It seems to me that most hurled darts at Boris had to do with flash. The "Available Light" contingency smote him. That's kinda bad. I've seen a LOT of "available light" photos that I don't think much of. But I thought GrayWolf was both brave (Old?) and kind in his review.
Keith Whaley wrote:
graywolf wrote:
Now, I feel bad. I did not think I was criticizing Boris's photos.
You mean, "...negatively criticizing. . ." You were criticising, but there's nothing wrong with that. Especially since he asked for it! You weren't criticizing anyone in the peanut gallery, or THEIR work, so who cares what others say about your criticism?
He aked, I though, for help in improving his
photography in the future.
That's the way I read it!
I thought I addressed that very thoroughly in fact giving what amounted to a free class in
advanced photo techniques. Now it seems that all that I should have done was
say, "Very nice".
Uhh, calm down, GW.
He got what he asked for. There's no problem there, in my eyes.
I guess, I wonder, does anyone apperciate my efforts here?
C'mon, Tom. Lighten up. Who cares? If you like giving lessons and advice, and you know it's good advice, go ahead and give it! Who cares if anyone else likes it? Listen to the person asking for the advise. As for the others -- scrume.
Or should I just figure all folks are doing, in cases like this thread, is sharing their snapshots and shut up?
Well, I will share one of my snap shots. It is related to this thread because it is an indoor flash shot. I scanned it to see whether it was worth retouching the scratches. Scanned from a 8x10 work print, and downsized for the web. The print is a bit more contrasty than the jpeg.
http://www.graywolfphoto.com/presscameras/temp.html
--
Nothing wrong with the shot. Sort of odd location for a hair dresser, I guess. But if he likes it, and the patron likes it, why not? <g>
Good work.
I may be dickering on a 2 1/4 x 3 1/4 Crown Graphic soon. I'll let you know. . . <g>
keith
