Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: docjoque
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 next>>
Nov 9, 2013 08:08:17   #
Mogul wrote:
Just on a lark, I thought it could be taken even farther. Bmac, you have done something thai is providing enjoyment and a learning experience. You have provided a picture with many "pictures within the picture", a veritable candy store of images in one file. Thank you.


Yes! Great crop. While we are always taught to add foreground interest, and those in the know always try to achieve it, we have to remember that the foreground interest has to be "interesting." Those rocks were kind of 'meh' for me, and more of just a check on the checklist. This crop brings focus where it should be.
Go to
Nov 8, 2013 08:30:43   #
lighthouse wrote:
Its pretty, nice colours, reasonable composition, the blue might be a little intense.
I find the polarised uneveness of the blue in the sky unattractive.
Is it HDR? The sky doesn't look natural.
Nice snapshot though.
I'd like to see a stronger foreground element to give the eyes a subject to lock onto and lead in.


The right side of the image is very blue. And the uneveness of the sky is distracting. Did you put a gradient on this image? It looks like it, for even the water is not of a consistent color.

Nice shot though.
Go to
Nov 8, 2013 08:24:00   #
Linda From Maine wrote:
No worries, just remember it's such a subjective topic, and I am no expert :) The background of this mushroom does not compete for attention IMHO. It is a pleasing color, mostly smooth texture (barely bokeh), and seems appropriate to the setting.

I think bokeh consisting of bright spots draws your eye away from the subject. I find myself wanting to know what the source of those bright spots are rather than spending more time with the flower. Also it just occurred to me that your flower is cropped quite close. Maybe if it took up less space in the frame?

Sorry if this was a bit of a hijack, hangman - but we're all struggling with the concept, and it's helpful to compare images, I think. Mariposa's:
http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-161397-1.html
No worries, just remember it's such a subjective t... (show quote)


I agree. This boke is so subtle and smooth that's it's not competing with the subject.
Go to
Nov 8, 2013 08:21:33   #
abso-freaking-lutley.
Go to
Nov 8, 2013 08:20:00   #
I prefer the original crop. Did you get any where his feet were blurred? Definitely keep the ravine. Perhaps lessen the shadow of the horn across the face and bring out the eye. A simple dodge with bring out the highlights and contrast of the eye, then just sharpen a bit.

Did you get giddy shooting this? I know I always do.
Go to
Nov 8, 2013 08:10:53   #
mariposa84 wrote:
hmm had to get that much bokeh because if not it would have been a house and car in my picture (YUCK). So if i understand correctly if I would have taken the picture against the sky with the same composition that would have been negative space?


Boke is such an important element of photography that I have trouble thinking of it as negative space.
Go to
Nov 8, 2013 07:27:04   #
I'm on my phone, so can't give it a whirl, but how about turning it into BW and actually ADDING some noise/grain?
Go to
Nov 6, 2013 09:09:02   #
So all you guys supporting the, "Camera doesn't matter" POV, what kind of camera do you have? You just use your cell phone, right?
Go to
Nov 6, 2013 09:06:14   #
boberic wrote:
if you give a good mechanic crappy tool he will still make a propper repair. If you gave a crappy photographer good "tools" he will make crappy photos. End of argument


So you're saying a good mechanic can drop a tranny with a Phillips head?
Go to
Nov 6, 2013 08:52:42   #
Well, Michelangelo would create a better fresco with mud than a bad artist with a full palette. However, he would not have been able to create the Sistine Chapel with mud.....well, maybe, but it wouldn't have been as nice.

A surgeon in the field can perform and amputation, but he'd do it so much better in an OR.

Rachmaninov would sound great playing a concerto on a garage piano, but he'd be magical on a concert Steinway.

I could go on and on, but i won't.

I think you missed the whole purpose of the post.
Go to
Oct 18, 2013 12:08:20   #
Pentony wrote:
Everybody has their own opinion. The only opinion which counts is yours. You have to do your own research. What is recommended by someone may not fit your needs.

For now put aside your budget. From a point and shoot camera (P&S), start reviewing bridge cameras with an attached zoom lens. Review online then go to brick and mortar (photo) store to hand hold cameras for your comfort level and your budget.

No matter what you purchase, it won't be your last camera because you will grow. Keep your P&S as a backup camera

As far as shooting through a fence?
1. try to avoid it or
2. get up as close to the fence as you can (lens hood on the fence ~ see note below) or
3. get into post processing (PP).

Note: a bridge camera may not have a lens hood, so if possible attached a UV or clear filter on lens. Hoods and filters are for protecting the lens from damage.

You have to do your own research. After you find two, three or four cameras you like, go on line and use sites which will compare cameras.

No matter which camera you choose, you can't go wrong. Master that camera, then upgrade to another camera, keeping the previous camera as a backup.

Keep in mind that you're use to have a light weight P&S which fits in your pocket or purse. With a bridge or a DSLR you may not have that convenience. Have fun.
Everybody has their own opinion. The only opinion... (show quote)


Great advice.

Also, if you like the Brick and Mortar store, ask if they will match online prices. Many will do so now. That way, you get a great price, but still get the knowledge of the store employees and someone to help you out when you get stuck.
Go to
Oct 18, 2013 12:03:24   #
wteffey wrote:
Ah, the wonderfulness of on-line recommendations. Ask for something in the $1,200 range (still a lot of $ for most people) and we get recommendations for a $2,600 lens.


LOL! No kidding.
Go to
Oct 18, 2013 11:52:10   #
sueyeisert wrote:
I shot college football. I'd recommend 70-300mm with vr. And I love my Sigma 17-50mm f 2.8 lens which is on my Nikon all the time. Don't forget you need a monopod.


Anyone try the Sigma 50-500? I'm curious.
Go to
Oct 18, 2013 11:50:36   #
CurreyPhoto wrote:
Jenni,

Welcome to UHH. Nobody has yet answered your initial question. So, the best camera for sports shooting from Nikon is the D4 and the best from Canon is the 1Dx. The both shoot at a very high frame rate and at a very high ISO, both of which are critical to shooting sports. The best lens for sport shooting is less certain. For me it would be the 70-200 f2.8. Both Canon and Nikon make excellent ones. The argument for buying one or the other of these cameras and lens is that either will fit your needs for several years and you will not end up buying and selling several cameras and lenses only to end up where you could have been from the beginning.

I understand that it is daunting to think about spending that much money and being wrong, so, I suggest buying used or refurbished. A very good Nikon for fast frame rate and pretty good high ISO is the D3 model. I am sure that Canon has comparable models, but I am not sufficiently familiar with them to offer advice. Others here are, though. My last suggestion is to make dPreview. com you favorite web site, next to UHH, of course. You will be able to compare size, weight and picture quality of all recent and many older cameras, so you will not have to guess about what the various camera models can do. You should also google "sports shooters"' look at the pictures and see what equipment was used.

Good luck in your search, keep asking us questions and let us know what you decide on and how it works out.
Jenni, br br Welcome to UHH. Nobody has yet answe... (show quote)


Well, I think people were best answering her question based on her budget. You just recommended a 10k system to a novice. Many seasoned pros don't even shoot with the D4 or the Canon 1Dx. But yes, you're right; They are the best cameras for sports, and if she's going to be shooting Monday Night Football or the NLCS for SI, then by all means, she needs to go out and get that rig.
Go to
Oct 18, 2013 11:42:07   #
davidrb wrote:
8-) 8-) 8-) Some folks will advise using different lenses depending on whether the ball is hit to the outfield or the infield. :lol: :lol: :lol:


LOL!
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.