I totaly agree, and my pics do need improvements in many ways. They are slowly getting better as the months go by... BUT, ... (and this is kind of an excuse )my personal preference is for subject over quality of image. I would personally much prefer to view semi good pictures of great subjects than amazing pictures of boring subjects. Many of the pictures ive seen over at digital camera mag and other places with very high quality images bore that crap out of me.
Went back to the butterfly house today. Was supposed to go with a mate but he backed out because his hangover was too big... slacker Got some great shots, tried to get some real close in shots of eyes and legs and stuff
Definitely so. I agree, to a point. Those beautiful butterfly photos don't need any fancy composition to make them sing. The aesthetics of the subject are enough to make the photo look great. As long as the image is technically clean, it's going to look great. In fact, anything "fancier" might detract from the beauty of the insects. However, with more mundane subjects (like architecture and landscapes), good composition using the rule of thirds and the like will really set the amateur apart from someone who really knows what they're doing. A lot of that is photographic masturbation where the shooter is thinking more about impressing fellow photographers than impressing the average viewer (we have those types, too, in television).
First few spring plants popping up early If we get a frost these things are really screwed, still no daffs yet, which is a suprise given the last few years
Some general shots from around Lancaster, not any good ones really The last one is the castle keep, built in 1088
Found this moth in the cellar, first moth/butterfly of this year... it must be a bit eager to be out so early This is a much better pic than i used to take of random insects around the house... i must be getting better
Some of the very very blue pics... notso much. I just increase colour saturation slightly and increase contrast. A lot of the time the camera is adjusting light levels for the foreground object, and the sky gets darkened and saturated as a result.... ummm i think... i dont actualy know
Am I the only one who can see this weird scene on Dan's moon? Looks like some chap scaring a panda, rat-dog and giant mouse
Couple more, not very good. But the squirrel was relly hard to get, he was well paranoid and kept running away
Putting them in spoiler tags wont make the page load any quicker, as spoilered pics are loaded just as if they werent spoilered. As for the bobbing up n down, in IE goto tools-internet options-advanced, under 'mutlimedia' tick 'show download image placeholders. I always have that option ticked, it makes even a half-loaded webpage have th right proportions
I've been trying out a new technique over the last few days called 'hdr'. Its basically takes 2 or more pictures of the same subject with different exposures/brightnesses and brings out the best highlights in them, then merges them to create a single image. Im rather crap at it at the mo but here is my first few tries Oh and a nice normal picture of a bird
Couple from the garden this mrong, gawd i cant wait to get the marco lense im saving for.... I sould get twice as close in on the macro shots...
Oh and just to say, i will no linger be posting any big pictures in here. Just to make the thread more readable and viewable. I wont post anything thats over 800 pixels on its longest side. So, as soon as this thread gets onto a new page it should be much nicer to click on and view. So i suggest someone posts some comments to push this onto another page C'mon, i need criticism!!
