Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: Bobspez
Page: <<prev 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 333 next>>
Jan 11, 2022 12:14:22   #
E.L.. Shapiro wrote:
That is what I wrote in my last post. I uploaded my own file and it worked nicely. it's a great little tool for the restoration toolbox.
Based on the similarities in sharpening in your example and the OP's example, especially the hair and eyes, I'd say you found the answer.
Go to
Jan 10, 2022 21:34:43   #
Color film became available in the 1930's. Kodak first introduced it in 1935. Before that black and white photos were hand painted in colors. I don't believe this photo was taken in the 1920's. It doesn't look like it was black and white painted with colors. The hairstyle and clothes looks more like the 1950's or later to me. As far as how it was done, I have no idea.
Go to
Jan 7, 2022 23:10:33   #
Hope you like it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4K6Gm2JAgw
Go to
Jan 4, 2022 11:54:46   #
BigDaddy wrote:
While this photo may have won awards, it's proof that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Yes, it's OK but would never have received my vote,depending of course on the competition. I've seen hundreds if not thousands of wildlife photo's on the hog that *I* like more. I bet if you posted this picture on one of the critique forums you would get a bunch of constructive and maybe even destructive criticism.

There are unlimited possibilities in photography and not likely everyone will agree on the best, or any, combination. It's the nature of the beast.

As most people noted, including the OP, the instructor gave her his thoughts which she paid for. She simply let a bit of criticism influence her happiness more than it should have.
While this photo may have won awards, it's proof t... (show quote)


I agree with all you said. It just seemed to me that the award winning photo I posted satisfied all of the teacher's criteria in regard to lighting, shadows, background, framing and interest which was in the OP's original post. And I noticed that a recent photo the OP posted of a hornbill seemed to satisfy that criteria as well.

Of course beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Van Gogh was judged a failure and never sold a single canvas in his lifetime. The Beatles were rejected by a major record label just before they became a worldewide phenomena. One man's trash is another man's treasure.

I stopped posting pictures for critique a long time ago. I was gratified though when the only poster on UHH that liked the attached pic that I thought was quite good was a professional photographer.


(Download)
Go to
Jan 3, 2022 22:03:38   #
Photolady2014 wrote:
Again, I did not mind the critique, I wanted to know if I was bad for still wanting to take a photo even if it did not have the award winning background etc! Even if I knew when I took the photo it was not perfect. I was fine with the critique…
I'm willing to bet that almost all award winning photos are cropped and tweaked in post. Sometimes you spray and pray and get a great shot. With wildlife they may be here and gone in a few seconds. Sometimes great lighting and composition is just there, often it's not.
Go to
Jan 3, 2022 16:38:53   #
I only read the first few of the 29 pages. I think the teacher did exactly what you paid him to do, critique your pictures and give all the advice he knew of on how to improve them. As a pro he is probably using professional standards. For example, would this photo be published by National Geographic? As nice as your photos are, the answer would probably be no. In the professional art world there's a difference between very good and perfect and perfect is what people expect.

I was watching a 1997 Las Vegas Bee Gees concert with my wife and as an amateur musician I marveled that every single note they sang, every pause, every breath, every harmony, every stage movement was perfectly executed. I could never reach that level of perfection and all the training in the world couldn't get me there. I'm perfectly happy to be just an amateur doing what I enjoy, but I would never mistake my work for anything near artistic brilliance.

Here are award winning nature photos for 2020 that seem to exhibit the qualities and lack of faults that your instructor was teaching. The attached award winning photo seems to satisfy all his requirements. You can only do your best. Photography should be enjoyable. If you don't want criticism, don't ask for it. I don't.

https://www.worldnaturephotographyawards.com/winners-2020

Photolady2014 wrote:
Morning all! So I just got through taking a 5 day class with a very well known photographer who has won many, many awards, photos in the Smithsonian and is a judge for contests like Natures Best Photography. I learned sooo much about what makes a great photo.

Half way through the 5 days I was feeling quite overwhelmed and almost in tears because to get the photo that he would consider a photo seems near impossible. I totally understand photos before and just after sunrise and sunset are the best, but is it awful that I still want to take photos mid day? On several of my trips I have still gotten photos I really like, even though they do not have the special light and there are shadows etc. I scoured my photos and submitted them for the class and so far I do not have one photo that is not a "non-photo" due to shadow or lack of a hook or a background that is not totally creamy, or a host of other bad things.

I will post some of his comments to what I thought was going to be an ok photo.

The last one was reviewed verbally, the shadows! Bridge of the nose by eye, and the light patch of fur below the right eye as you look at the photo and curve shadow back to the nose is a big distraction. He could tell I was off by 2 degrees and that caused the bad shadow. The lighter fur to the left of the nose stops the eye from traveling from the lower left to the eye. You are supposed to have something soft in the lower left that makes your eye travel from lower left to the "hook" eye. In this case it does not work due to light fur interrupts the flow to the eye and then the shadows on the right. Then, the white fur on the lips could have been lightened to make it better if the other issues had not condemned it to be a "non-photo". Oh and the green line going through the background is bad.

Who knew you were not supposed to have sky in a bird photo, or that with something like a coyote all 4 legs must have separation and no crossover and that the farthest away front leg should be going forward. That the background must be very creamy with no light and dark areas. Shadows are the worst! Like crap, I was off by 2 or 4 degrees with the shadow. Must have a hook, no lines and of course good light, no messy sticks. Example an owl in a tree is bad if the leaves are all around it.

Anyway, I feel like a bad person/photographer for still liking some of my photos that are not perfect and still wanting to just have fun taking a photo and if I see a mom and baby moose at noon in a messy field of grass with a shadow, I'm still going to take the photo!

Again, I learned a LOT and the pro is a very nice guy and very talented. I will try and do what he says, but may still take what I know will be a "non-photo" am I bad?

Comments welcome, I have had lots of criticism lately, I can handle it! Well I might cry....
Morning all! So I just got through taking a 5 day... (show quote)


(Download)
Go to
Jan 3, 2022 16:16:22   #
With all the bright whites I think you needed to use a faster shutter speed. If you shoot in manual mode and look at the live view and keep increasing the shutter speed to get better contrast you should see the right image before you take the picture. It's similar to shooting a full moon. You need to increase shutter speed until the features of the moon show up well in the live view.
Go to
Dec 31, 2021 18:01:56   #
Happy New Year.
Go to
Dec 31, 2021 18:01:22   #
bsprague wrote:
You'll be passing the midnight mark 8 hours before I do. Let me know if there are any bugs, hiccups, anomalies or glitches.


Happy New Year.
Go to
Dec 31, 2021 17:59:42   #
We were alive in 2021. We may not be so lucky in 2022. Let's count our blessings and hope for the best. Happy New Year.
Go to
Dec 28, 2021 21:18:47   #
Settlit wrote:
Frequently, I find salient UHH suggestions for techniques and best equipment to capture Birds in Flight. But, from where I sit, suggestions would be more relevant to me if they were aimed at Birds At Rest. On a fencepost, tree limb, or telephone wire. Any thoughts?
What I found was that a used Nikon J1 from ebay with the Nikon FT-1 autofocus adapter and a used nikkor 55-300 zoom from ebay (total cost for the used camera and lens and a new adapter was about $600) was the best tool for capturing small birds. The J1 has a 1" sensor so pictures can be cropped to 100% with no loss of detail. The J1 can shoot in burst mode which I think is essential because they will only be there for a second or two before they fly away. If you fire off a half dozen shots you will be lucky to get the one good one. At full 300mm zoom the camera has an equivalent focal length of 810mm and can clearly capture small birds 50 to 75 ft. away. I just sit on my porch and wait for birds to come to where I can shoot them, or if they are on a pole or over my fence I'll walk up slowly and try to shoot them before they fly away. Because that rig only weighs 2.2 lbs. it's easy to shoot hand held while maneuvering to get the shot. Then post processing can get the right lighting and I always crop to the maximum to be able to see the bird well. If I can see the bird's eye clearly it will probably be keeper. I generally shoot at iso 100, f5.6 (the widest that lens goes at full zoom), and adjust the shutter speed according to the lighting.




(Download)


(Download)


(Download)


(Download)


(Download)


Go to
Dec 20, 2021 14:15:58   #
mikegreenwald wrote:
Thank you.
Unfortunately, this is not specific for the 6008i, and can also be found here in the US. The lack of specificity does matter - the automated features of the 6008i are bypassed in these older 120 film backs. The workaround is use the camera manually, which works fine as long as I remember to carry a light meter.
When I shot film I used a digital camera to figure out the correct exposure and shutter speed. I matched the iso to the asa of the film. Didn't need a light meter.
Go to
Dec 20, 2021 12:32:58   #
Another 120 back for the rolliflex 6X6

https://www.ebay.com/itm/363651556416?_trkparms=ispr%3D1&hash=item54ab526440:g:A50AAOSwqFRgf-8h&amdata=enc%3AAQAGAAACsPYe5NmHp%252B2JMhMi7yxGiTJkPrKr5t53CooMSQt2orsS5%252FLJbfonbQUYd49AU1AJY3V8OFq92%252BzxHCcQu9f2rtq%252BHnbJMltONwN6D3OkPeJ0oDe2BGXybK7gB0%252F6ZY3MWIQgeH%252FRzoivbv9JwUNcYRnmhknd109E3Py0vIzI9pUeLTvoQDn9623Nq0aIr7a5uTVrdNAZMuXdIawxx50nw71jvIjI1SGUwW8Is7PdLv2fK49tW9Uic3HdknoJjrERmNlCwv97vbqHAkG5kmIf%252F%252FeoI6g5GSpdAbstU1126vNlkowiMV93zhglI7HyFH4DeRKZ6e1DBKp6jKNKH1qkwj3kK0pLhcwUpgP%252FyEaCD0engDR%252BCS1qjb9QUIEjn4323SKWu3uO6R95%252F%252BaRZLCrlPyXdvGXxNpvOintqJb2kfX13QqlA21ZslT%252BfZrn8rsLrU36Aq37PVu%252FVFoQmA2lQ6tiLP4M5P7JBHlu0Qxf8MCpUKkycxV6QwBlypKvr0o%252BNFd07TK67a2geMyxyw2KBvF2mZtL3V8SvAQIqXtyVPE72VN3Wuu3F%252B42lTOVBsd8w8xxB5t8BE0wCpb0a%252BgEqo6YKfZk62VtA2b5untE%252BvbTOhjpXg4H47rQHCxW7lkgOTB5yK8%252F4%252FKgXv80GsoFegBcj8LQ%252FATxH6XSfcpl%252BTaoST5jZjgN4F9EMXRX2rN37wj8n065zljSn1hxOJyqk%252FwwINbeOnAo9b584jLFwDjPb5egdUXB6y3C9ih0CflQNfxxFHwIKw8%252Fj42pAhQcSJNWEa3BieDl9z4ejeG5jJ4F7621UNnh7oS56a%252BJU48OOedNUq5h8rf5dzJ0nxVjTmOqeY7B1j7MQknoEnrKeJT5AUOdbia%252FWe2N6ieSuySwiJNWi7sY6jaQ9PQi0QAUZng%253D%7Cclp%3A2334524%7Ctkp%3ABFBMkPvXjbtf
Go to
Dec 14, 2021 17:54:10   #
I have been buying from them online for years. Recently I ordered the wrong SD card and they took it back without a problem.
Go to
Dec 12, 2021 14:16:32   #
I thing the jpgs had more contrast and looked better.
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 333 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.