Yeah, she stood out, she was head and shoulders taller than the rest of the players. Another set from this past weekend. A pretty mundane assignment, a gala event. The lighting scenario was nightmarish, a mix of tungsten and fluorescent so I just blasted it with two speedlights triggered remotely.
An elderly woman, who's property I often photograph on (a lot of wildlife), told me she hasn't a single picture of her cat that she's owned for 12 or so years--so I took it upon myself to snag a few and surprise her with a few prints. She lives alone, as her husband died a number of years ago, and has no immediate family in the area so I'm pretty sure the cat is her closest confidant. Serves as a reminder to take time with family and friends, because you never know if or when you'll end up, eventually, with none. A few florals, taken the same afternoon, as well
Very nice And very nice as well I think a liitle more DOF could have made this better. At least for me.
You mean like this: My thought process was, you always see frame-filling shots of the bridge, when in reality it's just a tiny piece of a very scenic coastline. The bridge is a good reference for scale though, and portraying it as a small feature in a big vista is a powerful visual imo. On the other hand, maybe there's a good reason you never see it shot that way... Thanks for the feedback!
I don't have any experience with photography or anything, but I picked up a Canon SD780 out of the recommendation of some forum members for my girlfriends birthday. I couldn't be happier.
@ waffle, #3 is pretty cool. lens flare on the cheek spoils it though. if you cold PS it out that would be awesome. ps: remove the pimples next time.
No probs here, my browser resizes the images immediately. With : This image has been resized. Click this bar to view the full image. The original image is sized 1978x1483.
Having travelled to the bay area many times, I agree that it's a beautiful coastline but I think the problem with the original was that the subtleties in light were simply too subtle. Had you not pointed out the beautiful light on the bridge, I probably wouldn't have noticed it. Ultimately, I think your original worked really well as a composition, but the light was too subtle to add impact to the image. The lighting you had works best in the third image (but it could work well in the second image - it's difficult to tell in a 500px wide image, whereas it'd be quite easy to tell in a 12x8in or bigger print), where it's clearly the subject in the scene. If it's the light which attracts you to a particular shot, make sure you make that the subject (or at least a big part of the image) - the great thing about photography is that you can cut all the crap out more deliberately, whereas the eye does that and 'zooms in' subconsciously when you're out in the wilderness.
Some of these guys are browsing on slow connections due to geography though. I know a few of them only have 3G links or worse. A medium flicker pic with a regular hyperlink to the full size image is a little easier on their pipe.
I like the first three on that page, especially the clock. Large Lands End with the wreck of the RMS Mulheim in the foreground. .
Does anyone reckon that's down to the Iceland eruption? It certainly makes sense. Nice savannah sun by the by