Lightroom does not work for me. I hate the file management system and I need layers. This new strategy will have me looking for another brand.
Wow, wish it were an f4 at a lower cost.
I am not sure where I fit. I used to think I wanted validation from others, but recently decided I did not. I must be an archivist, but I have some other purposes I did not see mentioned.
Photography is first and foremost an intellectual challenge, like working a Suduko. It is something that occupies my free time and presents a challenge not unlike the one I had before retirement.
I do want to record certain scenes and print them. I will hang them on my walls and some may view them, but if they don't, it will not matter. I am a hermit anyway. My wife likes them and maybe my daughter. But often nobody likes my favorites but me.
That's the the next problem. If I shoot what I like and nobody liked it, does that mean I need to shoot stuff I don't like? I think not.
I strive for best possible quality within the limits of my equipment and means and skills. The satisfaction is when I head out for a specific image and come home with what I had intended.
Has a bug. In WIN7, it tells you to close Bridge before it can install but Bridge is not open and not pinned to the task bar.
Bruce Spell wrote: > Nice finish, Ben.
> I really don't understand the 0.5 vote :(
I never noticed it. I just look at the score and the finish postion. I did not expect to finish in the top 10, there were some great images in this challange.
--When you can't focus, nothing else mattersOnce you can, everything else does.
I expected this one to place in the top 4-5 and it did. Great eye contact and color.
My choice for first place. Great light, feather detail, eye contact and a prefect background.
There are probably no beautiful places or subjects left on earth that have not been photagraphed. To require only unique subjects or to work only on the ugly and mundane would mean to abandon photgraphy.
To require that any repeat of a subject must be better than all other images of that subject is equally obsurd.
Take pride in doing a great job on a fantastic subject.
RuthC wrote: > This is a really great shot, but the swan is not swimming, it is either taking off, or coming in to land!
Exactly why the rest of my challanges will not have any other rules but to be wild birds.
One of the best Mesa Arch images I have seen.
Thanks Bill. No matter how many of these shots may be around, this one is mine. I was there, and even though this light probably occurs about half of all mornings, I was there for at least one of them. By the way, I have returned twice since this image to find clouds and no glow, so its not a slam dunk.
Bill Robinson wrote: > I never tire looking at excellence in photography, no matter how iconic it may be! ;)> cheers> Bill
JeffGoran wrote: > no offense, but it looks like a photoshoped black shape on a radial gradient background...> Especially when viewed at full size, the borders do not look real, no feathers just round shapes finishing the wings...> I think the 5 one star votes agreed with that.> If I'm wrong, I apologize.> > Jeff
I had the same impression about a composite and I do see a lot of artifacts in the sky. --When you can't focus, nothing else mattersOnce you can, everything else does.
I have been to Pacific City, will be looking for this location my nbext trip, my kind of seascape.
Congrats Ed, nice shot, nice caption.
Much appreciated.--When you can't focus, nothing else mattersOnce you can, everything else does.
Thanks, this is a spot I have viisted for 20 years and never saw it so spectacular as that afternoon.--When you can't focus, nothing else mattersOnce you can, everything else does.
BPJosh wrote: > Its a nice shot and all but I don't get it! So many other absolutely amazing photos in this challenge yet a bird wins?
Matter of taste, if it is not a bird or landscape, I seldom bother to look. I wonder what people see in most of the winners. But at least I understand that taste is subjective and mine is as well.
This is also one of my favorite shots. If I look at the best entries which are sorted by score, this image belongs on page one for sure.
Sudipto Roy wrote: > This is a fabulous shot. Those who have tried taking such an image would only know what it takes to get this perfect moment of truth.
Thanks, I have been working on this since 1981 when I was using a Nikon film camera and a 600 f8 manual focus lens.--When you can't focus, nothing else mattersOnce you can, everything else does.
Graeme Davidson wrote: > Ser dpreview and 20seven: I reckon the lighthouse would have been about 1300 meters away (shot at 240mm)> > I should point out that the moon's path that evening (13-04-2009 - North East coast of Scotland) was such that it didn't rise much above the horizon before setting, giving me more opportunity to get a shot with the moon over the lighthouse by walking along the seaside.> > When that photograph was taken, the moon would have been under 5 degrees above the horizon and was very much dimmer/golden as a result but not so that I could maintain detail on the moon itself. When I arrived to take the shot, the moon was not visible and I thought the clouds would never clear (no wind!) but patience and good luck prevailed.> > In order to get the composition with the moon above the lighthouse, I had to reposition myself north along the seaside and take shots when the moon came out.> > The illumination of the lighthouse is the result of sodium vapour street lighting from the town of Montrose (Scotland) immediately behind me. The golden moon light backed up with the orange/yellow sodium vapour light from Montrose provided an overall golden light.> > The only PP in the photo is white balance correction and levels and a slight crop.> > I can post up a series of thumbnails of other similar shots taken that evening if futher evidence is required.> > 20seven, with respect, the rules in this competition, unlike some other competitions, did not state that pictures previously entered were not allowed. I would not have entered if it had said otherwise.> > Again, I would like to thank everyone again who kindly voted for my picture and offer my congratulations to the other fine entries.>
Congratulations on a great image. I entered myself and expected this one to win.
Ignore the anti PP people, pp is at least half the job of photography and has been forever with the possible expetion of slide film. Digital raw images are worthless and flat and soft until processed.