Reworked IR photoModerators: Greg B, Nnnnsic, Geoff, Glen, gstark, Moderators
Forum rules
Please note that image critiquing is a matter of give and take: if you post images for critique, and you then expect to receive criticism, then it is also reasonable, fair and appropriate that, in return, you post your critique of the images of other members here as a matter of courtesy. So please do offer your critique of the images of others; your opinion is important, and will help everyone here enjoy their visit to far greater extent. Also please note that, unless you state something to the contrary, other members might attempt to repost your image with their own post processing applied. We see this as an acceptable form of critique, but should you prefer that others not modify your work, this is perfectly ok, and you should state this, either within your post, or within your signature. Images posted here should conform with the general forum guidelines. Image sizes should not exceed 950 pixels along the largest side (height or width) and typically no more than four images per post or thread. Please also ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is.
Previous topic • Next topic
13 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Reworked IR photoI've had another go it PP one of my previous IR shots. Last time I PP'd it it was too dark.
I've done 2 versions.
First one is amazing. Second one is also good, but a bit blue in the top half for mine perhaps? To be totally nitpicky the foregrounds are a bit blown, but it doesn't distract very much for me. Print that first one BIG!
I think the 2nd almost has it- the false colours are great- but agree with MCWB, maybe a bit blue in the sky and the lawn is a little blown. Great church- where is it? Robert Robert
EOS 5D Mk II, 24-70 f2.8, 70-200f4 IS, 50 f1.8, 100 macro, 300D (IR Mod)
I like both images, which remind me of a snowed landscape. I like the first one because of its B&W looks despite the fact of being and IR image; and the second because the beautiful colours somehow contrast revealing the IR nature of the image. Do I make sense?
I love the 1st one - eery!
Geoff
Special Moments Photography Nikon D700, 50mm 1.4, 85mm 1.4, 70-200 2.8VR, SB800 & some simple studio stuff.
I like them both too. I think the first one may be the better of the two, but I also like the colours you have intoduced to the second. Great work.
Greg - - - - D200 etc
Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see. - Arthur Schopenhauer
Previous topic • Next topic
13 posts
• Page 1 of 1
|