Bad website. There I am, looking at the two shots, touching neither keyboard nor mouse, and the damn thing suddenly started loading more pictures. They have packed more bad UI innovations into one site than I would have thought possible.
As far as what I saw of the two images, I slightly prefer the edited version, there is just not much visible in the first. But even with the lightening up, there is not much foreground interest, the person is too small in the image. And the water is just water - no distinctive lines of surf, etc. I think it would have been stronger if you had instead used a 28 or 35mm from a few feet behind the person. Alternatively, since this may be a shot of a lone person on a big beach, then forget most of the distracting shiny water and the almost invisible island and show the lone person on the beach. BTW, I never noticed a boat in my relatively brief time viewing before Flickr decided I needed to look at something else. And there is no way I am going back there to look again. stan On Sep 10, 2013, at 7:28 AM, CollinB wrote: > One is as-shot. > The other I darkened the island and a boat on the horizon, added some blue > saturation to the water, lightened the sand a little, and the avid reader a > lot. > http://www.flickr.com/photos/55001392@N08/sets/72157635460224539/ > K5, 70/2.4. > I'm wondering what you think of it. > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
