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 242000 members, there is space for everyone, from the beginner to the professional.
user181 | sent on November 06, 2011 (18:11) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Very nice, some white a bit 'on the edge (neck and "shoulders") Molto bella, qualche bianco un po' al limite (collo e "spalle") |
user101 | sent on November 06, 2011 (18:40) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
I like the unusual diagonal cut. mi piace l'insolito taglio obliquo. |
| sent on November 06, 2011 (18:48) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
poor fish hello povero pesciolino ciao |
| sent on November 06, 2011 (19:15) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
I'm sorry but I am not convinced by qusti reasons:
Some white-gone
Inclination of the frame-
Little-pdc
-Iris open too.
If I closed F.8'd get more detail, sharpness and prodondità Field (the operating margins were you). The indestructible canon 40d has the second dial for rapid interventions deviation exposure ... so make ;-) (here you could also try to underexpose). hello and good light, laurel scusami ma non mi convince per qusti motivi:
-alcuni bianchi andati
-inclinazione dell'inquadratura
-poca pdc
-diaframma troppo aperto.
Se avessi chiuso a f.8 avresti ottenuto un maggior dettaglio, nitidezza e prodondità di campo (i margini operativi gli avevi). L'indistruttibile canon 40d ha la 2a ghiera per gli interventi rapidi di deviazione dell'esposizione... sfruttala  (qui potevi anche cercare di sottoesporre). ciao e buona luce, lauro |
| sent on November 06, 2011 (19:17) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Some white to the limit but perhaps recoverable great detail ... the picture hanging on the right. Qualche bianco al limite ma forse recuperabile, ottimo il dettaglio...l'immagine pende a destra. |
| sent on November 06, 2011 (20:29) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
great shot .. whites are not much of a problem, as seen above the slope may like (I do not exalt but there may be) what I like least is the signature too intrusive .. bellissimo scatto.. i bianchi non sono un gran problema, come visto sopra anche la pendenza può piacere (a me non esalta ma ci può stare) quello che mi piace meno è la firma troppo invadente.. |
| sent on November 06, 2011 (21:06) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Hello everyone and thank you for the valuable advice ...
as I wrote in the shooting data had already underexposed by 1 full stop ... then after I placed the white levels bringing the limit but not burnt ... at least according to the histogram of photoshop ;)
the composition pendant I chose to give some dynamism because the subject very filiform placed in a central position in my opinion would be a little out of tune ...
regarding the diaphragm I am of the opinion, speaking of the 100-400 at 400mm, which in terms of sharpness between 5.6 and 8 the difference is negligible ...
Alain you are absolutely right ... I just signed the wrong size ... In fact, if you look at my other photo is much smaller: fconfuso:
Ellemme you quoto as regards the diaphragm. The fish would have been clearer to F8 ... Ciao a tutti e grazie per i preziosi consigli...
come ho scritto nei dati di scatto avevo già sottoesposto di 1 intero stop... poi in post ho sistemato il livelli portando il bianco a limite ma non sono bruciati... almeno stando all'istogramma di photoshop ;)
la composizione pendente l'ho scelta per dare un pò di dinamicità dato che il soggetto molto filiforme messo in posizione centrale secondo me avrebbe stonato un pò...
per quanto riguarda il diaframma io sono del parere, parlando del 100-400 a 400mm, che in quanto a nitidezza tra 5,6 e 8 la differenza sia irrisoria...
Alain hai pienamente ragione... la firma ho proprio sbagliato la dimensione... infatti se guardi le mie altre foto è molto più piccola 
Ellemme ti quoto per quanto riguarda il diaframma. Il pesciolino a F8 sarebbe stato più nitido... |
|
Publish your advertisement on JuzaPhoto (info) |
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.
Resize to fit window
