Prev: Who will bail on DSLRs first, Sony or Olympus?
Next: best way to market pics ...
From: Peter on 27 Jun 2010 17:22
"John McWilliams" <jpmcw(a)comcast.net> wrote in message
news:i08evq$p0o$1(a)news.eternal-september.org...
> Allen wrote:
>> GMAN wrote:
>>> In article <e0cc8$4c2791e4$546ac3cf$8432(a)cache50.multikabel.net>, Robert
>>> Spanjaard <spamtrap(a)arumes.com> wrote:
>>>> Spent two evenings in the polder on my bicycle (you're not allowed to
>>>> stop a car wherever you want) this week, and this is the result:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.arumes.com/temp/polder/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> NICE!!!!!!!
>> Ditto, especially for the one with the windmill and the one of the house
>> (?) next to the canal. Keepers!
>
> I'm sure I'll get in Dutch for saying this, but do you go to the polders
> to ponder? Are there poldergeists there?


Maybe polderheists are the reason for not allowing cars to park.

--
Peter

From: Tim Conway on 27 Jun 2010 19:26

"Robert Spanjaard" <spamtrap(a)arumes.com> wrote in message
news:e0cc8$4c2791e4$546ac3cf$8432(a)cache50.multikabel.net...
> Spent two evenings in the polder on my bicycle (you're not allowed to
> stop a car wherever you want) this week, and this is the result:
>
> http://www.arumes.com/temp/polder/

Good photos.


From: Mort on 27 Jun 2010 20:53
Robert Spanjaard wrote:
> Spent two evenings in the polder on my bicycle (you're not allowed to
> stop a car wherever you want) this week, and this is the result:
>
> http://www.arumes.com/temp/polder/
>
>
>
Hi Robert,

Nice polder pictures. Which polder was it?

I was born and raised in the USA, and studied for my M.D. degree in
Utrecht from 1952-1957. Before coming back to the USA in May 1957, my
wife and I visited the polder at Lelystad, where the soil was just
starting to appear as the water receded. It was fascinating, especially
to see in the museum there all the plans laid out for the streets,
homes, shops, schools, etc., in advance.

Na meer dan 50 jaren spreek ik nog wat Nederlands.

Regards,

Morton Linder
USA
From: Robert Coe on 27 Jun 2010 21:24
On Sun, 27 Jun 2010 20:01:08 +0200, Robert Spanjaard <spamtrap(a)arumes.com>
wrote:
: Spent two evenings in the polder on my bicycle (you're not allowed to
: stop a car wherever you want) this week, and this is the result:
:
: http://www.arumes.com/temp/polder/

Robert,

Like everyone else, I do like the pictures. But just in case your objective
was to tease out a bit more substantive criticism than the saccharine attaboys
the others have been laying on you ...

1. This picture is nicely done, but more than a little dull. I think it would
have helped a lot to make the windmill the focus of attention, which I guess
would have required a vantage point down near the bend of the canal, where the
windmill is. I also would have preferred the grass in the foreground to be
less OOF, but recognize that it might have been technically infeasible or even
a deliberate stylistic choice.

2. Another nice shot, but a tractor is a tractor, and this one doesn't have
much context. I'd like to see enough of the field to see what the tractor has
been doing (or is about to do).

3. This one is compositionally excellent, but something seems amiss in the
perspective of the house, probably due to wide-angle effect. I'm tempted to
suggest a half degree of clockwise rotation, but that would probably throw off
the reflection of the tree behind the bridge. Maybe you can't have it both
ways.

4. I can see leaving the background OOF, but I can't see doing it to the
white sheep. The brown sheep just aren't dominant enough, nor positioned well
enough, to allow them to function as the sole focus of the picture.

5. This is a real winner. I might have tried to brighten the bottom or
cropped it a little, but that's just a nit. The colors work very well, and the
aura is more that of a 17th-century Japanese house than of a Dutch greenhouse.
Worth hanging on the wall. (And a good desktop wallpaper. Too bad you didn't
have it in time.)

6. Again the greenhouse is a strong element, but I don't think the rest of
the picture lives up to it. The green is too relentless and is borderline dark
and muddy. I think I would have shown more of the greenhouse and less of the
orchard. But that's just me, and the picture is reasonably effective as
displayed.

Bob
From: Pete on 28 Jun 2010 04:17
On 2010-06-28 02:24:22 +0100, Robert Coe said:

> On Sun, 27 Jun 2010 20:01:08 +0200, Robert Spanjaard <spamtrap(a)arumes.com>
> wrote:
> : Spent two evenings in the polder on my bicycle (you're not allowed to
> : stop a car wherever you want) this week, and this is the result:
> :
> : http://www.arumes.com/temp/polder/
>
> Robert,
>
> Like everyone else, I do like the pictures. But just in case your objective
> was to tease out a bit more substantive criticism than the saccharine attaboys
> the others have been laying on you ...

In that case, I will present some different opinions...

> 1. This picture is nicely done, but more than a little dull. I think it would
> have helped a lot to make the windmill the focus of attention, which I guess
> would have required a vantage point down near the bend of the canal, where the
> windmill is. I also would have preferred the grass in the foreground to be
> less OOF, but recognize that it might have been technically infeasible or even
> a deliberate stylistic choice.

Not dull at all. It's refreshingly different from the "classical"
approach (which is boring). The OOF grass in the foreground is a little
uncomfortable and would become overpowering in a large image/print.

> 2. Another nice shot, but a tractor is a tractor, and this one doesn't have
> much context. I'd like to see enough of the field to see what the tractor has
> been doing (or is about to do).

The tractor and trailer are both old and tired. The tractor has a blank
stare on its "face". Showing more context would only detract from the
idea that the tractor is resting and not happy about the prospect of
doing more work.

> 3. This one is compositionally excellent, but something seems amiss in the
> perspective of the house, probably due to wide-angle effect. I'm tempted to
> suggest a half degree of clockwise rotation, but that would probably throw off
> the reflection of the tree behind the bridge. Maybe you can't have it both
> ways.

The house does have a slight CCW angle and I feel its reflection is too
near the bottom of the frame. Other than those minor niggles, superb.

> 4. I can see leaving the background OOF, but I can't see doing it to the
> white sheep. The brown sheep just aren't dominant enough, nor positioned well
> enough, to allow them to function as the sole focus of the picture.

Agreed. The OOF blur is too much: again, this prevents making a large
image/print. Despite that, I do actually like the picture.

> 5. This is a real winner. I might have tried to brighten the bottom or
> cropped it a little, but that's just a nit. The colors work very well, and the
> aura is more that of a 17th-century Japanese house than of a Dutch greenhouse.
> Worth hanging on the wall. (And a good desktop wallpaper. Too bad you didn't
> have it in time.)

I feel this picture does not belong in the set: it's the only one with
no green in it and it's the one I like the least.

> 6. Again the greenhouse is a strong element, but I don't think the rest of
> the picture lives up to it. The green is too relentless and is borderline dark
> and muddy. I think I would have shown more of the greenhouse and less of the
> orchard. But that's just me, and the picture is reasonably effective as
> displayed.

A superb picture. The variety of greens and their texture is most
realistic for an early morning/late afternoon scene. Darned good sky
also.


Overall, a most enjoyable set of images. Of particular technical merit:
colour balance, saturation, light and tone. None of the images has a
"digital" or Velvia look, which makes a welcome change.

--
Pete

First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: Who will bail on DSLRs first, Sony or Olympus?
Next: best way to market pics ...