----- Original Message -----
From: Bob Talbot <BobTalbot@st-abbs.fsnet.co.uk>
To: Qkano <wildimages@lineone.net>
Sent: Saturday, May 17, 2003 6:17
PM
Subject: Gallery Review for
2003-05-17
Well
'Tis Saturday, the gallery has now been updated.
Some random thoughts while viewing the full-scale images.
Is this the worst set of images that have ever been shown in the PF gallery?
John Edwin Mason:
"John D'earth and Conrad Herwig"
http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/gallery/jmason.html
Those eyes!
That's about it really: without those eyes this is a NOTHING picture. With them is strangely becomes compelling.
I don't have a clue who the two people featured are - that's irrelevant. It should be annoying to have the near guy out of focus but for some odd reason it does not seem to matter - indeed, the stare brings him back in.
A challenging image for a reviewer ...
David Small:
"Walk in Water"
http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/gallery/small-1.jpg
OK David: Have we not seen this before (3-4 years ago?) in the PF gallery? I'm sure I remember something VERY similar (or was that by Rosen ? ;o)
I think it does not need the title: the joke is the water reflection and titling it so is explaining the joke..
Contrast is very high: flatbed scan of a print I assume.
Verticals are incredibly vertical yet the centre of the print shown is on the third floor. Mmmm ... cropped from a bigger neg. or a shift lens?
Oh, a fun picture but the contrast spoils it.
Dan Mitchell:
"Pulley"
http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/gallery/mitchell.html
Excellent Abstract.
Love the muted tones, composition, I even like the high contrast zig-zaggery across the top.
Cannot see how you could have presented this image better. Beefing up the saturation would have killed it.
Good work!
'Tis Saturday, the gallery has now been updated.
Some random thoughts while viewing the full-scale images.
Is this the worst set of images that have ever been shown in the PF gallery?
John Edwin Mason:
"John D'earth and Conrad Herwig"
http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/gallery/jmason.html
Those eyes!
That's about it really: without those eyes this is a NOTHING picture. With them is strangely becomes compelling.
I don't have a clue who the two people featured are - that's irrelevant. It should be annoying to have the near guy out of focus but for some odd reason it does not seem to matter - indeed, the stare brings him back in.
A challenging image for a reviewer ...
David Small:
"Walk in Water"
http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/gallery/small-1.jpg
OK David: Have we not seen this before (3-4 years ago?) in the PF gallery? I'm sure I remember something VERY similar (or was that by Rosen ? ;o)
I think it does not need the title: the joke is the water reflection and titling it so is explaining the joke..
Contrast is very high: flatbed scan of a print I assume.
Verticals are incredibly vertical yet the centre of the print shown is on the third floor. Mmmm ... cropped from a bigger neg. or a shift lens?
Oh, a fun picture but the contrast spoils it.
Dan Mitchell:
"Pulley"
http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/gallery/mitchell.html
Excellent Abstract.
Love the muted tones, composition, I even like the high contrast zig-zaggery across the top.
Cannot see how you could have presented this image better. Beefing up the saturation would have killed it.
Good work!
Rand Flory:
"Autumn at Beck Lake"
http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/gallery/flory.html
OK, nearly a great image. The right hand side is just a tad too dark for me - enhanced (in a negative direction) but the mock-shadow effect
I can see what you were trying to achieve: bright bushes against murky, foreboding background scenery but it has not quite worked for me.
Oh, it's still a damned good shot - but we want perfection, no?
Jeff Spirer:
"Maple Shack"
http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/gallery/spirer.html
I don't even know what a maple shack is. Where lumberjacks rest during the annual Maple Syrup harvest?
This shot has a lot of atmosphere and little detail. The old "feller" <G> staring out the window waiting for the bun wagon to call?
Or what is he looking at? The uncertainty adds a tiny element of interest.
This picture works for me - love the steam ...
Greg Fraser:
"Hidden Meaning"
http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/gallery/fraser.html
OK, so it's yellow. Heck, I even like yellow, but the title ...
The flower is out of focus: the intent I think was to show just the flowers "sexual organs" in graphic detail.
Where it fails for me is in the lighting, or at least the lack of tonal contrast between the naughty bits and the petals ...
Sorry greg: this one is a flop
Don Draper:
http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/gallery/draper.html
Now that is what a flower picture should look like.
The background though: it seems some texture has crept in - was it a coarse fabric not quite out of focus enough or is it banding from the scan?
I guess that could be fixed in PS with selected use of gaussian blur?
On second thoughts, the longer I look the less I like the out of focus blooms top left. It looks staged so a smaller aperture?
Conclusion: a nice shot but it has (IMO) some flaws which detract from what could have been.
jIMMY Harris:
"A SUNSET - It happens everyday"
http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/gallery/jharris.html
"It happens every day therefore it is boring"
That's the mantra of some for sure. Sunsets can be truly evocative though: however many you see in your lifetime. Actually, in some parts of the world they don't happen every day ...
This sunset???
Are those colours for real, an accidental under-exposure "artefact" of the slide film or a deliberate manipulation in PS "to be different".
Either way, as a final image, I don't find the deep mauve appealing. I prefer the boring old warm orange ;o(
Jim Davis:
"Fairy Reflection"
http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/gallery/davis.html
Two birds again ...
immediate thoughts:
1) minor crop from top to remove that darker band (distant shore?)
2) The beak and eye being out of focus is always going to spoil a bird shot for me.
OK, the "fairy" part ... the soft focus effect. Mmmm ... no, sorry, for me it is not working. I like the wing feathers where they drape to the water ... but it's all just TOO soft for me ...
... I'm no fairy!!!
Andrew Davidhazy:
"Warped outlook"
http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/gallery/davidhazy.html
Surely a thumbnail should be smaller than the real image (unless you have corrected it by the time this gets through).
What can I say. Technical images ... fantastic special effect. If I had a camera that could do this (or the technical nous to make one) I'd have a lot of fun with it.
Be honest though ... the real reason you call it a "streak" camera was when you used it for photographing moving nudes ;o)
OK,,
to anyone who feels the need to comment, criticise, bitch, complain about the above reviews ... I'll happily take not of what you say AFTER you have shown by example how you think it should be done for all 10 images this week.
IMO it was a good gallery ...
Bob
If the US is such a wonderful model of
democracy ...
... why does it appear to act like a global
Dictator
?
