Fred Widall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for all the comments - good to see such a level of unanimity on the
list for once VBG
I was trying for the supermodel/barbie look but guess I overdid
things.
Funnily enough Leah thought it was a beautiful image, ah well.
If *she* didn't think it was
As an exercise in Photo Painting it's very good. But it's turned a
natural beauty into plastic caricature.
I'm not surprised she liked it. The technique is popular for a reason :-)
Dave
BTW Leah has a beautiful smile.
On 9/19/05, Fred Widall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Fred Widall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2005/09/19 Mon PM 12:39:27 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: PESO: Portrait of Leah
Thanks for all the comments - good to see such a level of unanimity on the
list for once VBG
I was trying for the supermodel/barbie look but guess
-Original Message-
From: David Savage [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
As an exercise in Photo Painting it's very good. But it's
turned a natural beauty into plastic caricature.
I'm not surprised she liked it. The technique is popular for
a reason :-)
People want to look like
I'm just as confused Bob. I said The technique is popular for a
reason, I don't know can't understand the reason.
Dave
On 9/19/05, Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-Original Message-
From: David Savage [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
As an exercise in Photo Painting it's very good. But
In a message dated 9/19/2005 8:12:38 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm just as confused Bob. I said The technique is popular for a
reason, I don't know can't understand the reason.
Dave
=
Movie staritis. Or extreme makeoveritis.
Marnie aka Doe
Bob W wrote:
-Original Message-
From: David Savage [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
As an exercise in Photo Painting it's very good. But it's
turned a natural beauty into plastic caricature.
I'm not surprised she liked it. The technique is popular for
a reason :-)
People want to
On 9/18/05, Fred Widall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/fwwidall/44492373/
A portrait of my co-worker Leah.
I tweaked the image in Photoshop - cropped in closer, smoothed out
her skin, brightened her teeth, added catchlights to her eyes,
lightened the skin tones and
On 9/19/05, frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The only thing I think is a bit OTT is her eyes - they don't look
natural with the light the way it is. Otherwise, it's a beautiful
portrait of a gorgeous young lady!
Well done!
...but now that I see the original, it's so much
http://www.flickr.com/photos/fwwidall/44492373/
A portrait of my co-worker Leah.
I tweaked the image in Photoshop - cropped in closer, smoothed out
her skin, brightened her teeth, added catchlights to her eyes,
lightened the skin tones and blurred the background.
I like the finished image, but
Yeah, I think you overdid things, by quite a lot. The
original is a very nice portrait.
Rick
--- Fred Widall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/fwwidall/44492373/
A portrait of my co-worker Leah.
I tweaked the image in Photoshop - cropped in
closer, smoothed out
her
Seriously over done. The original was a photo of a very attractive
woman that needed a bit of fill flash. The after was Bizarre. (I think
I'm over using the word Bizarre, I hope I'll be able to stop that).
Fred Widall wrote:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/fwwidall/44492373/
A portrait of
At 08:01 PM 9/18/2005, Fred Widall wrote:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/fwwidall/44492373/
A portrait of my co-worker Leah.
I definitely think you went too far. Everything looks artificial. You've
lost the natural coloring in the skin and hair. The hair looks overly sharp
on the top-left.
I like the crop much better. The original looks like one of my pet
peeves (I could be wrong on this one) - that is, AF tends to cause
people to compose poorly (myself included). Too often it is choose
the focus of the subject and then center that and focus and then not
really recompose. Fred,
Fred,
Way over the top!
This moves from a nice looking woman to one of the Stepford Wives.
Bob
On 9/18/05, Fred Widall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/fwwidall/44492373/
A portrait of my co-worker Leah.
I tweaked the image in Photoshop - cropped in closer, smoothed
Hi!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/fwwidall/44492373/
A portrait of my co-worker Leah.
I tweaked the image in Photoshop - cropped in closer, smoothed out
her skin, brightened her teeth, added catchlights to her eyes,
lightened the skin tones and blurred the background.
I like the finished
http://www.flickr.com/photos/fwwidall/44492373/
A portrait of my co-worker Leah.
I tweaked the image in Photoshop - cropped in closer, smoothed out
her skin, brightened her teeth, added catchlights to her eyes,
lightened the skin tones and blurred the background.
I like the finished image, but
. I simply like the
original better. Sorry!
Regards
Jens
Jens Bladt
Arkitekt MAA
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 19. september 2005 07:00
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: Re: PESO: Portrait of Leah
http
On 5/8/05, frank theriault, discombobulated, unleashed:
I think I'll go shoot on the street tomorrow - haven't done that for a
while.
Yeah any chance of a few frames without cyclists in??
;-)
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|
On 8/6/05, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 5/8/05, frank theriault, discombobulated, unleashed:
I think I'll go shoot on the street tomorrow - haven't done that for a
while.
Yeah any chance of a few frames without cyclists in??
;-)
We'll see...
LOL
Actually, I've got one printed
On 4/8/05, frank theriault, discombobulated, unleashed:
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3604173size=lg
I hope you enjoy it. When you see one you like or feel compelled to
comment on, feel free to jump in there. g
Nice snap ;-)
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People,
On 4/8/05, Shel Belinkoff, discombobulated, unleashed:
Hi Frank ...
Well, before getting it to what i consider a portrait, I'd like to say that
I'm glad we don't always agree, and that we sometimes see and feel things
from a very different perspective and POV. While i can't speak for you, I
One of the most beautiful portraits I ever saw was out of focus, showed
nothing of the man's features, and was shot from behind. It was apparently
an old man, walking along a path in a landscape bleached by the sun, and to
his right, a bit behind him, was a dead or dying tree, bent in a shape
On 8/5/05, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can see where Shel is coming from,
So can I.
and to some extent I agree with him.
So do I (to some extent).
Take 'Portrait of Tofu' (next PESO from Frank) for instance. Because
there is more than one person in the frame, are we to assume that
Well heck, Frank, I really like it. I like the
intense expression on the subject's face, his obvious
engagement with a mysterious something off-camera, and
the framing that includes the two out-of-focus
figures. Portrait? Maybe yes, maybe no. Nice shot?
Definitely.
Rick
--- Shel Belinkoff
On 8/5/05, Rick Womer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well heck, Frank, I really like it. I like the
intense expression on the subject's face, his obvious
engagement with a mysterious something off-camera, and
the framing that includes the two out-of-focus
figures. Portrait? Maybe yes, maybe no.
Hi Frank ... I don't see this as a portrait at all, nor do I see it as much
of a snap, either. There's no eye contact, which, in and of itself isn't
always necessary, but in this case I think it would help. PP has a very
goofy expression on his face, his head is at an awkward angle, he shows
no
On 8/4/05, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Frank ... I don't see this as a portrait at all, nor do I see it as much
of a snap, either. There's no eye contact, which, in and of itself isn't
always necessary, but in this case I think it would help. PP has a very
goofy expression on
Since you all liked my photo (was it a portrait? g) of Polish Pete
so much, I thought I'd keep them coming. vbg
Here's Tofu, up on the roof of the Carlton Arms tourist hotel in NYC:
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3604173size=lg
I hope you enjoy it. When you see one you like or
Hi Frank ...
Well, before getting it to what i consider a portrait, I'd like to say that
I'm glad we don't always agree, and that we sometimes see and feel things
from a very different perspective and POV. While i can't speak for you, I
know that seeing some of your work, and understanding some
Hi Frank
I like this one, it has a 3D - 3 person kind of depth for me ;-)
greetings
Markus
Here's Tofu, up on the roof of the Carlton Arms tourist hotel in NYC:
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3604173size=lg
On 8/4/05, Markus Maurer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Frank
I like this one, it has a 3D - 3 person kind of depth for me ;-)
greetings
Markus
Thanks, Markus!
-frank
--
Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
On 8/4/05, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Frank ...
Well, before getting it to what i consider a portrait, I'd like to say that
I'm glad we don't always agree, and that we sometimes see and feel things
from a very different perspective and POV. While i can't speak for you, I
Hi!
Since you all liked my photo (was it a portrait? g) of Polish Pete
so much, I thought I'd keep them coming. vbg
Here's Tofu, up on the roof of the Carlton Arms tourist hotel in NYC:
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3604173size=lg
I hope you enjoy it. When you see one you
I'm scanning several 4x6 quickprints (so the quality isn't great) of
some street portraits taken of a few of the Toronto messengers that
went to New York, so I can stick them into my photo.net CMWC folder
that I'm sending around to friends. You may enjoy some of them (or
not, who knows? g).
This
Hi!
I made this portrait the last weekend, I think it was Sunday. I shot it
with an wideangle lens (flektogon 35/2.4) and the result looks strange
and interesting for me. It was shot wide open at very low speed - I do
not remember exactly but at about 15-30. The negative was stand
developed
Hello to all of you,
I made this portrait the last weekend, I think it was Sunday. I shot it
with an wideangle lens (flektogon 35/2.4) and the result looks strange
and interesting for me. It was shot wide open at very low speed - I do
not remember exactly but at about 15-30. The negative was
Quite fascinating. A nice composition and frame. Very good contrast control in
what was probably a difficult situation. Excellent.
Paul
Hello to all of you,
I made this portrait the last weekend, I think it was Sunday. I shot it
with an wideangle lens (flektogon 35/2.4) and the result
Very nice. I like the softness to it, and the framing.
Dave
Hello to all of you,
I made this portrait the last weekend, I think it was Sunday. I shot it
with an wideangle lens (flektogon 35/2.4) and the result looks strange
and interesting for me. It
This is a beatiful photograph of a beautiful lady. Good work.
On 7/6/05, luben karavelov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello to all of you,
I made this portrait the last weekend, I think it was Sunday. I shot it
with an wideangle lens (flektogon 35/2.4) and the result looks strange
and
On 6/14/05, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://home.earthlink.net/~pdml-pics/hologram.html
This image was projected into a smoke filled cubicle and appeared on the
smoke. I was shooting directly into the light. Every fraction of a second
the image changed depending on the
http://home.earthlink.net/~pdml-pics/hologram.html
This image was projected into a smoke filled cubicle and appeared on the
smoke. I was shooting directly into the light. Every fraction of a second
the image changed depending on the movement of the smoke.
Shel
In a message dated 5/25/2005 3:22:00 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
http://home.earthlink.net/~scbelinkoff/wiwgr.html
Frank and a couple of others wanted to see a somewhat different
version of
this pic, and since i was in a mood to fool around in PS, here's a BW
version
On 5/26/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A LOT better, Shel. Although I still think she's squinting from the sun. But
it improves it a great deal.
Surely something can be done in PS about that squinting, Marnie. LOL
cheers,
frank
--
Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri
In a message dated 5/26/2005 5:34:51 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 5/26/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A LOT better, Shel. Although I still think she's squinting from the sun. But
it improves it a great deal.
Surely something can be done in PS about
In a message dated 5/26/2005 8:22:53 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Is she squinting? Is she squinting from the sun?
http://home.earthlink.net/~scbelinkoff/squinting.jpg (50% crop from
original)
Shel
==
Okay, it's a bit hard to tell. But, yes, I think the sun is
In a message dated 5/26/2005 8:58:45 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
As for her having skin cancer, well, that's a fascinating guess, but I
don't know how accurate it is, as she was part of a group (maybe four or
five people) who were wrapped in such a robe. Of course, you'd
Better, but more due to the blurring of the background than the
conversion, methinks. Some of the highlights appear to be a bit over
the top.
Paul
On May 25, 2005, at 1:28 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
http://home.earthlink.net/~scbelinkoff/wiwgr.html
Frank and a couple of others wanted to see a
On 5/25/05, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://home.earthlink.net/~scbelinkoff/wiwgr.html
Frank and a couple of others wanted to see a somewhat different version of
this pic, and since i was in a mood to fool around in PS, here's a BW
version with, perhaps, a less distracting
On 5/21/05, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm not sure if I like this one. There are some aspects to it that I find
quite compelling, and others that suggest I could have done a much better
job on this one. Others from the series were dismal failures.
Hi Frank,
Both the background and the color can be changed to suit your every desire
LOL
First, allow me to say that, overall, I agree with your assessment,
although I don't find the background as objectionable as you and some
others seem to. I don't care for it too much, either ;-))
I've
http://home.earthlink.net/~scbelinkoff/wiwgr.html
Frank and a couple of others wanted to see a somewhat different version of
this pic, and since i was in a mood to fool around in PS, here's a BW
version with, perhaps, a less distracting background.
A split channel technique was used for the
I'm not sure if I like this one. There are some aspects to it that I find
quite compelling, and others that suggest I could have done a much better
job on this one. Others from the series were dismal failures.
http://home.earthlink.net/~scbelinkoff/wiw.html
Shel
I'm not sure if I like this one. There are some aspects to
it that I find quite compelling, and others that suggest I
could have done a much better job on this one. Others from
the series were dismal failures.
http://home.earthlink.net/~scbelinkoff/wiw.html
Shel
Well, it's interesting in
Hi Shel
it would be quite a strong portrait for me without the busy background.
Like this it does not work for me and I see no way to improve it.
greetings
Markus
I'm not sure if I like this one. There are some aspects to it that I find
quite compelling, and others that suggest I could have
I find the light and the background somewhat jarring.
Paul
On May 21, 2005, at 12:45 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
I'm not sure if I like this one. There are some aspects to it that I
find
quite compelling, and others that suggest I could have done a much
better
job on this one. Others from the
, 2005 6:46 PM
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: PAW PESO - Portrait of a Woman in White
I'm not sure if I like this one. There are some aspects to it
that I find quite compelling, and others that suggest I could
have done a much better job on this one. Others from the
series were dismal
In a message dated 5/21/2005 9:46:44 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm not sure if I like this one. There are some aspects to it that I find
quite compelling, and others that suggest I could have done a much better
job on this one. Others from the series were dismal
On 4/12/05, Johan Uiterwijk Winkel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Taken during the first day I was playing with the camera (ist ds). Using
a A 50mm 1/1.7.
I wish I got the camera a year earlier :-|
http://24.132.100.203/IMGP0139-01.jpg
As Bruce said, big file, it takes a long time to load.
Taken during the first day I was playing with the camera (ist ds). Using
a A 50mm 1/1.7.
I wish I got the camera a year earlier :-|
http://24.132.100.203/IMGP0139-01.jpg
Very cute! The file is very large, however. I would consider making
it a bit smaller.
--
Best regards,
Bruce
Tuesday, April 12, 2005, 10:33:21 AM, you wrote:
JUW Taken during the first day I was playing with the camera (ist ds). Using
JUW a A 50mm 1/1.7.
JUW I wish I got the camera a year
Bruce Dayton wrote:
Very cute! The file is very large, however. I would consider making
it a bit smaller.
Next time Bruce ;-)
It's my first picture of a 6 megapix cam, so you should be happy that I
made it already a little bit smaller :-) It's waste of bytes.
Bye.
Johan.
On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 01:35:17 -0500, Peter J. Alling
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I decided to use a few prime lenses on the *ist-D just to see how they
preformed.
The oft maligned smc P-M 85mm f2.0 was mounted on the *ist-D when
Canon/Coffee house
girl decide to join me while I wasted some time
;-)
Christopher Oliver wrote:
On Sat, Mar 19, 2005 at 10:35:55AM -0500, Jim Hemenway wrote:
H... a pretty girl. That may be the problem in that you forgot to
focus on the eye closest to you. ;-)
I've often heard this advice about focusing, but as far as closest eyes,
I can't figure out how
On Sat, Mar 19, 2005 at 10:35:55AM -0500, Jim Hemenway wrote:
H... a pretty girl. That may be the problem in that you forgot to
focus on the eye closest to you. ;-)
I've often heard this advice about focusing, but as far as closest eyes,
I can't figure out how to get a lens to focus just
Christopher Oliver wrote:
On Sat, Mar 19, 2005 at 10:35:55AM -0500, Jim Hemenway wrote:
H... a pretty girl. That may be the problem in that you forgot to
focus on the eye closest to you. ;-)
I've often heard this advice about focusing, but as far as closest eyes,
I can't figure out
Hi Peter
nice framing and moment but unsharp and realy ugly Copyright notice (remove
the shadow there)...
greetings
Markus
I decided to use a few prime lenses on the *ist-D just to see how they
preformed.
The oft maligned smc P-M 85mm f2.0 was mounted on the *ist-D when
Canon/Coffee house
girl
Peter,
You focused on the tip of her nose! Try the eyes next time. That
lens has a very short depth of field wide open.
(Your contributing to the urban legend about one of my favorite lenses.)
Regards, Bob S.
On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 01:35:17 -0500, Peter J. Alling
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I
Focus, Peter, focus. This pic is OOF. Y'gotta get those eyes sharp in a
portrait. The extra compression over a standard portrait focal length
doesn't seem to work well here, but 'twas good to try it.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Peter J. Alling
The oft maligned smc P-M 85mm f2.0 was
H... a pretty girl. That may be the problem in that you forgot to
focus on the eye closest to you. ;-)
Jim
On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 01:35:17 -0500, Peter J. Alling
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I decided to use a few prime lenses on the *ist-D just to see how they
preformed.
The oft maligned smc P-M
I decided to use a few prime lenses on the *ist-D just to see how they
preformed.
The oft maligned smc P-M 85mm f2.0 was mounted on the *ist-D when
Canon/Coffee house
girl decide to join me while I wasted some time with a cup, (Papua New
Guinea). ~127mm makes
for tight head shots.
The background is good. Is this the curves tool you were using or
something else. I must explain that I still use Micrografx Picture
Publisher and am still learning PS equivalents.
Steven Desjardins
Department of Chemistry
Washington and Lee University
Lexington, VA 24450
(540) 458-8873
FAX:
Thanks Shel and Steve.
If you look at the image file, on the right, the editing went like:
- Added a layer copy of the background, did a lens blur on it, then
added a mask and painted out the bits of the blurred layer I didn't
want.
- Added an adjustment layer with the Curves tool, pulled down
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 08:41:36 -0500, Steve Desjardins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Q: I find the metal top of the fireplace distracting. I can't see to
fix ti with just cropping. Any other suggestions?
http://home.wlu.edu/~desjardins/
FWIW, I like Shel's version the best. It's a lovely
Hey Steve.
For some reason, when the picture loaded, it started off as BW, then the RGB
was added
one layer
at a time.
It works for me as a BW shot. The yellow in the mantel is gone and its not
distracting at
all.
Just a thought.
Dave
Q: I find the
Thanks to all who replied. I like this combination the best.
Steven Desjardins
Department of Chemistry
Washington and Lee University
Lexington, VA 24450
(540) 458-8873
FAX: (540) 458-8878
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 03/11/05 12:17 PM
Hi Steve,
Here's a QD adjustment using gaussian
Just got to looking at this thread. I liked what Shel did too, but I
preferred the full frame composition as you originally had it. I
thought it might look nice with the background defocused and pushed
down in value a bit ...
http://homepage.mac.com/godders/try1gdg.jpg
Eh, it's fun to try
Hey, yours looks pretty good, and I like the presentation. I still prefer
the tighter crop, but I prefer what you did to the background.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Just got to looking at this thread. I liked what Shel did too, but I
preferred the
Q: I find the metal top of the fireplace distracting. I can't see to
fix ti with just cropping. Any other suggestions?
http://home.wlu.edu/~desjardins/
http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrobb/temp/try1.jpg
William Robb
- Original Message -
From: Steve Desjardins [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Sent: Friday, March 11, 2005 7:41 AM
Subject: PESO - Portrait
Q: I find the metal top of the fireplace distracting. I can't see
to
fix
Clone stamp to the background colour.
John
-- Original Message ---
From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Sent: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 08:33:21 -0600
Subject: Re: PESO - Portrait
http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrobb/temp/try1.jpg
William Robb
Here's my take:
http://www.arach.net.au/~savage/wow_001.htm
Just a rough ready job.
Took me longer to write the page than do what I described.
Dave S
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 08:41:36 -0500, Steve Desjardins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Q: I find the metal top of the fireplace distracting. I
In a message dated 3/11/2005 5:43:39 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Q: I find the metal top of the fireplace distracting. I can't see to
fix ti with just cropping. Any other suggestions?
http://home.wlu.edu/~desjardins/
Nice protrait. Well, I haven't tried it
Hi Steve,
Here's a QD adjustment using gaussian blur on the fireplace grate and a
somewhat tighter crop. The area around the hair could be a lot better, but
all you wanted was an idea, right. Bill's crop, while a good option,
eliminates the background fire, which, imo, adds a nice, warm touch
Shel.
Catching up on some 400 Paw's stored up.
Love it. Great expression on his face. You can see the trials and tribulations
in his
face. Great
detail.Is that the Shel exposure factors shining through, or some PS.??
My Tri-x seems a bit greyish using the schools Tmax developer. Might need a
Hi Dave ...
Very little PS work done on this, and, for the most part, any of my BW
from the last few years. It's mostly exposure and development. Glad you
liked the pic ... it's a favorite of mine.
Y'know, over the years I've screwed around with a lot of different
developers, tried all sorts
Great shot. Love the expression and the camera angle. Nice work.
Hi Dave ...
Very little PS work done on this, and, for the most part, any of my BW
from the last few years. It's mostly exposure and development. Glad you
liked the pic ... it's a favorite of mine.
Y'know, over the years
Powerful shot, Shel. Great expression. Nice job!
Best,
Stephen Moore
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
http://home.earthlink.net/~pdml-pics/nflguy2.html
On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 17:35:56 -0800, Shel Belinkoff
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've been doing a lot of scanning the past two days as I dug out some negs
from an overlooked batch in storage, so there may be a few more pics than
usual appearing here.
I met this guy in Berkeley and we sat and
Tks! The guy was very photographable ...
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Stephen Moore
Powerful shot, Shel. Great expression. Nice job!
http://home.earthlink.net/~pdml-pics/nflguy2.html
I've been doing a lot of scanning the past two days as I dug out some negs
from an overlooked batch in storage, so there may be a few more pics than
usual appearing here.
I met this guy in Berkeley and we sat and talked for a few minutes. I asked
if he'd mind my taking a pic or two, and he
In a message dated 2/3/2005 5:37:35 PM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
http://home.earthlink.net/~pdml-pics/nflguy2.html
Shel
===
That's a keeper, Shel. Really like it. The hat makes it. And the expression,
too.
Marnie aka Doe
Hi Shel
it's nice to see
a) people liking their work like Kim does
b) vegetarian hot dogs being offered :-)
greetings
Markus
I like this one, not because it's a good photo technically, because it
isn't, but exactly for the reason you state: the joy that Kim
shows. Apart
Hi Fred
Like everyone else I think it is a fine portrait of a very pretty woman. The
one thing I did notice was the slight raccoon eyes. I don't know how much
of that was lighting or could be corrected before tripping the shutter. I
also have a question on 60 minutes in Rodinal. As increased wet
I find all the comments about 6o minutes in Rodinal 1:100 interesting because it
is a fairly common stand (no agitation) development method. It supposedly
increases acuteness and decreases contrast by allowing the developer to exhaust
itself in the shadow areas and continue developing in the
I love the expression and the diagonal composition, This shot has a lot
going for it.
IMHO there are c couple of small tweaks that could improve the picture:
1. clone out the background out of focus highlights near the top left
and right corners.
2. darken the background
3. not sure about this
Fred,
Nice shot. I like the pose and expression.
But your comment and WW's response are more about the print and contrast.
Have you tried printing on a grade 2 paper or using equivalent filtration? That may
accomplish what you want. (On my Dichro II I like Yellow @ 40 Magenta @ 15.)
Here's
Then do the same thing in PS.
Convert to color.
Add Magenta Yellow for grade 2.
Convert back to gray scale.
Convert to color
Select outer portions
Add Magenta a little yellow for a grade 4 darken.
Convert back to gray scale.
Almost the same as a chemical darkroom.
I do it with Picture
Patrick Genovese wrote:
I love the expression and the diagonal composition, This shot has a lot
going for it.
IMHO there are c couple of small tweaks that could improve the picture:
1. clone out the background out of focus highlights near the top left
and right corners.
2. darken the
.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Fred Widall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 10/17/2004 8:22:07 AM
Subject: PESO - Portrait of Tina
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2793927
I'm trying to improve my protrait technique and I offer up this
image for critique.
Shot
501 - 600 of 636 matches
Mail list logo
