Little Church in Gravenhurst

Bynx post #22 looks the best out of any of the ones displayed.
The initial post did look washed out as others have commented.
I know the foliage can't be moved from the building but it takes away from the building too many greens in the shot.

When you go to northern Ontario there is nothing but trees and that means lots of foliage. Its kind of funny. Next time you post an ocean scene I think I might mention there is too much water. On a serious note, Im glad there is all this chatter about the flatness of the first shot. It helped me find out why the problems with some of my posts not looking like my originals.

Listen you can go that route if you so choose to I simply voiced my opinion for crying out loud it’s a forum, my shot’s aren’t perfect by all means if you feel you want to act upon revenge or something and make a comment in one of my images nobody is stopping you and certainly not me, remember we all post an image here out to the public for the world to see and judge nothing should be taken personal. But hey as I mentioned do as you please if that’s what suits you.
 
i think the water reference was a bit of a joke.

lighten up fellows.
 
Actualy, Bynx, I suspect the place itself is very cool... you may just not have captured it.

I have a very similar place near me and it's one of those little church buldings just like this one is... but for some reason I'm never quite able to capture the coolness of it. I struggle with it in the same way I struggle with cemeteries... which is interesting since they are usually both in similar places, and often in the VERY same place.

Keep trying. I'll be curious to see if you nail it. Would love to learn from you if you do.
 
I am in no way opposed to progress, I just have a personal distaste for HDR. Your edit, however, improves on the washed-out feeling mentioned. Good job, good shot, etc. :)
Don't get me wrong the HDR didn't do this show well in face it doesn't even look like HDR. but it does have its uses epically in some night scenes. I didn't even notice the flowers until you mentioned them.
Wes
 
I am in no way opposed to progress

Good deal since there is no sign of progress here. Except for those who don't know much about photo history. HDR was invented in the 1930s. Look it up!

Youre repeating yourself and your're probably right, but so what! HDR as we know it, and as it is being referenced available to the unwashed masses didnt come along until recently. Now if your intention is to just start more arguments I suggest you just move on.
 
You're repeating yourself and your're probably right, but so what! HDR as we know it, and as it is being referenced available to the unwashed masses didnt come along until recently. Now if your intention is to just start more arguments I suggest you just move on.

:lmao:


Go wash.

I realize that knowing the slightest bit of history is extremely annoying because it means you haven't invented anything but it is still reality. Deal with it.

There hasn't been anything new in photography in a long time. That includes you.
 
You're repeating yourself and your're probably right, but so what! HDR as we know it, and as it is being referenced available to the unwashed masses didnt come along until recently. Now if your intention is to just start more arguments I suggest you just move on.

:lmao:


Go wash.

I realize that knowing the slightest bit of history is extremely annoying because it means you haven't invented anything but it is still reality. Deal with it.

There hasn't been anything new in photography in a long time. That includes you.

And your purpose for letting me know this? If it makes you feel better, let go and get it out of your system. Rant on.
 
hdr forum is funny.
thanks guys.:thumbup:
 

Most reactions

Back
Top