Thanks, Marnie, I really appreciate your comment. Obviously those "atta boy" or otherwise praising comments do less good than constructive criticism. I mean, if I produce a good photo and everyone is telling me it is good, it is, hmmm, well, I already knew that ;-).
So to what you said. Please don't read me here as if I am defending myself, because I am not. I am rather trying to present my opinion so that we can discuss yours and mine as one. For starters, I don't normally control the time of day when my family goes for a walk. All I can control is what kind of stuff I load to my photo bag and as of now - do I take or do I leave behind my monopod. This is given ;-). Though I have some afternoon trips in mind, it is not always possible to control. When I was shooting I did realize that the sun was high above and shadows were harsh. I tried, and apparently did not do very well, to look for those motifs that did not emphasize the harshness of the light. In fact, what I was after were shallow DOF shots with my 77 Limited lens. I shot some 'scapes but I tried to keep their number to a minimum. And still I went for DOF motif hoping to distract the viewer away from the lighting. > Okay, honest, I think you can do better. While it's not a bad gallery, it is > not a great gallery. For one thing, you were shooting at the wrong time of > day, too mid day, shadows are too deep and contrasty. Nature shots work best > in morning or late day. It looks like a pretty area. I have walked on Mt. > Diablo fairly often where I live and I have lot of photos that look like > this. (I > do like the bottle on the cracked earth). So, *if these were my photos*, I > would look at them and think I often had not simplified enough -- that I had > often not dug deep enough and figured out exactly what I liked about a > particular spot or area. Hard to explain what I mean, Boris, but nature is > pretty so > just shooting it can produce some pretty shots. But pow or really good or > great landscape/nature photography has more. Some sort of graphic or > compositional element that stands out. I recommend a look at John Shaw's > work (he has a > good site on the web). Or Harald Rust's in the PUG. :-) > > I know what I aspire to, myself, landscape-wise, and I rarely achieve it. > It's not easy. > > Hope that helps and is not too brutal. I guess I am saying, try again; you > are getting there. Well, of course it helps and it is not too brutal. I'd rather everyone commented like you just did. Not that I dislike praising comments, but I most definitely appreciate those such as yours. Cheers! Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
