• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

Jeroen

1. fc
45.jpg

1. bw
45-1.jpg

2. danielle fc
16-6.jpg

3. Danielle bw
16-7.jpg


Jan
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
One post, one theme/subject/motif unless one is comparing and/or contrasting!

Jan,

This is the one picture that, I, IMHO, believe should go with your title, nothing else. Alternative process, BTW, is not giving two version of the same image, rather using exotic processing such as Platinum, Gold, Albumin or Gum Bichromate, for example.


45.jpg


J.W. van den Bos Jeroen


See how it's clearly presented and titled. You might add what's the purpose of the image.

The color is needed, IMHO, so the B&W version is absolutely redundant, (unless there was some inherent difference you want to bring out.

You, alone, yourself, must define one theme/motif/subject matter so we can all discuss it. A scattering of ideas in one post makes it hard to focus on anything!

Kind wishes,

Asher
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Now the critique,

The hair is so defined from over-sharpening that it detract from the man's interaction with the flower. Do you really want this?

Asher

I suggest you consider adding a layer mask (simply drag the layer to the second icon on the left in the Layers window) and paint with a black brush in that box to make the unsharpened hair show through, say 30%.

You of course need the sharpened layer over the original layer.
 
Now the critique,

The hair is so defined from over-sharpening that it detract from the man's interaction with the flower. Do you really want this?

I fully agree with Asher.

While it seems to be something you like, since it's present in most if not all the images you posted, I find it very distracting. For me, sharpening needs to be functional, thus enhancing the experience of viewing an image, not distracting because it's too obvious.

I don't know what software you use for postprocessing, but it should be something that can be improved.

Bart
 
destroying

Hallo,
I dont like this site anymore, whatever I uploaded you allways have heavy critique, if you do that with everyone on this site, they all disappear>
Jan
 
Hallo,
I dont like this site anymore, whatever I uploaded you allways have heavy critique, if you do that with everyone on this site, they all disappear>
Jan

You submitted your pictures for critique. Expect critique.

Asher's critiques are incisive and precise. No one gets praise for second-rate photos around here, as many, including myself will attest.

But, if you are truly interested in improving your photography, you'll learn to accept and learn from the critique here. There's probably no better place to learn.
 
Top