Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Landscape & Nature Photography => Topic started by: Cartagenaphoto on May 27, 2015, 05:55:16 pm
-
From a cruise to Norway.
Sony DSLR-A900
Sony 70-200mm F2.8 G
ƒ/10.0
70.0 mm
1/160
ISO 200
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2927/14630430413_1c58a75698_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/ohQMfe)
Richard Witt (https://flic.kr/p/ohQMfe) by David Cartagena (https://www.flickr.com/photos/cartagenaphoto/), on Flickr
-
Now that's a fjord!
-
Now that's a fjord!
Yeah. I just read an article on wiki and now understand that the Scandinavian meaning of fjord (The word com from Scandinavia) also means an Inlet, or Sound. Where I live we have a fjord which I guess English speaking people would call a sound / inlet.
Thanks for commenting ;-)
-
I wonder if you considered an alternative composition - cropping out the bottom third. Just doing it with my hand, it produces something more abstract.
-
Nice.
-
Hi.
Yep tried that but then you loose the view of the ship that looks so tiny compared to the mountain.
And to me thats what makes this photo worth looking at.
Thank you for the comments.
David
-
Nice.
Thanks Paulo ;-)
David
-
Hi.
Yep tried that but then you loose the view of the ship that looks so tiny compared to the mountain.
And to me thats what makes this photo worth looking at.
Thank you for the comments.
David
Absolutely correct. The ship adds to the image.
-
Absolutely correct. The ship adds to the image.
Over the years I learned that there is as many opinions about composition and photos in general as there is people on the earth ;-)
Thanks for the comment.
David
-
Really love the shot here, David. The composition works for me and I really like the light balance.
-
Really love the shot here, David. The composition works for me and I really like the light balance.
Thank you so much ;-)
I am glad that you say you like the light balance because I worked on precisely that ;-)
David
-
I wonder if you considered an alternative composition - cropping out the bottom third. Just doing it with my hand, it produces something more abstract.
I quite like John's suggestion. A very different image but just as valid.
-
Absolutely correct. The ship adds to the image.
Rubbish. The image with the ship certainly works well and the ship tells the viewer exactly what's depicted. Without the ship there is another, maybe more intriguing, image.
-
Rubbish. The image with the ship certainly works well and the ship tells the viewer exactly what's depicted. Without the ship there is another, maybe more intriguing, image.
Crap. You are ignoring the posters original vision.
quote
I wonder if you considered an alternative composition - cropping out the bottom third. Just doing it with my hand, it produces something more abstract.
unquote
Just keep using your hand instead of cropping.
-
Crap. You are ignoring the posters original vision.
quote
I wonder if you considered an alternative composition - cropping out the bottom third. Just doing it with my hand, it produces something more abstract.
unquote
Just keep using your hand instead of cropping.
Hey, Stalker, keep using your own hand.... Quit taking your problems out on me, will you?
There are two equally good images in there.
-
John carefully read Reply#12. You were the one that quoted me. You started your post with the word rubbish. I haven't replied to you for months and it wasn't my intention to do so because of your over sensitive nature but using the word rubbish meant I felt a reply was in order. Don't quote me and I will carry on ignoring you. ;D
-
John carefully read Reply#12. You were the one that quoted me. You started your post with the word rubbish. I haven't replied to you for months and it wasn't my intention to do so because of your over sensitive nature but using the word rubbish meant I felt a reply was in order. Don't quote me and I will carry on ignoring you. ;D
I'm also careful to refer to your comment, not you, as rubbish. But again, you get ad hominem, Stalker. I do not have an "over sensitive nature", but I certainly do notice your odd replies to my posts. Put me on your ignore list, please, then you won't even see whatever I've written that upsets you. Everyone would be a lot happier, not least you.
-
I'm also careful to refer to your comment, not you, as rubbish. But again, you get ad hominem, Stalker. I do not have an "over sensitive nature", but I certainly do notice your odd replies to my posts. Put me on your ignore list, please, then you won't even see whatever I've written that upsets you. Everyone would be a lot happier, not least you.
If my comment was rubbish then it would apply to all the other members who didn't advocate a crop, including the original poster who said he wasn't in favour of a crop? If you state that someone's comment is rubbish then that is a slight on them? Regarding "over sensitive nature" then....
Ignoring all posts from: "AlterEgo" "deeejjaaa"
.....that is over sensitive, boasting about it. I am quite happy to ignore you but it was you that addressed me. So let this be the last word on the subject. :)
-
Ahem! Two 'senior' members engaging in mature conversation? Come on!
-
If my comment was rubbish then it would apply to all the other members who didn't advocate a crop, including the original poster who said he wasn't in favour of a crop? If you state that someone's comment is rubbish then that is a slight on them? Regarding "over sensitive nature" then....
Ignoring all posts from: "AlterEgo" "deeejjaaa"
.....that is over sensitive, boasting about it. I am quite happy to ignore you but it was you that addressed me. So let this be the last word on the subject. :)
No, it applied to you, because (hold the front page) I quoted your comment, not the OP's. The OP's response was perfectly fair, yours was just you making one of your odd replies to one of my posts. Put me on your ignore list, please.
So you claim disclosing who I ignore indicates I am "over sensitive"? FFS, who are you to question what someone puts in their signature? I accept "boasting" isn't too unfair, though FWIW my signature advertises my ignore list so people can make sense of threads where I fail to respond to that poster.
-
John did you not read Chris's post? Let go and move on.
-
Yes, and I made sure I wasn't insulting. It's you who needs to move on - once you've put me on your ignore list (Personal Message Options in your forum profile).
-
Crap. You are ignoring the posters original vision.
John made a perfectly valid suggestion as to an alternative [and in my view a more interesting] version of the image, why get upset about that? It's not even your photo.
-
If my comment was rubbish then it would apply to all the other members who didn't advocate a crop, including the original poster who said he wasn't in favour of a crop? If you state that someone's comment is rubbish then that is a slight on them? Regarding "over sensitive nature" then....
Ignoring all posts from: "AlterEgo" "deeejjaaa"
.....that is over sensitive, boasting about it. I am quite happy to ignore you but it was you that addressed me. So let this be the last word on the subject. :)
Rubbish. The image with the ship certainly works well and the ship tells the viewer exactly what's depicted. Without the ship there is another, maybe more intriguing, image.
I thought This forum was civilized but know I can see I am wrong.
So you two. Please don't reply to another of my threads again.
Have a nice weekend.
David Cartagena