A few black and white

robmiller said:
The second's alright compositionally but I'm not a big fan of the conversion personally. I'd like to see it with everything brought up and then the blacks crunched... it's pretty easy to go overboard with "punchiness" but I still think it needs a bit more.



Which is a largely unqualified statement because as far as I know you've never used anything else :confused: Being happy with your current kit does not mean that upgrades are "hype".

Compare your third shot (200mm on the Sigma 18-200 and ISO1600 on the 350D) to something a bit further up the spectrum (say 200mm on a Canon 70-200mm f/4 and ISO1600 on the 40D) and I bet it's night and day--infinitely sharper and far less noisier. You might be happier with the former, but it's nonsense to claim that that means to buy the latter is to buy into "hype".
Click to expand...

Chill out fella! :)
 
Last edited:
I can't say I am a fan of any of them to be honest, I find this kind of picture taking a bit voyeuristic and exploitative. I'd suggest approaching the person and asking if you could take their portrait or just generally approach the image capturing process differently.

Crops can't really do anything for the image because the composures are off and they're only off because you don't want to be seen to be taking a photograph of somebody that is unaware of your presence.
 
Last edited:
The second crop of the guy on the bench is better compositionally, but I'm not amazed by any of the shots really. For me, though others might like this, the graininess and the slight oof spoils them. As someone said above, it almost looks like film that's been scanned. Again, not necessarily a bad thing and some people will go to long lengths to simulate the effect, but it's not for me.

cleanbluesky said:
No, I think you'll find that the Sigma 18-200mm OS DC is a considerable upgrade over the kit lens. Given the price difference I'd hope so.
Click to expand...
It's an extremely versatile lens, which is what you pay the premium for there. Sharpness wise, 'ultra-zooms' pay a high price for their length versatility, especially wide open.
 
RandomTom said:
Why only tell rob, when cbs is not backing down either, when rob does follow a valid point.

Not to burst a bubble, or be one sided here but I'm not really a fan of the images, too noisy and lacking in sharpness/details for me.
Click to expand...

Its the continual 'condascending' attitude which destroys these forums for the rest of the happy bunch! In this instance, Rob kicked it off (and this thread is one example).

I come on here to look at the lovely submissions that people share, not to listen to ones opinion being drummed in, just because they wont back down. CBS is not innocent in this either as he should just ignore it, but to be honest, I just want to learn not be 'told' by someone who is NOT always right.

TBH, your comment could have included a more balanced critique. Rather than just criticise, how about say where he could improve the shot. Or what is good about it. If they are all terrible, dont bother posting.

For me, I think the noise adds to the 'dirtyness' of the environment and subject. I am not a fan of the first two as composition/crops are too tight, but the third is really great (although I agree, the other people in the shot are annoying).

Not a pop at you neither, just my opinion :)
 
martinturner said:
TBH, your comment could have included a more balanced critique. Rather than just criticise, how about say where he could improve the shot. Or what is good about it. If they are all terrible, dont bother posting.

For me, I think the noise adds to the 'dirtyness' of the environment and subject. I am not a fan of the first two as composition/crops are too tight, but the third is really great (although I agree, the other people in the shot are annoying).

Not a pop at you neither, just my opinion :)
Click to expand...

Thanks for this, in some ways I'd prefer people to say its crap if it were crap. The only thing that might be wrong about people saying that photos were crap, for me, is that what some people really like, others hate - even if they're both good photographers. Feedback is hard, but I don't post pictures to have my ego fed - I'm looking to learn and improve.

img4545nl4.jpg


Anyone got any opinions on this one?
 
Actually quite like that one, the only composition that could improve it is to even up the space between the heads and the buildings, and the feet to the bottom.

Like that one :).
 
It's okay.. not too sure about the image quality though. Looks rather noisy and a bit flat (the skin tones are the same tones as the pebble dashed building on the right?). What Camera is it shot on? Can't go wrong with the composition though, although I do prefer shots which retain their aspect ratio, I'm not really into liberal cropping but that's just a personal opinion.
 
EnglishMack said:
It's okay.. not too sure about the image quality though. Looks rather noisy and a bit flat (the skin tones are the same tones as the pebble dashed building on the right?). What Camera is it shot on? Can't go wrong with the composition though, although I do prefer shots which retain their aspect ratio, I'm not really into liberal cropping but that's just a personal opinion.
Click to expand...

It's flat because its a mild HDR then B&W conversion - I'm going to redo the source image
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom