Discussion in 'General Critical Analysis' started by mortallis288, Nov 7, 2007.
Tell me what you think about this one please?
I would like to see a far deeper depth of field. from the very bottom of the frame, to out past the ball. I want to see all the detail around the edge of the hole, each individual tiny little blade of Bermuda, each tiny little grain of dirt and sprinkle of sand around the border of the hole, and a little bit of the white inside the hole for contrast to all its surroundings.
The lighting cant be saved here. whats of interest is in the shade, whats not isn't. The saturation of greens doesnt work. I would suggest trying this same shot again. The idea is there. Consider leaving the flag in if you can get an interesting shadow cast. Try the same shot at dawn or dusk where you have a nice soft/warm light projection.
so do not saturate greens?
well, not exactly. I'm not saying never. It's just in this specific photo, the tone just seems all wrong to me. This is largely due to the shade though. The green in the direct light is almost yellow, and the green in the foreground has a blue tint to it. Blame it on the lighting.
Once you have something to work with, shoot in RAW and experiment in post production with your exposure and white balances. Give special attention to levels and color balances. Just play around until you get something that works.
CA and it's underexposed.
chromatic aberration...on the golf ball.
which leads my to my next question... What is chromatic abberation? Sorry, i am new to a lot of these words
Google and Wikipedia are your friends.
and your an A--h--e, please do not respond to any of my threads.
You expect everyone to spoon-feed you?
I'd edit that post fast, buddy, or everyone will be on you like white on rice in a glass of milk on a paper plate in a snowstorm.
no i do not expect anyone to spoon feed me, i expect someone to tell you what they are talking about if they are critiquing you. I must have high expectations from you.
Separate names with a comma.