Experiment!!! (Page 3): Thank you. I agree about the sky too. :sm01:...

Retired CPO Loc: Travel full time in an RV

Walkabout08 wrote:

The colors are fantastic and I agree with the earlier comment to crop out the sky. See Steve Perry’s recent top ten list for wildlife photography, he doesn’t want horizons in his backgrounds.

Thank you. I agree about the sky too.

Retired CPO Loc: Travel full time in an RV

tcthome wrote:

But, they are nice scenes & appreciated.

Thanks. I'm glad you liked them.

Retired CPO Loc: Travel full time in an RV

AzPicLady wrote:

I'd be happy with any of them, since my experience with birds makes me glad when they're recognizable. But the first one is REALLY nice, IMHO. I do agree that the sky adds nothing to the image, so I'd be likely to crop it out. But you might then be left with an odd size, making printing difficult (and I always print as the final step).

Thanks. I don't print at home, I just have a rare one printed on Canvas. I crop to what I think looks good. Never thought it might be driving the printers crazy, but they come through for me every time! And after looking at it many, many times I'm liking #1 a lot more.

Retired CPO Loc: Travel full time in an RV

Bultaco wrote:

None are really bad, they all have a yellow cast, may be my monitor tho.

Well, I think they are all oversaturated a bit. If I keep them, I'll do some work there. I didn't notice a yellow cast but I'll look again. Thanks

kpmac Loc: Ragley, La

#1 is quite good, Chief. I agree it could use a slight crop. The others are worth keeping but aren't as good as the first one. Please post more.

J-SPEIGHT Loc: Akron, Ohio

Retired CPO wrote:

Bosque del Apache NOT FOR PIXEL PEEKING. These would be rejects normally. Very late evening. Very low light. A lot of "fixing", for me, anyway. They look good to me from about three feet to the view screen. Viewed FULL SCREEN. I provided downloads out of habit but downloading these is probably a waste of time. I KNOW THEY AREN'T SHARP. I do have some sharp ones that I will be posting after I get a reaction on these.

Nice set

jim in TC Loc: Traverse City, Michigan

AJFRED wrote:

Well, to me at least, all three are interesting. The first appears nice and sharp, and I do agree it could be improved by eliminating the featureless sky. The second two impress me as being more “painterly” in appearance, and are pleasant to view as such. At one time in the history of photography, people worked to achieve this look. I like ‘em all.
-AJ FRED ( old Navy Dad)

I was thinking of saying something almost exactly like this.

LinHSNW

Likewise

Retired CPO Loc: Travel full time in an RV

kpmac wrote:

#1 is quite good, Chief. I agree it could use a slight crop. The others are worth keeping but aren't as good as the first one. Please post more.

Thanks Ken, I appreciate it! And I will!

Retired CPO Loc: Travel full time in an RV

J-SPEIGHT wrote:

Nice set

Thank you Jack

Retired CPO Loc: Travel full time in an RV

jim in TC wrote:

I was thinking of saying something almost exactly like this.

Thank you, Jim. I appreciate the comment.

Retired CPO Loc: Travel full time in an RV

LinHSNW wrote:

Likewise

Thank you!

GreyOwl40 Loc: Quebec City

Chief, I really don't have anything to add that hasn't already been said. You have received a number of good suggestions. It really is all about the first image. I really like the photo; especially the colors, so I downloaded it and tried a couple of crops. I wasn't particularly smitten by any of them, as I really do not find the sky objectionable. It is a different photo without the sky. It is unfortunate that the background isn't sharp, but this is certainly not a reject; far from it!

Retired CPO Loc: Travel full time in an RV

GreyOwl40 wrote:

Chief, I really don't have anything to add that hasn't already been said. You have received a number of good suggestions. It really is all about the first image. I really like the photo; especially the colors, so I downloaded it and tried a couple of crops. I wasn't particularly smitten by any of them, as I really do not find the sky objectionable. It is a different photo without the sky. It is unfortunate that the background isn't sharp, but this is certainly not a reject; far from it!

Thank you. I appreciate you taking a look. Yeah, I think #1 is a keeper, still not sure what I'm going to do with 2 and 3.

Quixdraw Loc: x

Retired CPO wrote:

Bosque del Apache NOT FOR PIXEL PEEKING. These would be rejects normally. Very late evening. Very low light. A lot of "fixing", for me, anyway. They look good to me from about three feet to the view screen. Viewed FULL SCREEN. I provided downloads out of habit but downloading these is probably a waste of time. I KNOW THEY AREN'T SHARP. I do have some sharp ones that I will be posting after I get a reaction on these.

Interesting coincidence, had a conversation with my buddy on the topic of pictures and pixel peeping. A great deal of the time, in print, or even in download, an image is very good and a pleasure to see. Maybe sometimes that is all that is needed. Heaven knows, I'm a fan of sharp, but just sayin'.