What do you think about this photo?Do you have questions or curiosities about this image? Do you want to ask something to the author, give him suggestions for improvement, or congratulate for a photo that you really like?
You can do it by joining JuzaPhoto, it is easy and free!
There is more: by registering you can create your personal page, publish photos, receive comments and you can use all the features of JuzaPhoto. With more than 252000 members, there is space for everyone, from the beginner to the professional.
| sent on January 12, 2018 (14:52) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Azzardo, and I apologize for the impudence, having only to learn, but ..... had been closed to 2.8 or 3.5 would not have been in focus both eyes? The photo, which is still beautiful, would have earned something or lost ... "character"
Anyway, thank you for your dedicated attention.
Cordial greetings.
Paul
Azzardo, e chiedo venia per l'impudenza, avendo solo da imparare ma, ..... fosse stato chiuso a 2,8 o 3,5 non sarebbero stati a fuoco entrambi gli occhi ? La foto, che è comunque bellissima, avrebbe guadagnato qualcosa o perso di ..."carattere"
Comunque sia ti ringrazio per l'attenzione dedicata.
Un cordiale saluto.
Paolo
|
| sent on January 13, 2018 (19:56) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
For heaven's sake, no gamble on your part, nor even impudence! (I'm nobody, me!)
I was simply testing the new lens, and it seemed to me (this) an appreciable result, with all the "if" and all the "but" of the case.
Tendentially we focus on the nearest eye (in the case of portraits in the foreground selective focus), but here I wanted to do the subversive, aware of the fact that I would have disappointed or angry someone.
To me personally, the photo in question like, so I shared it.
If I gather my opinions I will be happy,
if I collect a few, I'll be happy the same, as happy regardless ;-) Per carità, nessun azzardo da parte tua, né tantomeno impudenza! (non sono nessuno, io!)
Semplicemente stavo testando la nuova lente, e mi sembrava (questo) un risultato apprezzabile, con tutti i "se" e tutti i "ma" del caso.
Tendenzialmente ci si focalizza sull'occhio più vicino (nel caso di ritratti in primo piano a fuoco selettivo), ma qui ho voluto fare l'eversivo, conscio del fatto che avrei deluso o stizzito qualcuno.
A me personalmente, la foto in questione piace, quindi l'ho condivisa.
Se raccoglierò pareri concordi sarò contento,
se ne raccoglierò pochi, sarò contento uguale, poichè contento a prescindere  |
| sent on January 14, 2018 (11:37) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
The profound spiritual anarchy that characterizes my thinking keeps me away from disappointments or fights of all kinds, deriving from the violation of established practices and rules, on the contrary, I always like to think "on the contrary" or "alternatively".
I see that I am not alone and I thank you for the complete answer and the time spent.
La profonda anarchia spirituale che connota il mio pensare mi tiene lontano da delusioni o stizze d'ogni tipo, derivanti da violazione di prassi e regole consolidate anzi, sempre mi piace pensare "al contrario" o "in alternativa".
Vedo che non sono solo e ti ringrazio per la compiuta risposta ed il tempo dedicato.
|
|
Publish your advertisement on JuzaPhoto (info) |
![[retina]](shared_files/layout/retina_badge.jpg){kind=icon}
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.
12.1 MEGAPIXEL
Resize to fit window
