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.
| sent on June 17, 2014 (12:58) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Portrait of a very beautiful.
I really like the blurred, the management of light and soft colors.
bravo.
joseph Ritratto molto bello.
mi piace molto lo sfocato, la gestione della luce ed i colori tenui e caldi.
bravo.
giuseppe |
| sent on June 17, 2014 (14:25) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Thanks for the ride and comment .. ;-) Grazie del passaggio e del commento..  |
| sent on July 18, 2014 (15:08) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Hello Mac89. I allow a passage a little 'picky?
I think the photo is meant well, but I seem to have some obvious limitations: a little three-dimensionality, low contrast in homogeneous areas, blurred that conveys a sense of "nervousness."
Where I'm going? To the fact that I think this shot is an example of how the characteristics of the "glass" can give or take a good photo.
Thou hast done well, in my opinion, but I think you clash, and discounts, the characteristics of the lens. You simply put ... the horses the whip.
I think with that perspective, which has strong reputation in general terms, with that light and that set could not do a better milligram. Ciao Mac89. Mi consenti un passaggio un po' schizzinoso?
Secondo me la foto è pensata bene, ma mi sembra che abbia alcuni palesi limiti: poca tridimensionalità, poco contrasto in aree omogenee, sfocato che trasmette un senso di "nervosismo".
Dove voglio arrivare? Al fatto che secondo me questo scatto è esemplificativo di quanto le caratteristiche del "vetro" possano dare o togliere a una buona foto.
Tu l'hai fatta bene, secondo me, ma penso che ti scontri, e sconti, le caratteristiche dell'obiettivo. Hai semplicemente ... messo i cavalli alla frusta.
Mi sa che con quell'ottica, che ha solida reputazione in termini generali, con quella luce e quel set non potevi fare un milligrammo meglio. |
| sent on July 18, 2014 (15:15) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Excellent analysis, I noticed myself in different circumstances that the Tamron has a little nervous bokeh.
Moreover, it is a goal handyman portrait for real I prefer maybe 85 with its softness.
With regard to the three-dimensionality are convinced that also depends on how you use the lens.
Here I was close to the model with the maximum focal length, the result is only two floors, her focus and blurred background without too many steps.
PS: This was the last set where I used the 17-50 before the sale. Ottima analisi, ho notato anch'io in diverse circostanze che il piccolo Tamron ha un bokeh nervoso.
Del resto è un obbiettivo tuttofare, per ritratto vero e proprio preferisco magari l'85 con la sua morbidezza.
Per quanto riguarda la tridimensionalità sono convinto che dipenda anche da come si usa la lente.
Qui ero vicino alla modella con la focale massima, il risultato sono solo due piani, lei a fuoco e fondo sfocato senza tanti passaggi.
PS: questo è stato l'ultimo set in cui ho usato il 17-50 prima della vendita. |
|
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.
12.9 MEGAPIXEL
Resize to fit window
