|
|
Aimee' Desire'
{K:744} 9/19/2005
|
Kim, I am very isnpired by your work. Impressive portfolio. Creating images like thisos one of my favorite things to do. I'd like to see what you think of some of mine. My Best, Aimee'
|
|
|
|
|
Bobbie C.
{K:1425} 6/14/2004
|
I like this technique. Also try one like this, but move the camera during only part of the exposure. Or do a double exposure, one still and one moving.
|
|
|
|
|
Carlheinz Bayer
{K:14220} 3/1/2004
|
Nice effect! Well done. Cheers! Carlheinz
|
|
|
|
|
Dirck DuFlon
{K:35779} 2/2/2004
|
Kim, I think this worked very well! You picked a really good subject for the effect, and it comes off nicely - gives me the impression of the trees shooting up out of the ground! As Stefan mentioned, it gets a little choppy at the bottom, but pretty much inevitable given the horizontal lines there. Very dreamlike - distorted but recognizable, and definitely a nice sense of motion!
|
|
|
|
|
L B.
{K:13965} 1/30/2004
|
Really thanks for your comment on my garden. That is information wich i can use to make a better next photo!
I think it is a pretty cool effect. The shaking trees. I did not see the other picture, but the deepness in the picture is superb. That is a big part in the effect, it makes it 3D. The only thing i don't like are the two big black parts in the picture. I don't know how it came but i think there maybe where a little house or so. Maybe you can tell me!!
Greet, Lex
|
|
|
|
|
John Barclay
{K:3650} 1/28/2004
|
Hi Kim,
I'd say your on the right track. This is very nice, I wonder what a multi exposure would like like here?
|
|
|
|
Hugo de Wolf
{K:185110} 1/28/2004
|
Kim, there's a great dynamism in this photo. I think you've carried out this experimet with great subtlety; the motion is definately there, and the trees are still recognisable as such. The hard contrast between the darks and the lights do make it look like a painting. I would love to see what this would do in a subdued light with a fill flash, with people as the (prime) subject.....
Cheers,
Hugo
|
|
|
|
|
Kim Culbert
{K:37070} 1/28/2004
|
I believe that the concave-ness of the trees come from the 19mm end of my zoom... with the tilting up and down it accenuates the almost fisheye view of this lens. But, after trying it with a 50mm I liked the curve as it added a different look. Thanks so much for looking, and I will play around with blurring the brush strokes at the bottom to see what it looks like.
|
|
|
|
|
Stefan Engström
{K:24473} 1/28/2004
|
I like the painterly effect of the camera motion. I am grappling with whether I like the "brush strokes" near center bottom of the image, looks a little choppy, but they also have good definition which is hard to come by in these kinds of exposures. What I went for when I tried this was to accentuate the vertical structure of the trees so the camera motion was strictly up-down, in fact it was moving before I hit the shutter and the exposure was quite a bit faster than yours. This is what they made digital cameras for, but the colors are great with the film you used. One thing I don't understand about the image is how the concave impressino (horizontally) came about.
|
|
|
|
|
Rossari Maurizio
{K:632} 1/28/2004
|
good image.Regards:Grazia
|
|
0 
