Photo: Farclas Miscellany_1

[Farclas]

A random selection from the last year. Concrit welcome!

1. Galloping down to the start.


2. Reflections_1: Festival Theatre


3. Reflections_2: Old On New


4. Candid portraiture. Hmmm. Wedding flirt - she's interested; he's not so sure.


5. Abstraction. Candle on table in posh pub.


6. Portrait. The Cruelty of the Tight Close-Up

[Hans]

1. Well excuted and crisp, with great light on the horse and excellent depth of field, a good shot but... the composition or crop (?) does nothing for me. I suppose in a shot like this I want to see movement and at least the feet of the horse (preferably all four) Or was this one of those situation you couldn't improve your position without immediately having all kinds of erm... clutter in the shot?

2. Great picture, well executed, can't say much about it.

3. The reflection is great but unfortunately you can't do anything about the surrounding of it. Hadn't the modern glass canopy been there...

4. What a great shot. Also shows what great quality/sharpness can be had nowadays with an ISO setting of 800 (do you have that on auto or not?). I'm always rather self conscious and often too "shy" to take these kind of photographs but I do love 'em! And you also had a bit of uck with the shirt the guy is wearing! Great shot!

5. A marvelous shot! I love it. But when I wanted to know more about it I discovered it was a PNG and no exif data... So, you'll have to tell me more. Just a shot or composed? No flash but existing light right? Tripod or not or maybe the camera on a table the same as the one you photographed? Stock photo quality, you could sell this one (or maybe you already did? As it's a PNG )

6. Oh... oh.. Yes, cruel but also pretty (but I think I have said that before ). Speaking about cruel, I can outdo you there... what immediately struck me was that the portrait is either to warm or too red. Did you do that on purpose? So I took the liberty of using the automatic colour option in photoshop on it and erm... that doesn't particularly constitute being kind to her, does it? But it does, in my honest opinion, reflects the truth more? Colourwise. I can't judge that, you can



So, to avoid this lady thinking bad thoughts about me, I also applied that glamour action that I sent you and glamourous she is!



Hmm, maybe I should have added some red.

[Farclas]

Thanks for your kind comments, Hans.
1. Horse - yes. I was restricted in my stance - I was shooting from the road onto Musselburgh racecourse with a long lens (too mean to pay entrance fee!). It was a conscious framing choice imposed by my position - there was terrible foreground clutter (rails, spectators, signage). So that was the best to be had.

5. This was shot on RAW, but I finally tracked down the jpg version. Just goes to show what good glass can do for a very venerable second body. Hand-held, as you can see from the shutter speed and the 20D acquitted itself well at that ISO:


6. Flash was straight up and off the ceiling, which is good for hair, but the general fill was tungsten which did warm things up . . .

[StevenB]

Farclas, that last portrait is fantastic - very well lit and detailed. It's a little bit on the warm side, but Hans I think you overcompensated. Your version looks a little too blue to me, as the lady now has slightly blue eyeballs. Was the cloth in the background pure white or a creamy colour?