Sorry for being so late in commenting. Busy and summer time..
I was also asked to comment on Dave Brook's picture. However I can't find any picture
by him in the August gallery. Has there been some mix up?
I happen to be somewhat critical in today's comments. Please remember that I am only
reporting on my way of looking at the pictures, there is no "truth" in there.
I also want to point out that, although I normally get by fairly well in speaking
English, this is definitely a situation where my
shortcomings at times are frustrating. (I am sure that many other non-English speakers
feel the same way). I often have to resort to speaking a simplified language than I
would in using my own language. Please bear this in mind, in case I don't express
myself very well.
"Harbor Lights" by Steve Larson
Although the scenery is nice I have to be somewhat critical here. To me there is a
lack of "definition"in various respects.
It seems that focus is on the boat(?) to the left and that the wide aperture doesn't
fully reach the far away harbor. (Or maybe a slightly unsteady hand has had a greater
effect on the far away objects.)
The points of lights in the harbor get burned out and "muddy"(?). (I ask myself
whether this may be a quality issue with the Vivitar lens at wide open. It would be
very interesting to see the same shot taken with an SMC lens.)
The interesting part to me is that particular light which dissolves into the dark sky,
particularly where the many masts add a special graphical effect, (where critical
focussing may not be of such a great imp�ortance) and I would have liked to see a
tighter crop in order to zoom in on this part. (However the bright, burned out spots
of lights may pose a problem here.)
I am also ambivalent concerning the completely dark area in the foreground. Maybe a
crop into a more panoramic format would have helped the eye in perceiving, for
instance, the contrast between the boat to the left and the further away harbor.
I think I would also have cropped at least an inch to the right.
Anyway, despite my critical words on some aspects it is still a nice scenery that you
have captured.
"Woman at 400 to 700 nm" by John Cohen.
Hm. It seems I am in a critical mood today.
I think you should work more with your "subject". She is beautiful.
However, this picture seems to fall between two chairs, so to speak. I am left
wondering about about the purpose of the picture.
She is not really being portrayed as a person. (Had this particular light from the
prism been left out, I could have more easily concentrated on her face, the
tranquility and shape of her head and face. But still, I guess the intention is not to
present a real portrait of her.)
Although interesting, this colorful light from the prism in my opinion doesn't really
add much to the picture, other than the funny effect of it.
A few words about the framing. Her head is firmly placed right in the middle of this
horisontal frame. This will lock your eye to her face, but the empty dark space to the
right makes it difficult for you to rest your eye in her face or follow the direction
of her own eyes. I would definitely have cropped the picture maybe up to her left ear.
(Just to complete this unfriendly comment I also notice some smear of whatever on the
print that you should have cleaned up... :))
Other than that, I think it was an interesting effort, well worth of further
explorations.
Lasse
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
