|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 10/5/2006
|
Thank you very much Paul, for your nice comment! I wish I'd been directly at the lake for that.
Best wishes,
Nick
|
|
|
|
Paul's Photos
{K:35235} 10/4/2006
|
I saw the comments regarding the scan, no reason to go there... the buildings do seem to distract a bit from the overall composition but the sky is great. I really love the clouds and the colors.. good work
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 10/4/2006
|
Thank you so much for this, Ale!
Cheers,
Nick
|
|
|
|
Alessandro Capelli
{K:34805} 10/4/2006
|
WONDERFUL!!!! 10/10!!!
CONGRATS!
Ale
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 5/23/2006
|
Oops, sorry Doyle, it has been late at night after a long day, and my RAM needs definitely to get upgrated!
Best wishes,
Nick
|
|
|
|
Doyle D. Chastain
{K:101119} 5/23/2006
|
I wouldn't mind being called Giuseppe . . . but HE might be a tad insulted! :-)
Regards,
Doyle I <~-~-~
|
|
|
|
|
Doyle D. Chastain
{K:101119} 5/23/2006
|
Don't call me Giuseppe!
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 5/22/2006
|
Thank you for the nice comment, Giuseppe!
I didn't consider this until now - a good point indeed.
Ciao,
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Doyle D. Chastain
{K:101119} 5/22/2006
|
I like it WITH the human dimension included. I should point out, that the human dimension doesn't decrease the beauty of the scene . . . it makes it real.
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 4/27/2006
|
Thank you very very much for the kindest comment, Akaky!
Best wishes!
|
|
|
|
|
Akaky Bashmachkin
{K:-1095} 4/27/2006
|
I agree with Giuseppe and Michael: beautiful, absolutely beautiful.
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 4/18/2006
|
Many thanks for the wonderful comments, Michael. I'm looking forward to seeing more of your photos soon.
Best wishes!
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 4/18/2006
|
Amen, Giuseppe!
|
|
|
|
no longer a member
{K:10557} 4/18/2006
|
I love the dramatic sky in this one and how you captured the sun setting at the edge of the mountains. Beautiful colors!
Thank you for looking at my portfolio. You have a great many shots in yours that I think is great as well. Many compliments and best wishes....Mike
|
|
|
|
Giuseppe Guadagno
{K:34002} 4/16/2006
|
The love for beauty.
Giuseppe
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 4/16/2006
|
Thank you very much, Hugo, for all the info and the hints. I think it's a good idea to ask the forum. There will be certainly enough people there that can help further.
Cheers and a nice weekend!
|
|
|
|
Hugo de Wolf
{K:185110} 4/16/2006
|
Hi Nick,
I'm not a scanning expert, and as I couldn't solve this similar problem I have with my scans, I take my negatives to a photo lab, to have them scanned properly, so I'm not the most qualified person to determine what is exatly the issue.
As I said in my last comment (the other photo), the right side of your images show a bit more blue / purplish haze, and the saturation is a bit lower, also showing a bit more grain. I presume the negatives and prints look fine (as did mine), so that's the tell tale I picked up on in assuming it has something to do with the scanner.
Maybe if you place the image in a different place, you'll have less problems. I also tried placing a piece of white and black paper over the photo ot prevent any distortion in the light; upto a point, that worked fine.
With the issue I had, cleaning the glass worked, but didn't take away the effect all together. It might be that because of heat, heavy use or something, the structure of the glass changes, creating a different refraction of the light; but that's speculation. Why don't you ask a question in the photography help forum? Maybe there are more experienced people who can tell you what's wrong - I'm just guessing on what I see, and from the problems I've experienced, which seem to be similar...
Cheers,
Hugo
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 4/16/2006
|
Aaah, now I see and now I understand! Thank you very much for the description of the reasons, Hugo! This is what I mean when I call for a bit more logic in critiques, namely to say a few words about the "whys" because for me as a newbie in the scanning techniques it can be quite hard to get it. So, let me see if I understood it right.
The fact that there blueish (or also other colors?) washes is an indicator that this hasn't been on the original image, which of course suggests that something in the scanning process didn't work right. Assuming that such washes are not on the original photos is a thing of experience, that doesn't need further proof, right?
About my scanner, I also cleaned the glass plate but I still see some strange patterns just as if I had cleaned it using soap but without removing the foam and drying it properly. I hope you know what I mean. I think these patterns are on the back side and so I wonder how I could get the plate out of the scanner. I don't see any other possibility than dismantling it and I hesitate doing that because I am afraid that I'll do more harm than good. Why don't they make them such that removing the plate for cleaning is a bit easier?
Thank you very much again for your hint - today I learned something new!
|
|
|
|
|
Hugo de Wolf
{K:185110} 4/16/2006
|
Hi Nick, I didn't conclude anything, but looking at the right side of the image there seems to be some vertical oriented bluish wash over the image, especially in the dark parts. As that occurred to too with my scanner, i suggested that might be the same thing.
I'm not really sure what causes it; it could be the intensity of the scanner light making the glass less transparent; I didn't manage to get it fixed, I tried cleaning, but that didn't work. It was a fair scanner, but nothing really worth having fixed. ..
Cheers,
Hugo
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 4/16/2006
|
Many many thanks for the great comment, Hugo, though, as alredy said to Aaron, I can't understand how it is possible to conclude any damages in the scanner, when we don't have the original. Don't get mke wrong, this is no rhetorical question. I just want to know how this can be possible.
About scanning, well, I have to examine the glass of the flatbed, since I also think that it could have caught dirt on it. But provied that it is really no more clean, what is the bets method to clean it? Some special liquid perhaps?
Greetings and thanks again!
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 4/16/2006
|
Many many thanks for the kind comment, Selami!
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 4/16/2006
|
So many thanks, Nessa! That time of the day can really be magic!
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 4/16/2006
|
So many thanks, Czeslaw, and my best wishes to you!
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 4/16/2006
|
Many thanks, Gustavo! I had to wake up very early for this, but it was worth it, I think!
Best wishes!
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 4/16/2006
|
Sí, exactamente qué pensé cuando tomé la foto. ¡Algo está llevando las nubes el infinito! ¡Thankm usted tan muc, Alicia, para su comentario del maravilloso !
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 4/16/2006
|
Thank you very much for the comment, Aaron! Perhaps I will invest in a drum scan, if you answer me the following:
In order to know that the photo was marred due to the scan job, we have to know what the original photo looks like, which we can't know since we only see the scan. So, if we don't know what the original photo looks like, and we know even less what the morning looked like, how can we know that the scan was such terrible? Is it experience?
I would suggest, in all respect and admiration, a bit more logic in critiques, since it is mathematically strictly proven that no message, be it in word or picture, can be decoded using the message itself, which in other words means in this particular case that nobody can know what the scenery looked like, and much less if the scanning of the photo has been good or bad judging only the scan of the picture itself.
One just has to trust that the scenery *was* as depicted. Or else, we would be able to translate, say, hieroglyphs, using... hieroglyphs - which is hopeless!
But perhaps there are also other criteria, that you could explain to me, because my knowledge is that of a newbie. How is it possible to know that it was the scan job and not the picture itself, that looked marred? I suppose there are some assumptions here, that are automatically made about the original photo?
Best wishes,
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 4/15/2006
|
Great appreciation and many thanks for your kind comment, Sergio!
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 4/15/2006
|
Thank you very very much, Keith, for the kind comment, and for the idea of recropping.
Considering the beauty of nature alone, your version is of course the much better one.
Still, my thought was to somehow put the strength of the start of a new day in a relation to human beings, with all problems and sorrows and headaches. And so in I took the houses in the photo for having something human under this gorgeous morning.
Indeed, photography allows as any other art many many different interpretations, of which the fruits should be discussion, exchange of views, and a never ending interest to discover what the other's eyes see.
Thank you very much and best wishes!
|
|
|
|
|
Hugo de Wolf
{K:185110} 4/15/2006
|
Hi Nick, it seems you have some difficulties with the scanning... Looks like either your lamp is failing you, or you've got some damages to the glass of the flatbed.
The shot itself is well composed and the exposure looks spot on, disregarding the scanning flaws. I'm betting the printed image from negative looks awesome.
I'd put a bit more effort in the postprocessing. The edge of the roof seems to be dangling a bit, and as the attention is directed to the setting sun over the mountains and the lake, the cityscape in front is a mere framing of the photo. A good one, neverthe less, but as the sunset diverts the eye to the left part of the image, the right side seems to wander off a bit. See what I mean?
Cheers,
hugo
|
|
|
|
|
selami Torun
{K:9397} 4/15/2006
|
Beautiful capture Nick! amazing colors, good composition..
good work
regards
|
|
|
|
vanessa shakesheff
{K:68840} 4/15/2006
|
Beautiful capture ,gorgeous colours and scene.7.nessa
|
|
|
|
Czeslav Gavinkovski
{K:6800} 4/15/2006
|
Great game of the lights and colors in the sky.
Good luck,
Czeslaw.
|
|
|
|
Gustavo Valadares
{K:1437} 4/15/2006
|
Another great capture Nick. Splendid moment i loved the sky. Regards,
Gustavo.
|
|
|
|
|
Alicia Popp
{K:87532} 4/15/2006
|
Precioso amanecer.. luces, colores , siluetas... reflejos. Pareciera que una fuerza absorbe las nubes y las lleva a un punto en el infinito... felicitaciones!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Aaron Proot
{K:329} 4/15/2006
|
A potentially solid photo marred by a hideous film scan job. You might want to invest in a drum scan of this image.
|
|
|
|
Sergio Cárdenas
{K:25028} 4/15/2006
|
Amazing moment Nick! Great capture with nice clouds and colors of the sky.
Very well done.
Regards
|
|
|
|
Keith Saint
{K:13784} 4/15/2006
|
This is a great shot I love the sky its a good strong part of the image.
You have taken this just at the right time of the day
I think the foreground is a little distracting though so I have recropped it
|
|
|
0 
