Posted by Roman Johnston on November 18, 2008 at 2:47 PM
Been so danged busy with projects and trying to get the business up.
Only had a small amount of time to play in the Gorge. Wife was with me so no long hikes, sticking to more common locations. The colors were great though. Got a pano of Multnoma as well in full color. It is in my gallery link below.
Roman
Posted by Roman Johnston on November 18, 2008 at 10:53 PM
Thats quite all right Jesse. I dont expect to please everybody all the time.
I apreciate all input.
EDIT UPDATE:
Jesse, Ok…taken a little time to think about what you said, and I can see what you’re saying about the sharpness of the photo. Looking back at the original at full size it is even reflected in that. It just isn’t 100%crisp….good catch on your part about that. I have a few other frames of the same falls, will look and even replace it with a crisper version or pull it from my gallery.
As for the composition, I stand behind that. What you see as a distraction I see as a piece of the scene that I cannot ignore and part of the full experience of being there….kind of like the shrubbery in the bottom of your punchbowl falls shot.
I stick within my framing/aspect ratio. My usual goal/discipline (except in panos) is to stick with the frame I have and not crop after the fact. I get the fact that not everyone is going to agree with my compositions.
Again…it is OK that it isn’t doing anything for you…if we all walked in lockstep….we wouldn’t have art at all. There would be one picture….and everyone would like it…and that would be it…lol.
Roman
Posted by John Williams on November 19, 2008 at 12:55 AM
That top left corner is quite attractive, but the rest of the photo doesn't keep up the good vibe; Jesse's got some valid thoughts.
Posted by James Walley on November 19, 2008 at 7:24 AM
I don't have the same problems with this image -- it looks quite nice to me. My only quibble is that the water has a bit of a magenta tinge in the LRC -- maybe a slight WB tweak would help?
Posted by Roman Johnston on November 19, 2008 at 9:28 AM
James, I can see what you are saying...I will look at that as well when I look for a crisper version of the shot. All the other colors are dead on, and will adjust the whites in a layer to reflect properly the white of the falls. Gotta say, good eye, its pretty light.
Roman
Posted by Marc Dilley on November 19, 2008 at 10:22 AM
A crop from the bottom helps things. One other issue is a hot spot in the rapids. You might want to go back to the raw file and see if you can recover some detail there.
Posted by Roman Johnston on November 19, 2008 at 10:37 AM
Cool...thanks Marc....will look at that when I revisit the file.
Roman
Posted by Darren White on November 23, 2008 at 2:26 AM
I think you could have done better with the comp.....including the man made walking area is a nit for me.......and you have cut off most of the right side of the cascade there at the bottom....also the water is washed out in many places...
Posted by Roman Johnston on November 23, 2008 at 8:54 AM
"Roman, that was a pretty harsh comment about Jesse's shrubbery in the bottom of his pb shot......that stuff is natural.....earth given........it also help to frame the image........come one now....be honest! "
Your kidding....RIGHT? It was harsh to point out somtimes you have to inclue part of the actual scenery to get the shot even if it dosnt add to the composition?!?!? Just because you have a personal ethic that says not to include anything man made, dosnt mean everyone does....nor is it objective to insist others hold to that same standard.
Sooooif I use your harshness meter....his review of my picture is over the top for talking about the fact he didnt like the wall in my composition?!?
He has his rights to his feelings and opinions....just like I have rights to mine....and NEITHER were overboard. Sure...when I first read his review....it gave me pause...but I am a big boy and can be introspective.
This is too much like a "good ol boys" forum. Objectivity is right out the window.
Please cancel my membership here.
Roman
Posted by Erik Lundh on November 23, 2008 at 1:21 PM
Hey folks,
I comtemplated removing a couple of comments on this thread. I really don't think we should rip into someones image for retaliation for previous comment's made by a friend, fellow photographer or themselves. Their were a few comment's made on the punch bowl image that were valid critiques. Once a critique is posted weather it's favorable or unfavorable, We should accept others opinions and go on... Roman, I hope you reconsider.
Posted by Darren White on November 23, 2008 at 1:48 PM
I have taken the liberty of removing my comment about your comment on Jesse's shot.......sorry for that!!! I do feel that my comment about your image is valid
Posted by Matt Anderson on November 24, 2008 at 8:18 AM
Roman, I think there has been a lack of respect by others towards you on this thread (after reading all the comments that were there before deletion). I think your PB comments were well within being in line. This is one of the few times I've seen this kind of negativity at NPN. very disappointing IMO.
Posted by Roman Johnston on November 24, 2008 at 9:54 AM
Thanks Matt, and thank you Darren for editing your post AND sticking with your oigonal thoughts on the cretique. I dont mind when somone has issues with my work. I enjoy the feedback positive AND negitive. I dont mind being pushed.....but when things start to stray toward personal issues and they come out in a cretique.....I start getting bothered.
I will argue points if my intent opposite of the cretiques info....if you re-read my comments to the others....I accept info and look back at my work with all the comments in mind amd accept when somone is spot on.
Like the softness, I agree completly, as well as the blown highlights and the mild color cast on the water. I can accept and see these issues and they are valid points.
I can also see your comment about inclusion of the concrete as an idea you didnt like....and you have every right to feel that. I personally dont mind including man made items in the compositon if neccessary. I often take city scapes so I don't really have a problem with man made items. I see the peice of concrete no more bothersome than a boulder in the stream.....for me it was part of the experience.
As for the composition my vision saw the lower detail where the leaves are as part of the stream as well. It isnt rapids where white water happens, but it is waterflow....so I didnt see the stream as flowing off the edge of the frame, but filling the entire bottom of the frame
But I can understand the visual queues the human eye zooms in on....and with the white trailing off the edge, I can fully accept and understand comments that were given.
Discussion
12 repliesOnly had a small amount of time to play in the Gorge. Wife was with me so no long hikes, sticking to more common locations. The colors were great though. Got a pano of Multnoma as well in full color. It is in my gallery link below.
Roman
I apreciate all input.
EDIT UPDATE:
Jesse, Ok…taken a little time to think about what you said, and I can see what you’re saying about the sharpness of the photo. Looking back at the original at full size it is even reflected in that. It just isn’t 100%crisp….good catch on your part about that. I have a few other frames of the same falls, will look and even replace it with a crisper version or pull it from my gallery.
As for the composition, I stand behind that. What you see as a distraction I see as a piece of the scene that I cannot ignore and part of the full experience of being there….kind of like the shrubbery in the bottom of your punchbowl falls shot.
I stick within my framing/aspect ratio. My usual goal/discipline (except in panos) is to stick with the frame I have and not crop after the fact. I get the fact that not everyone is going to agree with my compositions.
Again…it is OK that it isn’t doing anything for you…if we all walked in lockstep….we wouldn’t have art at all. There would be one picture….and everyone would like it…and that would be it…lol.
Roman
Roman
Roman
Your kidding....RIGHT? It was harsh to point out somtimes you have to inclue part of the actual scenery to get the shot even if it dosnt add to the composition?!?!? Just because you have a personal ethic that says not to include anything man made, dosnt mean everyone does....nor is it objective to insist others hold to that same standard.
Sooooif I use your harshness meter....his review of my picture is over the top for talking about the fact he didnt like the wall in my composition?!?
He has his rights to his feelings and opinions....just like I have rights to mine....and NEITHER were overboard. Sure...when I first read his review....it gave me pause...but I am a big boy and can be introspective.
This is too much like a "good ol boys" forum. Objectivity is right out the window.
Please cancel my membership here.
Roman
I comtemplated removing a couple of comments on this thread. I really don't think we should rip into someones image for retaliation for previous comment's made by a friend, fellow photographer or themselves. Their were a few comment's made on the punch bowl image that were valid critiques. Once a critique is posted weather it's favorable or unfavorable, We should accept others opinions and go on... Roman, I hope you reconsider.
I will argue points if my intent opposite of the cretiques info....if you re-read my comments to the others....I accept info and look back at my work with all the comments in mind amd accept when somone is spot on.
Like the softness, I agree completly, as well as the blown highlights and the mild color cast on the water. I can accept and see these issues and they are valid points.
I can also see your comment about inclusion of the concrete as an idea you didnt like....and you have every right to feel that. I personally dont mind including man made items in the compositon if neccessary. I often take city scapes so I don't really have a problem with man made items. I see the peice of concrete no more bothersome than a boulder in the stream.....for me it was part of the experience.
As for the composition my vision saw the lower detail where the leaves are as part of the stream as well. It isnt rapids where white water happens, but it is waterflow....so I didnt see the stream as flowing off the edge of the frame, but filling the entire bottom of the frame
But I can understand the visual queues the human eye zooms in on....and with the white trailing off the edge, I can fully accept and understand comments that were given.
Thanks again for cleaning this up......
Roman