it, but now I can both see it
now and must also admit that it was my thoughts when I took it.
Thank you for mentioning the composition. You basically make three
comments about the picture, whereform I surely can learn from all of them.
Martin
Simon Stanmore
"Alan Browne" <alan....@videotron.canospam> wrote in message
news:XCubb.22662$dp6.6...@weber.videotron.net...
>
> Simon Stanmore's portrait of a girl dribling water from her mouth...
> As compositions and use of light go, this is one of the best in the
> whole shootin. The skin tones and texture are recorded beautifully; the
> rim lighting very effective against the background.
> Water mandate 9 ...the girl is too appealing!
>
It's another one done in my back garden ... inspired by the "and is 70% of
our bodies" & "People must live with it, but they can't live without it"
parts of Simon's mandate. The girl's my fiance - she suffers for my 'art'!
Looking like the winner of a wet t-shirt competition after doing this was
seriously 'appealing' too ; )
Simon
jimkramer
"Alan Browne" <alan....@videotron.canospam> wrote in message
news:XCubb.22662$dp6.6...@weber.videotron.net...
>
> A good plain ole waterfall shot. No too creamy and we get a better
> notion of what it would look like in real life than David Griffith's
> water shot. Dull scan.
> Water mandate: 10
Forgive my ignorance, but what exactly do you mean by a dull scan?
Jim
Doug Payne
> [...]
Wow. You must have way more spare time that I do. I know you're in the
same time zone as me, and I'm just barely awake, and allegedly working.
> Doug Payne's ... ?
> Wonderful composition and use of negative space in what is really an
> environmental statement? Patterns in the slime are interesting...
> Water mandate 10.
I'll wait a bit to see if anyone else knows what it is, before I
explain. Hint, it's not slime by a long shot, not is it particularly an
environmental statement, although I am a nature lover who spends most of
his spare time living outdoors in remote places. Thanks for the comments.
Dennis O'Connor
a man alive and the whole world weeps - and why this moisture on my face as
I raise the camera.....
And, the camera date happened to be on by circumstance...
Denny
"Alan Browne" <alan....@videotron.canospam> wrote in message > Dennis
CS
> Relics ... (name or title)
> Spectacular sunset shot with a reflection on a pond.
> Water mandate: 6
Alan,
Thanks for the comment.
The body of water was actually a small pool collected on a parkinglot.
Alan Browne
Martin Djernæs wrote:
> Hi Alan,
>
> Alan Browne wrote:
>
>> Martin Djernaes river in the hills.
>> While the foregound is water, we are thinking more about the
>> surroundings and the water in the stream is just a foreground. The scan
>> appears dull to me. Overall composition is nice, if typical for such a
>> shot.
>> Water mandate 8.
>
>
> Thank you for your comments. Well yes I do agree that the picture is a
> bit dull somehow in the colors and contrast .. the scan didn't make it
> much better and I feel that the edges of the picture show that, but I do
> have the same feeling with the picture itself (4x6 developed by the
> local "1h"). It was taken with a tripod, but the f/32 and the 80mm was
> the absolute extreme for my lense ... do you thnk that also could be a
> part of the issue?
Shouldn't be... there may be some difraction limitation issues, but that
would go more to sharpness. (as you lose sharpness you may get contrast
loss too).
There is a huge light range here and negative film helps; on slide this
would have been impossible.
When scanning, adjust the colors and tones (using white/black elements
as references) and then use the unsharp mask to bring out detail such as
in the rocks near the big log on the left in the stream bed.
>
> You're death on when you say that the stream is just the foreground and
> the picture is more about the surroundings. To be honest with you I
> didn't think about that when I submitted it, but now I can both see it
> now and must also admit that it was my thoughts when I took it.
By the mandate proposed by Simon, the photo had to have water in it, not
be about water ... I was being Xtra harsh in my comments!
>
> Thank you for mentioning the composition. You basically make three
> comments about the picture, whereform I surely can learn from all of them.
My pleasure,
Alan
Alan Browne
Lionel wrote:
> Word has it that on Mon, 22 Sep 2003 00:10:30 -0400, in this august
> forum, Alan Browne <alan....@videotron.canospam> said:
>
> Firstly, thanks for commenting, Alan. I really appreciate both praise &
> criticism of my work.
>
>
>>Lionel's waterspout in the garden.
>>Again a shot that does not immediately say water. Wetness abounds, but
>>at first we're asking "what's the subject?" The dark space in the
>>middle doesn't help. Finally, 'cause we know we're looking for it, we
>>see the water on the leaves and below the spout.
>>Water mandate: 7
>
>
> I deliberately used the dark space (a gully trap, in fact) in an attempt
> to create a certain amount of mystery. The theory behind the composition
> was that people would notice the water droplets on the ivy leaves first,
> & then their eyes would be drawn to the murky dark area, where they'd
> see the water flowing down the drain. (Dunno if anyone noticed, but I
> used the traditional waterfall/river 1/2 second exposure as a bit of a
> visual joke to reward photographers when they finally saw the stream of
> running water.) I guess I should've brightened the shot up a little to
> make the drain more obvious, but I wanted to make it hard to tell that
> it /was/ a drain.
You succeeded in spades!
>
> PS: I'm kicking myself over the shot I chose for the 'motion'
> assignment. Closely looking over some other shots I took on the same
> night, one that looked crap in the preview turned out to be perfect on a
> real screen. I'm definitely going to put up a web page with my
> 'hindsight' picks for this competition.
>
Water under the bridge. Move on.
Cheers,
Alan
Alan Browne
The Dave© wrote:
> My two personal favorites were Simon Lee's and Simon Stanmore's.
>
> Nice critique job by Alan, too, btw. I enjoy your comments.
>
Thx and you're welcome.
Alan
Alan Browne
Simon Stanmore wrote:
Well, you certainly took Simon L's mandate to heart...!!!
Cheers,
Alan,.
Alan Browne
jimkramer wrote:
For whatever reason I get the feeling that the scan doesn't pull out all
of the detail of the original. Maybe dull is the wrong word. The rocks
in the upper left and upper right have an un-focused look to them. Is
this where you tell me, surpirse, it's digital?
Cheers,
Alan
Ken Cashion
<alan....@videotron.canospam> wrote:
Good critique, Alan. I enjoyed reading it.
When I look at my image from the web, it is pixelated to all
hell, on the screen of the computer when I sent it in, it wasn't.
I really, really hate to start on this digital image pixel
thing. I really, really don't want to do it...but then, I already
know more about this damned computer than I wanted to know when I got
it...so...
Oh, yeah, my underexposure was deliberate...that is why I
figured the exposure for the little bar lamp and let everything else
go "depressingly" to wherever it fit on the scale. Even with an 80A,
the color balance was still toward the red...I knew it would be. Can
you imagine how red it would have been without the 80A? Wow!
And that was not just whiskey...it was Scotch and there was
water in it besides the ice cube.
I live at the edge of a swamp with cypress knees, Spanish
moss, algae, lillies, and a photo of that is what most anyone would
have done...for me, it would have been a cop-out.
Ken
jimkramer
> >
> > Jim
>
> For whatever reason I get the feeling that the scan doesn't pull out all
> of the detail of the original. Maybe dull is the wrong word. The rocks
> in the upper left and upper right have an un-focused look to them. Is
> this where you tell me, surpirse, it's digital?
>
> Cheers,
> Alan
>
But seriously, I was wondering if that wasn't more because it was handheld
at 1/8s exposure? I really wanted to know what you meant by dull; and I have
to agree there is an "unfocused" quality, but I wasn't sure if that was the
water trickling down the rocks due to the time exposure, or if my hand was
too shaky now to do that exposure length? I had a very mixed bag that day
and wished I'd lugged a tripod with me after I looked at what I had shot.
Thanks,
Jim
Lionel
forum, Alan Browne <alan....@videotron.canospam> said:
>Lionel wrote:
>> I deliberately used the dark space (a gully trap, in fact) in an attempt
>> to create a certain amount of mystery. The theory behind the composition
>> was that people would notice the water droplets on the ivy leaves first,
>> & then their eyes would be drawn to the murky dark area, where they'd
>> see the water flowing down the drain. (Dunno if anyone noticed, but I
>> used the traditional waterfall/river 1/2 second exposure as a bit of a
>> visual joke to reward photographers when they finally saw the stream of
>> running water.) I guess I should've brightened the shot up a little to
>> make the drain more obvious, but I wanted to make it hard to tell that
>> it /was/ a drain.
>
>You succeeded in spades!
Thank you. (I think :) Judging by your response, I achieved my
compositional goal, but it didn't have the emotional effect that I'd
intended. Feh. Oh well, halfway is still better than no way.
>> PS: I'm kicking myself over the shot I chose for the 'motion'
>> assignment. Closely looking over some other shots I took on the same
>> night, one that looked crap in the preview turned out to be perfect on a
>> real screen. I'm definitely going to put up a web page with my
>> 'hindsight' picks for this competition.
>>
>Water under the bridge. Move on.
I'm not fussed about it. I'm just annoyed with myself for not spending a
bit more time choosing a candidate. Because I was in a hurry, I went
with a 'safe' shot (the dancers), rather than giving the experimental
shots a decent evaluation.
FWIW, here's the shot that I liked better in retrospect:
<http://lo.ve.ly/shoot-in/CRW_0223-web.JPG>
Artistically, it's much more interesting, but I wouldn't venture a guess
as to how most people would react to it.
Alan Browne
Lionel wrote:
> FWIW, here's the shot that I liked better in retrospect:
> <http://lo.ve.ly/shoot-in/CRW_0223-web.JPG>
> Artistically, it's much more interesting, but I wouldn't venture a guess
> as to how most people would react to it.
>
overall it works but would have needed more 'punch' on the car. You've
just given me a cool idea though...
Alan Browne
jimkramer wrote:
Ah, the culprit! waterfall shots with blur, even just a bit, should be
taken with a tripod. The slightly unfocused look is camera shake and I
guess I shouldn't examime photos at 11:30 at night...
Absent a tripod, pick up a stick or something to take up the weight of
the camera. This will at least help get the weight off of your arms and
contribute to stability... smooth shutter movement needed too. Lean
against a tree with the body of the camera pressed against the tree too.
Cheers,
Alan
Dallas D
About the picture:
The shot is taken out of my sunroom louvre windows and the hotspots you see
in the background are the harbour lights of Durban. Despite an aperture of
f/22, that's as sharp as I could get them with my 28-135mm lens. The
exposure was 30" using A mode and mirror lock-up. Unfortunately I don't have
a cable release so bulb exposures are a bit out of the question.
My original idea for water was to shoot a bottle of Miller Genuine Draft
with the condensation lit from the side. Unfortunately I drank all the MGD
before taking the pic! Doh!
We've had a lot of rain here over the past three weeks, which although we
are now officially in spring, is quite uncharacteristic for this time of
year. Normally we have most of our rain in summer, which is generally
November - June (yes, I'm serious). So there I was, staring out the window
at the harbour, lamenting the demise of all the Millers when the rain
suddenly hit the window.
Viola!
Glad you like it.
--
"Get up, get out & do something, how will you make it if you never even
try?"
Macy Gray
www.imageunlimited.co.za
.
"Alan Browne" <alan....@videotron.canospam> wrote in message
> Dallas Dahms night abstract of water droplets.
Brent
> Brent Schneeman's water pump.
> This is a subtle, simple and eye pleasing shot. The relationship of the
> windmill to pumping water may not be obvious to some. I'm not sure if
> I'm looking through misted glass or a reflection.
> Water mandate 8 (DISCUSS).
> Alan
Alan, thank you for your comments.
You are actually looking through a reflection of the windmill in the
water that the windmill pumped. The water was slimy. The sky was
grey. The original TTL-view was upsidedown. I like the photograph b/c
of its Impressionistic nature.
By the way, the relationship between the windmill to pumping water
wasn't obvious to me. It was a reflection shot. Now it is more than
that. Thanks.
(It was taken, by the way, in Click Texas. Mapquest can point the
way.)
-Brent
Bowser
Just curious; why did you want to damn the shot initially? What put you off?
Not looking to get into it, I really want to know what you thought.
Normally, I only get that reaction from self portraits.
Thanks for the comments.
"Alan Browne" <alan....@videotron.canospam> wrote in message
news:XCubb.22662$dp6.6...@weber.videotron.net...
Rich Pos
<alan....@videotron.canospam> wrote:
>
>Rich Pos' seascape.
>This shot does say seascape more than water, but it is a cool shot
>indeed with two bodies of water, two very different looking sandy beach
>areas and the sky with a nice yellow glow at the horizon. Like it.
>Water madate: 8, sorry 'bout that.
Thanks for taking the time to comment Alan.
You are right in saying it is a seascape, which was shot as a backup.
My original plan was a different, more original shot that failed. I
gave the original idea 5 min. exposure when it needed 8 or 10.
I bracketed 3 exposures but my guess-ti-mate was way off.
Where can I get a good, used, hand held meter capable of determining
looong exposures.... for cheap??
RP©
Alan Browne
Brent wrote:
>>>>>>"Alan" == Alan Browne <alan....@videotron.canospam> writes:
>
>
>>Brent Schneeman's water pump.
>>This is a subtle, simple and eye pleasing shot. The relationship of the
>>windmill to pumping water may not be obvious to some. I'm not sure if
>>I'm looking through misted glass or a reflection.
>>Water mandate 8 (DISCUSS).
REVISED TO 10!!!
>
>
>>Alan
>
>
> Alan, thank you for your comments.
>
> You are actually looking through a reflection of the windmill in the
> water that the windmill pumped. The water was slimy. The sky was
> grey. The original TTL-view was upsidedown. I like the photograph b/c
> of its Impressionistic nature.
In that case, although VERY UNPOPULAR OF ME TO DO SO, you are upgraded
to a 10/10 for the mandate!!!
>
> By the way, the relationship between the windmill to pumping water
> wasn't obvious to me. It was a reflection shot. Now it is more than
> that. Thanks.
Amazing what an image represents to different people!
>
> (It was taken, by the way, in Click Texas. Mapquest can point the
> way.)
Is "Click" a photographers paradise?
>
> -Brent
Cheers,
Alan.
Alan Browne
Bowser wrote:
> Alan,
>
> Just curious; why did you want to damn the shot initially? What put you off?
> Not looking to get into it, I really want to know what you thought.
> Normally, I only get that reaction from self portraits.
Initially all I saw were the damn lilly pads. They take up so much of
the surface as to obscure the water near completely. Then as I was
about to go back to my text to give you a free trip through the dirtier
gears of the critique machine, I noticed the line dividing the white
clouds and darker sky and tops of the trees in the reflection. I came
back to give it a harder look.
I still say the lilly pads dominate v. the mandate, but it is a very
nice shot.
Cheers,
Alan.
>
> Thanks for the comments.
>
> "Alan Browne" <alan....@videotron.canospam> wrote in message
> news:XCubb.22662$dp6.6...@weber.videotron.net...
>
>>Bowser's pond
>>I was quick on the draw to want to damn this shot, but a more careful
>>look a the reflection of the sky in the fore area, clouds in the middle
>>and the far shore trees reflected in the back area of the shot made me
>>re-evaluate this. Very good shot, lot of dimension in the plane of the
>>water, with the long grasses in the corner as punctuation.
>>Water mandate: 9 ---the lilly pads dominate.
>>
>
>
>
--
How important does a person have to be before they
are considered assassinated instead of just murdered?
Bowser
limited abilities of the camera, of course, didn't have the same impact
on-chip as it did in real life. I tell you, there's no telling how far I
could go if my equipment didn't hold me back. ;-)
"Alan Browne" <alan....@videotron.canospam> wrote in message
news:BaLbb.2934$9n4....@wagner.videotron.net...
Alan Browne
I.Reje...@my.isp wrote:
> Archived from Alan Browne <alan....@videotron.canospam> on Mon, 22 Sep
> 2003 00:10:30 -0400:
>
>
>>My comments.
>
>
>>Vic Mason's park lake promenade
>>A shot with a lot of dimension that has some water in it. The graceful
>>curve of the promenade is nice, especially as it is accented by its own
>>return into the image on the far shore. Bench, grass, far trees, sky
>>dominate. Water is in the shot, but is not the shot.
>>Water mandate 7.
>
>
> Thanks Alan. I had another image, which would have increased my rank of
> your arbitrary Water Mandate, but that image resided in my archives. Now
> that I know archived images are O.K. to submit as long as they are so
> marked "*_old.jpg" I will endeavour to do better next time. :-)
> vm
>
Don't sweat the water mandate number, apparently I'm a bad, bad boy for
ever bringing it up.
Cheers,
Alan.
Alan Browne
Rich Pos wrote:
In your dreams?
See www.fredparker.com for a situation based metering system. Jump
right down to the section called Exposure Value Chart and the following
chart.
Alan.
Rich Pos
<alan....@videotron.canospam> wrote:
>In your dreams?
That *usually* doesn't work.
But I'll give it a try.
RP©
Alan Browne
Gordon Moat's Cranberry Ocean Spray.
This shot cannot be accused in any way, shape or form of not having
water in it. Even the obvious rocks (shoals, whatever) are deeply
covered in water. The bubbles/foam surfaces are made of water. Yes
there is water here. See the water? Hey look! Water!
Seriously there is a lot of texture and movement to this. The navy blue
seems real but the royal blue a little too royal blue? Any touch ups
you want to confess to here Gordon? The whites are a bit over the top?
Water Mandate: 10000000000000000000000
Cheers,
Alan
Alan Browne wrote:
> Well, here in EDST zone (UTC-6, +1 DST) it is just past midnight and
> there are 31 images in ... (Thanks always to Bret "Annika" Douglas for
> the posting work).
>
> My comments. I've added a "Water mandate" score (1..10) as many shots,
> to me, were not concentrated on water, but simply had water in them.
> This is perhaps beyond what the mandator mandated, he said "So, for this
> week, there should be some water in your photographs. What form it is in
> and what it is doing is up to you," but I'm taking a more literal
> interpretation that the shot should say "water" in some definite
> fashion. Sue me.
>
> REF: http://www.pbase.com/shootin/water
>
> Warning: I'm being a bit hard on some people here; and I'm being
> painful about whether "water" is the subject of the shot.
>
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
>
> Mike Benveniste's dam in the field...
> The first thing that hits (at thumbnail level too) is of course the
> magic hour light of this shot. The rich gold colors and the deep blues
> of the water. This shot (too small on the screen by the way) makes us
> want to see more of the scene and to take a walk there. I like this one
> a lot, but wonder if it has been cropped right (detail at top).
> Water mandate: 10
>
> Bowser's pond
> I was quick on the draw to want to damn this shot, but a more careful
> look a the reflection of the sky in the fore area, clouds in the middle
> and the far shore trees reflected in the back area of the shot made me
> re-evaluate this. Very good shot, lot of dimension in the plane of the
> water, with the long grasses in the corner as punctuation.
> Water mandate: 9 ---the lilly pads dominate.
>
> Dallas Dahms night abstract of water droplets.
> I like this a lot for the hot colours in the back being caught and
> reflected by the drops hanging on to.... ?
> A stark and simple composition.
> Water mandate: 10
>
> Vic Mason's park lake promenade
> A shot with a lot of dimension that has some water in it. The graceful
> curve of the promenade is nice, especially as it is accented by its own
> return into the image on the far shore. Bench, grass, far trees, sky
> dominate. Water is in the shot, but is not the shot.
> Water mandate 7.
>
> Dennis O'Connor's wet night street
> At least some seeming evidence that it was done in the past 9 days.
> Very cool night shot with the colors and reflections. We're drawn more
> to the street action and lights ... the drops of water on the
> windshield are distraction more that subject.
> Date in the image, ugh.
> Water mandate 8.
>
> Doug Payne's ... ?
> Wonderful composition and use of negative space in what is really an
> environmental statement? Patterns in the slime are interesting...
> Water mandate 10.
>
> Pete's ... water shot.
> Yep that's water. Weird shot, we're not sure what is giving the
> water's surface it's shapes and forms. Sunlight glinting is good as are
> the weeds and stones on the bottom.
> Water mandate: 10
>
> Rich Pos' seascape.
> This shot does say seascape more than water, but it is a cool shot
> indeed with two bodies of water, two very different looking sandy beach
> areas and the sky with a nice yellow glow at the horizon. Like it.
> Water madate: 8, sorry 'bout that.
>
> Relics ... (name or title)
> Spectacular sunset shot with a reflection on a pond.
> Water mandate: 6
>
> John Riegle's seagulls by water
> Okay, I'm tired of saying by now. This shot has water in it, but the
> shot is not about water!!!!
> Water mandate 7.
>
> Brent Schneeman's water pump.
> This is a subtle, simple and eye pleasing shot. The relationship of the
> windmill to pumping water may not be obvious to some. I'm not sure if
> I'm looking through misted glass or a reflection.
> Water mandate 8 (DISCUSS).
>
> Simon Stanmore's portrait of a girl dribling water from her mouth...
> As compositions and use of light go, this is one of the best in the
> whole shootin. The skin tones and texture are recorded beautifully; the
> rim lighting very effective against the background.
> Water mandate 9 ...the girl is too appealing!
>
> Glenn Travis' fountains.
> Overall as an image this is very, very nice. In fact I've had a copy of
> this in my "OPP" folder since Glenn first put it up over a year ago (so,
> so much for the rulz.) The simple two color on black shot makes it very
> strong and the exposure of the fountains is ...perfect. The dead space
> above the building is unfortunate, but the power of the overall image
> convincing. Water does not dominate the shot, but is clearly part of
> it...and the detailed rippled reflections in the water help give the
> image depth.
> Water mandate 8.
>
>
>
> Alan
>
--
Michael Benveniste
<alan....@videotron.canospam> wrote:
>Mike Benveniste's dam in the field...
>The first thing that hits (at thumbnail level too) is of course the
>magic hour light of this shot. The rich gold colors and the deep blues
>of the water. This shot (too small on the screen by the way) makes us
>want to see more of the scene and to take a walk there. I like this one
>a lot, but wonder if it has been cropped right (detail at top).
>Water mandate: 10
Thanks for your comments. I'm afraid I had brain fade when I
submitted to the contest; I saw the topic, said, "Hey, I just uploaded
a water shot" and popped off a copy without reading the rules. Mea
Culpa.
That's the full shot, but it's a generic scan of a 4x6 print. I'm
hoping to get a film scanner Real Soon Now -- once I do I'll get back
in the running.
Incidentially, the shot was taken just north of Leenane, on the border
between County Galway and County Mayo.
--
Michael Benveniste -- mhb-...@clearether.com
Spam and UCE professionally evaluated for $250. Use this email
address only to submit mail for evaluation.
Rich Pos
Gave a quick look. Think I'll need to spend more time with it because
I have no idea what he's talking about. I'm at best a 'shoot from the
hip' photographer (hey, that's just what I've been doing for the
latest mandate).
Technical details are usually wasted on a guy like me.
Thanks for the link.
RP©
Alan Browne
Rich Pos wrote:
Hmm... it is simple enough.
Do you know the film speed? Good
Can you read the first chart? I thought so.
Let's say it's "Night Away from city lights under a full moon"
That is EV = -3
2nd chart
Let's say the film is 800
Look down the 800 collumn til you hit -3
Look accross for times that go with the apertures above.
If the ev value you want doesn't appear, just extrapolate:
Say the film was ISO 100.
First value is EV= -1 ( 2 stops) brigher than EV = -3 )
Look accross for time and aperture, but now also open up 2 stops; or
open up 1 stop and double the time; or double the time and double it
again...
How much easier can it get?
Cheers,
Alan.
Rich Pos
<alan....@videotron.canospam> wrote:
>How much easier can it get?
*blush*
RP©
Leicaddict
water, and for this I think you clearly missed the mark. While steam and
ice are different states of water, when we say water specifically, then
we're talking about the liquid form. Unfortunately, non of your elements
ties into the central theme,i.e., water. except for the slight condensation
I saw.
--
Leicaddict
"Alan Browne" <alan....@videotron.canospam> wrote in message
news:XCubb.22662$dp6.6...@weber.videotron.net...
> Well, here in EDST zone (UTC-6, +1 DST) it is just past midnight and
> there are 31 images in ... (Thanks always to Bret "Annika" Douglas for
> the posting work).
>
> My comments. I've added a "Water mandate" score (1..10) as many shots,
> to me, were not concentrated on water, but simply had water in them.
> This is perhaps beyond what the mandator mandated, he said "So, for this
> week, there should be some water in your photographs. What form it is in
> and what it is doing is up to you," but I'm taking a more literal
> interpretation that the shot should say "water" in some definite
> fashion. Sue me.
>
> REF: http://www.pbase.com/shootin/water
>
> Warning: I'm being a bit hard on some people here; and I'm being
> painful about whether "water" is the subject of the shot.
>
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
>
> Mike Benveniste's dam in the field...
> The first thing that hits (at thumbnail level too) is of course the
> magic hour light of this shot. The rich gold colors and the deep blues
> of the water. This shot (too small on the screen by the way) makes us
> want to see more of the scene and to take a walk there. I like this one
> a lot, but wonder if it has been cropped right (detail at top).
> Water mandate: 10
>
Alan Browne
Michael Benveniste wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 00:10:30 -0400, Alan Browne
> <alan....@videotron.canospam> wrote:
>
>
>
>>Mike Benveniste's dam in the field...
>>The first thing that hits (at thumbnail level too) is of course the
>>magic hour light of this shot. The rich gold colors and the deep blues
>>of the water. This shot (too small on the screen by the way) makes us
>>want to see more of the scene and to take a walk there. I like this one
>>a lot, but wonder if it has been cropped right (detail at top).
>>Water mandate: 10
>
>
> Thanks for your comments. I'm afraid I had brain fade when I
> submitted to the contest; I saw the topic, said, "Hey, I just uploaded
> a water shot" and popped off a copy without reading the rules. Mea
> Culpa.
Mea Culpa for what? It's a very nice photo and, gasp, there's water in it!
>
> That's the full shot, but it's a generic scan of a 4x6 print. I'm
> hoping to get a film scanner Real Soon Now -- once I do I'll get back
> in the running.
Used, perfect condition Dimage Scan Dual CAD$300, you pay shipping. All
the original doo-dads and software. (24 bit, eg 8 bit per R.G.B.).
>
> Incidentially, the shot was taken just north of Leenane, on the border
> between County Galway and County Mayo.
Ireland? 230VAC? Maybe you better not buy that scanner from me unless
you have a 2:1 transformer handy.
I've raised a suggestion that people post comments on their shot
following pbase opening....
Cheers,
Alan
Simon Lee
spell out:
> Don't sweat the water mandate number, apparently I'm a bad, bad boy
> for ever bringing it up.
It's my fault for not being more specific about using the mandate in
the photo... though at the time I think I was being coy about folks using
shots of clouds :)
--
__ A L L D O N E! B Y E B Y E!
(__ * _ _ _ _ "Some days I feel like my shadow's casting me
__)|| | |(_)| \ Some days the sun don't shine." --Warren Zevon
Gordon Moat
> Gordon Moat's Cranberry Ocean Spray.
> This shot cannot be accused in any way, shape or form of not having
> water in it. Even the obvious rocks (shoals, whatever) are deeply
> covered in water. The bubbles/foam surfaces are made of water. Yes
> there is water here. See the water? Hey look! Water!
> Seriously there is a lot of texture and movement to this. The navy blue
> seems real but the royal blue a little too royal blue? Any touch ups
> you want to confess to here Gordon? The whites are a bit over the top?
> Water Mandate: 10000000000000000000000
>
> Cheers,
> Alan
Holy shit!!! Thanks for noticing. I was beginning to think you missed mine,
since I got it posted a bit late.
Okay, this was shot using Kodak E100VS, and the slide actually is more blue and
sharper whites than I could get it to scan. No filter was used at all on the
lens, and exposure was set manually.
About the only scanning trick was to change the focus to just in front of the
mark suggested by the autofocus of the scanner. There seemed to be slightly
better detail when I did it that way.
Slight noise showed up in the Blue Channel when I exported a JPEG, so I did a
quick 0.8 pixel Gaussian Blur only on that channel. The intent was just to get
it to look like the chrome did under a loupe, though given more time, I could
have done even better.
Ciao!
Gordon Moat
Alliance Graphique Studio
<http://www.allgstudio.com>
Tony Parkinson
> Rich Pos wrote:
> >
> > Where can I get a good, used, hand held meter capable of determining
> > looong exposures.... for cheap??
>
> In your dreams?
>
;^)
--
"Does this mean we're not friends anymore ?"
- Doc Holliday
"Tombstone"
Brent
> Brent wrote:
>>>>>>> "Alan" == Alan Browne <alan....@videotron.canospam> writes:
>>
>>> Brent Schneeman's water pump.
>>> This is a subtle, simple and eye pleasing shot. The relationship of the
>>> windmill to pumping water may not be obvious to some. I'm not sure if
>>> I'm looking through misted glass or a reflection.
>>> Water mandate 8 (DISCUSS).
> REVISED TO 10!!!
Yea! Thanks.
> Is "Click" a photographers paradise?
Click proper consists of 2 shacks, the windmill and tank, some old
rickety fences and I believe is populated entirely by cows. However,
the shacks are nifty, the tank and windmill have potential, the fence
can be used for depth of field tricks, in the Spring there are
wildflowers and the roads are made of red dirt.
Yeah, Click works on a photographic level.
I have no idea of the genesis of its name, nor how it rates listing on
a map. But, when I was looking for a road map of Texas, the presence
of Click was the deciding factor in the purchase.
-Brent
Alan Browne
Ken Cashion wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 00:10:30 -0400, Alan Browne
> <alan....@videotron.canospam> wrote:
>
> Good critique, Alan. I enjoyed reading it.
> When I look at my image from the web, it is pixelated to all
> hell, on the screen of the computer when I sent it in, it wasn't.
> I really, really hate to start on this digital image pixel
> thing. I really, really don't want to do it...but then, I already
> know more about this damned computer than I wanted to know when I got
> it...so...
> Oh, yeah, my underexposure was deliberate...that is why I
> figured the exposure for the little bar lamp and let everything else
> go "depressingly" to wherever it fit on the scale. Even with an 80A,
> the color balance was still toward the red...I knew it would be. Can
> you imagine how red it would have been without the 80A? Wow!
> And that was not just whiskey...it was Scotch and there was
> water in it besides the ice cube.
> I live at the edge of a swamp with cypress knees, Spanish
> moss, algae, lillies, and a photo of that is what most anyone would
> have done...for me, it would have been a cop-out.
>
> Ken
>
...did you see the "touched up" version of your shot that I posted:
http://www.aliasimages.com/images/21527569.Water_Ken_Cashion_AHB.jpg
I think I managed to retain the gloom and depression....
Ken Cashion
<alan....@videotron.canospam> wrote:
Yes, I did and I thanked you and commented on it somewhere
else.
"Gloom"?
"Depression"?
That might have been the high point of that old guy's day.
:o)
Still, "Joy" or "Delight" might have been confusing.
Ken
Alan Browne
Ken Cashion wrote:
...I have recurring problems with Videotron. About 1% of posts out
there are invicible to me...
> "Gloom"?
> "Depression"?
> That might have been the high point of that old guy's day.
> :o)
...just that you don't catch the mood yourself...
Alan Browne
I can only assume from below that that person was close to you.
Condolences.
Alan.
Dennis O'Connor wrote:
> It is 4:45AM and I am going to pull the plug on a respirator that is keeping
> a man alive and the whole world weeps - and why this moisture on my face as
> I raise the camera.....
> And, the camera date happened to be on by circumstance...
> Denny
> "Alan Browne" <alan....@videotron.canospam> wrote in message > Dennis
Leicaddict
--
Leicaddict
<I.Reje...@my.isp> wrote in message
news:%WWbb.2$5z...@twister.socal.rr.com...
Archived from "Leicaddict" <leica...@hotmail.com> on Mon, 22 Sep 2003
22:11:18 -0400:
>Alan, I might point out that it's not about water, steam, and ice, but only
>water, and for this I think you clearly missed the mark. While steam and
>ice are different states of water, when we say water specifically, then
>we're talking about the liquid form. Unfortunately, non of your elements
>ties into the central theme,i.e., water. except for the slight condensation
>I saw.
Whilst some may agree with you, speak for yourself. When, as you say, "we"
(the royal WE?) say water, it means simply water. A particular physical
state of water was not specified in the mandate. Solid water or water
vapour is still water. Period. Alan did NOT "miss the mark" at all.
mailto: clix.at.xeropixdotcom
Leicaddict
teacher. "We" can be used instead of "I" to maintain an impersonal tone. But
you already knew that, right? Like I said, Moron. But don't worry next time,
I'll write down to the lowest common denominator. Your mother must really be
proud of you.
--
Leicaddict
<I.Reje...@my.isp> wrote in message
news:_97cb.1298$T46...@twister.socal.rr.com...
Fucking Leicaidiot. You are a dipshit. Try line 3, word 8 as well as a
contracted form on line 4, word 1 of your response to Alan. Bzzzt. Thanks
for playing,dummy. You need to switch to crack-Lite. Hahahahahaha!
Archived from "Leicaddict" <leica...@hotmail.com> on Tue, 23 Sep 2003
20:30:21 -0400:
>Hey Moron, exactly where did I ever say, "We?"
>Leicaddict
Alan Browne
Aha! Trying to escape the scathing comments of your faithful narrator
by slipping in some late entries!!! Well, I will be extra nasty...
Kramer's "how I was killed by a water attack"
This stunning last moment shot of someone literally at deaths door from
a drive by water shooting will be a landmark in photojournalism. (Okay,
it's the other way around ... the drive-er-by-er is being shot...)
Bystanders watch, aghast, as the shooter stares down the target and
mercilessly lets him have it.
You will be remembered, oh great fearless shooter.
Water mandate: 10
Peter Boormans's "spring water"
Ooooohhheeeee, are we being subtle here! The simple composition is very
appealing, the large water droplet reflecting a nice dark blue that
contrasts agains the soft back ground. I like it. Perhaps the depth of
field could have been a bit deeper, and the focus a bit sharper while
maintaing the smooth oof background.
Water mandate: 8 (spring dominates)
Duncan Ross's "Guinnea Pigs day at the Baths"
Sorry, this is gonna hurt. This is a P&S shot. You could have taken
this from different perspectives to get a more interesting look at the
rodents... and I have no idea how they behave in these situations but a
comical element like a little beach ball or something that a child would
play with in the bath to add dimension and color as well, would have
helped immensely. Shot is not sharply focused (which would enhance the
wet fur) and the scan seems dull.
Water mandate: 9.
Alan Browne wrote:
> Well, here in EDST zone (UTC-6, +1 DST) it is just past midnight and
> there are 31 images in ... (Thanks always to Bret "Annika" Douglas for
> the posting work).
>
> My comments. I've added a "Water mandate" score (1..10) as many shots,
> to me, were not concentrated on water, but simply had water in them.
> This is perhaps beyond what the mandator mandated, he said "So, for this
> week, there should be some water in your photographs. What form it is in
> and what it is doing is up to you," but I'm taking a more literal
> interpretation that the shot should say "water" in some definite
> fashion. Sue me.
>
> REF: http://www.pbase.com/shootin/water
>
> Warning: I'm being a bit hard on some people here; and I'm being
> painful about whether "water" is the subject of the shot.
>
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
>
> Mike Benveniste's dam in the field...
> The first thing that hits (at thumbnail level too) is of course the
> magic hour light of this shot. The rich gold colors and the deep blues
> of the water. This shot (too small on the screen by the way) makes us
> want to see more of the scene and to take a walk there. I like this one
> a lot, but wonder if it has been cropped right (detail at top).
> Water mandate: 10
>
> Dennis O'Connor's wet night street
> At least some seeming evidence that it was done in the past 9 days.
> Very cool night shot with the colors and reflections. We're drawn more
> to the street action and lights ... the drops of water on the
> windshield are distraction more that subject.
> Date in the image, ugh.
> Water mandate 8.
>
> Doug Payne's ... ?
> Wonderful composition and use of negative space in what is really an
> environmental statement? Patterns in the slime are interesting...
> Water mandate 10.
>
> Pete's ... water shot.
> Yep that's water. Weird shot, we're not sure what is giving the
> water's surface it's shapes and forms. Sunlight glinting is good as are
> the weeds and stones on the bottom.
> Water mandate: 10
>
> Rich Pos' seascape.
> This shot does say seascape more than water, but it is a cool shot
> indeed with two bodies of water, two very different looking sandy beach
> areas and the sky with a nice yellow glow at the horizon. Like it.
> Water madate: 8, sorry 'bout that.
>
> Relics ... (name or title)
> Spectacular sunset shot with a reflection on a pond.
> Water mandate: 6
>
> John Riegle's seagulls by water
> Okay, I'm tired of saying by now. This shot has water in it, but the
> shot is not about water!!!!
> Water mandate 7.
>
> Brent Schneeman's water pump.
> This is a subtle, simple and eye pleasing shot. The relationship of the
> windmill to pumping water may not be obvious to some. I'm not sure if
> I'm looking through misted glass or a reflection.
> Water mandate 8 (DISCUSS).
>
Alan Browne
I hereby rename Duncun Ross's shot,
"Bubble Bath at the Bay of Guinnea Pigs"
Cheers,
Alan.
Bandicoot
>
>
> Aha! Trying to escape the scathing comments of your faithful narrator
> by slipping in some late entries!!! Well, I will be extra nasty...
[SNIP]
>
> Peter Boormans's "spring water"
> Ooooohhheeeee, are we being subtle here! The simple composition is very
> appealing, the large water droplet reflecting a nice dark blue that
> contrasts agains the soft back ground. I like it. Perhaps the depth of
> field could have been a bit deeper, and the focus a bit sharper while
> maintaing the smooth oof background.
> Water mandate: 8 (spring dominates)
Thanks - I am rather pleased to see how different your reaction is from
Al's, because I hoped that it would be a shot that wouldn't just press the
same buttons with everyone.
I considered having more DoF, but in the end liked the way the very shallow
depth means the helix of the spring moves in and out of focus as it goes
round, it seems to slow down the eye's movement across the frame. But a pin
sharp version would be equally valid, just different.
The overall sharpness is better on the slide: this is not a very good scan
but by the time I'd realised that I was much keener on going to bed than on
doing it again...
"Never mind the sharpness, feel the bokeh...."
;-)
Peter
Steve Kramer
>
> Aha! Trying to escape the scathing comments of your faithful narrator
> by slipping in some late entries!!! Well, I will be extra nasty...
>
> Kramer's "how I was killed by a water attack"
> This stunning last moment shot of someone literally at deaths door from
> a drive by water shooting will be a landmark in photojournalism.
Danger is my destiny... (said with my best James Bondian look.)
> (Okay,
> it's the other way around ... the drive-er-by-er is being shot...)
I was afoot, courageously stalking dangerously wet T-shirts.
No cars for this photophool!
> Bystanders watch, aghast, as the shooter stares down the target and
> mercilessly lets him have it.
Aghast that I had a camera in my hand and LET him squirt me! Little did
they know "M" had supplied me with my waterproof case!
> You will be remembered, oh great fearless shooter.
I don't want to be remembered. I want to be paid, damnit. Everyone
always says 'I want to remember you' but nobody says 'I want to pay
you.'
> Water mandate: 10
Thanks. This is the most fun I've had with my clothes on in a long time!
Steve Kramer
Chiang Mai, Thailand
http://www.photoenvisions.com
--
"The voyage of discovery lies not in seeking new horizons,
but in seeing with new eyes." - Marcel Proust
Alan Browne
Steve Kramer wrote:
> Alan Browne wrote:
>
>>Aha! Trying to escape the scathing comments of your faithful narrator
>>by slipping in some late entries!!! Well, I will be extra nasty...
>>
>>Kramer's "how I was killed by a water attack"
>>This stunning last moment shot of someone literally at deaths door from
>>a drive by water shooting will be a landmark in photojournalism.
>
>
> Danger is my destiny... (said with my best James Bondian look.)
I think that was some other cheap booze swilling womanizing fearless
holleywood hero who said that...
>
>
>>(Okay,
>>it's the other way around ... the drive-er-by-er is being shot...)
>
>
> I was afoot, courageously stalking dangerously wet T-shirts.
Ah, career minded...
> No cars for this photophool!
>
>
>>Bystanders watch, aghast, as the shooter stares down the target and
>>mercilessly lets him have it.
>
>
> Aghast that I had a camera in my hand and LET him squirt me! Little did
> they know "M" had supplied me with my waterproof case!
>
>
>>You will be remembered, oh great fearless shooter.
>
>
> I don't want to be remembered. I want to be paid, damnit. Everyone
> always says 'I want to remember you' but nobody says 'I want to pay
> you.'
My sides are splitting! See Lisa for your paycheque.
Cheers,
Alan.
Steve Kramer
>
> Steve Kramer wrote:
> >>Kramer's "how I was killed by a water attack"
> >>This stunning last moment shot of someone literally at deaths door from
> >>a drive by water shooting will be a landmark in photojournalism.
> > Danger is my destiny... (said with my best James Bondian look.)
> I think that was some other cheap booze swilling womanizing fearless
> holleywood hero who said that...
Actually, it was the title of a book about a British or Dutch (?)
commando in Holland during W.W.II. I read it when I was 12. Almost nine
years ago so I don't remember... It's amazing that senility can actually
set in at such a tender age!
> >>(Okay,
> >>it's the other way around ... the drive-er-by-er is being shot...)
> > I was afoot, courageously stalking dangerously wet T-shirts.
> Ah, career minded...
A mind is a terrible thing to waste. :o)
> My sides are splitting! See Lisa for your paycheque.
I tried that. She just said "I want to remember you." :o(
Alan Browne
Steve Kramer wrote:
>
>
> A mind is a terrible thing to waste. :o)
--a mind is a terrible thing to lose ( Al Gore ).
>
>
>
>>My sides are splitting! See Lisa for your paycheque.
>
>
> I tried that. She just said "I want to remember you." :o(
Me too!