Marlay Park C and C

RealEstateKing

Heres some pix I took at Marlay Park on the weekend.

I think the burned out highlights on the waterfall are a bit much bit otherwise nice.

Whaddya you think?

RealEstateKing

C'mon you can tell me. Ill be alright.

MooseJam

very nice shots, that just down the road from me

Borderfox

First shot is exellent, maybe see if you can do anything with the burnt out area top centre. Second looks oversharpened but has potential

Valentia

First one: I like the muted tone but the sky is distractingly burnt unfortunately. Try a crop.

Second: The duck is facing the wrong way.

Please have a look at the FAQ's and post the pics in the thread. You are more likely to get comments that way.

RealEstateKing

Agree on the sky, it's kind of a given that it would be burnt, with the darnkess of the foreground - and the long exposure required to get the water to blur. That and I had no tripod.

kjt

I like the first shot, a tighter crop would make it better. I was up in Marley trying a hdr shot there on Tuesday, only 2mins away.

AnimalRights

Valentia wrote: »

Second: The duck is facing the wrong way.

Is it not boring if Ducks are photographed always facing the front?
I thought the picture was excellent if over sharpened.

Anouilh

I like these photos very much.

I wonder if a photographer is left handed that it may also lead to a photo like that of the duck looking correct? The aesthetic of the Western World seems to be dominating the Internet. It's such a relief to find an image that is not in the grip of the rule of thirds.

AnCatDubh

#1 - I love the fuzzy water effect captured in number one - i'm a sucker for that really. But the burnt out sky simply wrecks it for me (in terms of something that you might hang on your wall). Have you a neutral density filter available to you? This enables you to take longer exposures in brighter conditions and not become over exposed (apologies if you already know all of this). A graduated ND filter may have helped in this case which may have enabled you to take down the brightness of the sky area whilst maintaining the brightness of the water area.

The duck/mallard shot wouldn't be my cup of tea i'm afraid. As another poster has stated he is facing the wrong way ( just can't get the models these days eh? ) - to my eye and on a reasonable monitor the scene appears quite noisey(?) - was the ISO left higher from a previous shot? - could be just me. Perhaps its the water that i'm not liking - its vast in terms of the proportion of the image and it appears muddy and murky and overall not very appealing (imho). Composition wise it might have been better if shooting him in that direction (i.e. the 'wrong' way) to position him to the left hand side of the frame rather than at the right as he is now - just a suggestion to think about for the future. I think the mind doesn't expect him to be where he is i.e. at the right hand side of the frame facing away and to the right. Perhaps its one that breaks the rules and some people may go for it - sorry but not for me.

Cheers.

MooseJam

how long was the exposure in the first shot, was there no wind at all theres no evidence of movement in the trees

AnimalRights

AnCatDubh wrote: »

Composition wise it might have been better if shooting him in that direction (i.e. the 'wrong' way) to position him to the left hand side of the frame rather than at the right as he is now -

Good point that.

Valentia

AnimalRights wrote: »

Is it not boring if Ducks are photographed always facing the front?

I suppose it's whatever your having yourself. Some people like a duck from behind others from the front...........:pac:

shepthedog

Valentia wrote: »

I suppose it's whatever your having yourself. Some people like a duck from behind others from the front...........:pac:

lol


nice shots, for number one a crop of the bright area could work.. Two good shots there...
As for the duck, well... haha... sometimes positioning something at the extreme edges of a picture works and I like it.. Rules are not what photography is about!

Zillah

Heh




Mine is infrared, taken about half a year ago. Apparently its been raining since

RealEstateKing

Yeah neither shot is something I thought that much about at the time.

I was on a walk and I had my d40 with me, the bridge one I just self-timed the camera and stuck it on a wall. Exposure was about 1.5 seconds I think.

The duck one I like mainly because I managed to freeze him in action with a 300 mm lens (Hence the ISO being 800), maybe on the left would have been better - but when your shooting animals at 300mm with no autofocus (Thanks Nikon), you're lucky to get anything at all!

Anouilh

The duck could be easily aligned to a position that pleases you by using this Irfanview plugin



http://malektips.com/irfanview_3_0006.html

Anouilh

I like the photos here so much I'm bumping the thread to link with composition, aesthetics and the "ego" in photography, which is being discussed at the moment.

http://www.artisticego.com/?p=90

kjt

Anouilh wrote: »

I like the photos here so much I'm bumping the thread to link with composition, aesthetics and the "ego" in photography, which is being discussed at the moment.

http://www.artisticego.com/?p=90

I don't see the link between this thread and the ego thread, am I missing something?

Anouilh

kjt wrote: »

...am I missing something?

It's possible...

(Meant as a light riposte, btw...)

Anouilh

RealEstateKing wrote: »

C'mon you can tell me. Ill be alright.

This is why I made the link with photography and "ego".

It has been put forward the Irish and English personalities tend be more liable to put their work down, or, as least having invited a critique of their work, to be less robust in their defence of the work produced.

I'm not sure that this is always the case, but it is worth looking at in relation to how photos are critiqued, in general.

http://www.venhaus1.com/tips.html

Just a personal reflection...

Anouilh