Once again, colour or B&W?
Aug 20, 2015 14:00:05 #
Aug 20, 2015 14:03:19 #
Aug 20, 2015 14:25:39 #
Aug 20, 2015 14:37:01 #
Aug 20, 2015 14:58:51 #
Color
But, the main problem is you either didn't get in close enough or you should have backed off a little more. You cut off one rider's head and several horses hoofs.
Closer to show the main point of interest, which is?????
Back off so you don't chop off parts of the subjects.
But, the main problem is you either didn't get in close enough or you should have backed off a little more. You cut off one rider's head and several horses hoofs.
Closer to show the main point of interest, which is?????
Back off so you don't chop off parts of the subjects.
Aug 21, 2015 00:20:48 #
color. that doesn't bother me Robert. i like the leading lines to the guys face
Aug 21, 2015 04:39:29 #
robertjerl wrote:
Color
But, the main problem is you either didn't get in close enough or you should have backed off a little more. You cut off one rider's head and several horses hoofs.
Closer to show the main point of interest, which is?????
Back off so you don't chop off parts of the subjects.
But, the main problem is you either didn't get in close enough or you should have backed off a little more. You cut off one rider's head and several horses hoofs.
Closer to show the main point of interest, which is?????
Back off so you don't chop off parts of the subjects.
The main point of interest as far as I was concerned, was the horses rumps. There was another shot of the same subject (see below) but I thought the first was a more interesting composition.
I'm not making excuses for myself since I am not a photographer but both shots were taken using the zoom on my P&S and in the bright sunlight it was almost impossible to see what was on the screen so, as I have mentioned before in other posts, it was very much a matter of pointing and shooting and hoping for the best.
Although everyone so far has preferred the colour version, I still think that the first one also works in B&W (and that's a question no one has answered) but not so much the second.
Aug 21, 2015 05:49:40 #
GARGLEBLASTER wrote:
Your opinions? Does it work in B&W?
Color just suits my eye better in this shot
Aug 21, 2015 08:10:56 #
Aug 21, 2015 09:24:32 #
I generally like b&w. The shadows crossing the riders' shoulders and backs is more problematic and detracts from the contrast that gives black and white the impact.
Aug 21, 2015 12:26:13 #
Aug 21, 2015 12:27:58 #
Aug 21, 2015 14:28:14 #
GARGLEBLASTER wrote:
The main point of interest as far as I was concern... (show quote)
You are interested in the south ends of north facing horses?!!?!?
A good argument for cameras that have view finders. I carry a P&S in my shirt pocket. I never use the screen outdoors in full daylight. I just set it for wide and aim over the top.
Aug 21, 2015 14:40:19 #
robertjerl wrote:
You are interested in the south ends of north facing horses?!!?!?
A good argument for cameras that have view finders. I carry a P&S in my shirt pocket. I never use the screen outdoors in full daylight. I just set it for wide and aim over the top.
A good argument for cameras that have view finders. I carry a P&S in my shirt pocket. I never use the screen outdoors in full daylight. I just set it for wide and aim over the top.
I like horses in general but in this instance liked the way the light shone on them. And as a matter of interest I was not the only person taking shots of that self same view.
Yes, viewfinders are very useful but neither of mine have them. You presumably are a photographer and those on UHH who know my work know that I never lay claim to that title. Also, if you seen the original thread where I posted this photo (http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-331817-2.html#5569053) where you will see lots of photos of horses from all angles, then you will have seen that the title of the thread was: "Crap photos, interesting subjects". I can't be more honest than that.
Aug 21, 2015 21:58:33 #
robertjerl wrote:
Color
But, the main problem is you either didn't get in close enough or you should have backed off a little more. You cut off one rider's head and several horses hoofs.
Closer to show the main point of interest, which is?????
Back off so you don't chop off parts of the subjects.
But, the main problem is you either didn't get in close enough or you should have backed off a little more. You cut off one rider's head and several horses hoofs.
Closer to show the main point of interest, which is?????
Back off so you don't chop off parts of the subjects.
Ok, I'll disagree with several of these points - I like the black & white, but it needs help - there's 'way too much brightness, and not enough contrast.
The headlees horseman is foreground, and not truly the subject (Nor are the horses' hooves). If you check the intersection of a "rule of thirds" grid, you will find one face, which too me, is the first point of interest (Then the dappled light on the shoulders of the riders, and the "South end" of the NB horses. Like so.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.