|
|
Critique By:
Rose Hooper (K:899)
7/4/2003 8:27:04 PM
missing sharpness is from the jpeg conversion.
|
| Photo By: Rose Hooper
(K:899)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Rose Hooper (K:899)
6/20/2003 5:58:10 PM
very nice
|
| Photo By: David Chang-Sang
(K:680)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Rose Hooper (K:899)
5/19/2003 10:24:24 PM
This is a better version.
|
| Photo By: Rose Hooper
(K:899)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Rose Hooper (K:899)
5/2/2003 10:23:33 PM
Lovely!
|
| Photo By: DeeDee Newman
(K:172)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Rose Hooper (K:899)
5/2/2003 10:20:04 PM
The face could use a touch more detail in the highlights, but the hair is dead on. Burning is reccomended to correct.
|
| Photo By: Terrence Kent
(K:7023)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Rose Hooper (K:899)
4/28/2003 6:45:15 PM
Hey Phil, How did you manage to avoid the ice melting?! Well lit as usual, but lacks a little something. Perhaps a non-black background?
|
| Photo By: Phillip Cohen
(K:10561)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Rose Hooper (K:899)
4/21/2003 10:30:05 PM
This is a great shot. The multiple vanishing points create all sots of perspective lines, and keep my eyes busy looking around the image. I would love to see this printed big.
|
| Photo By: Andrew Caldwell
(K:18307)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Rose Hooper (K:899)
1/23/2003 12:41:45 PM
|
| Photo By: Rose Hooper
(K:899)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Rose Hooper (K:899)
1/13/2003 4:25:20 PM
This is tilted.
|
| Photo By: Luis Gens
(K:3)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Rose Hooper (K:899)
1/12/2003 10:11:25 PM
This photo deserves some renewed attention.
|
| Photo By: Stephen R. Zang
(K:1044)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Rose Hooper (K:899)
1/9/2003 8:05:13 AM
Hey, who taught you to take portraits? There's no eyes visible in this one.
Oh, wait, that's me! Hi Me.
|
| Photo By: Alisa Mudge
(K:7511)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Rose Hooper (K:899)
1/2/2003 5:17:19 PM
Hi John, Being picky is fine  I shot it in 1/2 stop intervals, and the lower exposure ones lacked detail in the shadows and other important areas of building... and the uilding roof had no detail. The higher exposure ones blow out too much detail.
|
| Photo By: Rose Hooper
(K:899)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Rose Hooper (K:899)
1/1/2003 9:05:34 PM
Before perspective correction...
|
| Photo By: Rose Hooper
(K:899)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Rose Hooper (K:899)
1/1/2003 5:56:44 PM
Very nice James, although a hint of texture in the shadows would be nice. I presume the print has such details but that the computer couldn't display them.
|
| Photo By: james mickelson
(K:7344)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Rose Hooper (K:899)
12/31/2002 1:36:16 PM
Thanks for the useful advice Sandra. I will have to get myself some black velvet as I had been planning to sooner than later. Some velvet in the background would have made a nice black background, although I must admit I like the warmth of the background in this particular shot.
I hope this bud or another nice one is still there this weekend when I visit the inlaws.
|
| Photo By: Rose Hooper
(K:899)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Rose Hooper (K:899)
12/4/2002 9:36:19 PM
Hey chelsea! Awesome pic. Went to comment but hit delete by accident.. Had to undelete. Oopsie!
|
| Photo By: Chelsea Burke
(K:5750)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Rose Hooper (K:899)
11/21/2002 9:31:47 PM
Hey you can't change ratings.
|
| Photo By: Terrence Kent
(K:7023)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Rose Hooper (K:899)
11/21/2002 9:29:48 PM
This is a lovely scene, and without the about, it had me wondering about the location.
|
| Photo By: Chelsea Burke
(K:5750)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Rose Hooper (K:899)
11/21/2002 9:27:20 PM
Like this! Chocolate prints are for weenies.
|
| Photo By: Terrence Kent
(K:7023)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Rose Hooper (K:899)
11/19/2002 6:41:29 PM
Very abstracty and nice.
|
| Photo By: Chelsea Burke
(K:5750)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Rose Hooper (K:899)
11/6/2002 2:18:06 PM
I love the contrast range in here (not to mention the texture and good choice of framing).
|
| Photo By: Roy Roberts
(K:23)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Rose Hooper (K:899)
10/19/2002 8:44:29 PM
You Da Man!
Phil, you're really talented at this stuff.
|
| Photo By: Phillip Cohen
(K:10561)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Rose Hooper (K:899)
9/30/2002 8:53:39 PM
This is a classic type of shot. I never tire of the patterns and lightplay of dunes. I must get my ass to somewhere like this sometime to try my eye out on such shots. I will definitely remember to bracket when/if I get a chance so I don't goof. This is lovely.
|
| Photo By: Keith Song
(K:-11)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Rose Hooper (K:899)
9/29/2002 10:41:00 PM
Phil, this is lovely. I bet Ikea would sell LOTS of these as big posters.
|
| Photo By: Phillip Cohen
(K:10561)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Rose Hooper (K:899)
9/29/2002 6:49:26 PM
Nice composition.
|
| Photo By: Reidar Olsen
(K:144)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Rose Hooper (K:899)
9/29/2002 6:45:30 PM
Lovely concept. I think it would have been slightly stronger without the boat in the background.
|
| Photo By: Kim Barke
(K:278)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Rose Hooper (K:899)
9/29/2002 6:44:23 PM
I like this, although a really really powerful flash could have helped fill the dark people in ...
|
| Photo By: Reidar Olsen
(K:144)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Rose Hooper (K:899)
9/18/2002 9:12:39 PM
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. Under the Wellington St bridge over the Rideau Canal.
|
| Photo By: Rose Hooper
(K:899)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Rose Hooper (K:899)
8/28/2002 3:10:02 PM
Request for input -- Do you agree with this guy. There are actually two issues at play - motion blur and shallow DOF on the foreground subject.
Larger image at http://www.royhooper.ca/doc/cat/3/photo/160?big=1
Over at PSig:
from rajeev balakrishnan (17) on August 28 2002, 1:49AM
There are 2 areas of focus on the same subject - the foreground blurred and then coming to focus. And the out of focus mass of flowers seems to be occuping more image volume. Would have made it better to have the entire mass of flowers in focus and just have the orange flowers in the background blurred. The stalks of some flowers on the left and the tips of those on the right get cut...could have either tightened the frame or widened it to include them.
|
| Photo By: Rose Hooper
(K:899)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Rose Hooper (K:899)
8/28/2002 2:59:55 PM
Yep Bill. I think this roll of film had my highest to-date good photos ratio.
|
| Photo By: Rose Hooper
(K:899)
|
|
