Vincent Goetz
Subscriber Member
djonesii,
some folks would call that florn
some folks would call that florn
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
djonesii,
some folks would call that florn
Beautiful!Dunkirk shale on the shore of Lake Erie.., Well above the Marcellus shale which is getting a lot of attention in the NE US lately. 645D, 120mm macro.
_IGP6408_7760 by tsjanik47, on Flickr
This thread, as always, repleted with inspiration
Two more from Söderåsen nature reserve, this fall.
AFDlll, 35AF and 50 shift, P45+
Ray
Thanks Don.Beautiful!
You're correct. Granite Creek is East of Jackson. We drove through Pindale on our way into Jackson passing Granite Creek. We tried twice to return to Pindale but never made it past Granite Creek. There's a State Park at the end of the road in Granite Creek that has a hot springs which is open year round. By the way - Hoback Jct is under heavy construction and has been since at least last year.Thanks Don.
I was looking at some of your wonderful Jackson shots and meant to ask you about a reference to Granite Creek. Is it the creek that empties into the Hoback River a bit east of Hoback Junction? I have some great memories of staying in a friend's family cabin along Granite creek and swimming in the hot spring during a snow fall. Great part of the world.
Tom
Wonderful color and light Graham.
Hi Shelby,Some shots from a shoot today for a school assignment.
My kids. In each frame, the shadow content/hardness is supposed to correlate to a specific emotional state (here, how far down the healing path my kids have gone since losing my mom to suicide two years ago)... also the position of the chair is supposed to correlate how "close" I perceive each of the kids still feels to her loss. The were just told to be themselves and we did not speak of my mom at all... these were taken with just them in their normal states.
Cheers,
Shelby
Thank you Bill for your kind word.Nice, Pramote - but I think you did a little post on the size of the moon, no?
Bill
I posted a B&W image of this shot on the Pentax 645D thread. In this image I kept the color in the starlings, but desaturated the sky and cropped considerably more; other than that, no manipulation.
My intention was to photogaph more shale on the shore, but I had the 400mm f/5.6 with me just in case.
Georgous!I posted a B&W image of this shot on the Pentax 645D thread. In this image I kept the color in the starlings, but desaturated the sky and cropped considerably more; other than that, no manipulation.
My intention was to photogaph more shale on the shore, but I had the 400mm f/5.6 with me just in case.
Tom
_IGP6448_7821modcolor by tsjanik47, on Flickr
tom, personally, I like this so much better than the B&W. Beautiful.I posted a B&W image of this shot on the Pentax 645D thread. In this image I kept the color in the starlings, but desaturated the sky and cropped considerably more; other than that, no manipulation.
My intention was to photogaph more shale on the shore, but I had the 400mm f/5.6 with me just in case.
Tom
Then I'm puzzled as to why the moon looks so large when you were using a 28 mm lens? Or did you crop a lot? (Doesn't look like it from the perspective.) Or is it simply the halo?Thank you Bill for your kind word.
I only have minor adjustment of shadow, highlight, saturation and sharpening on this photo.
Regards,
Pramote
I agree Bill. It seems all of my photos using a normal to wide angle lens that include the moon in the landscape, the moon always appears smaller in the photo than it does in real life. I don't know why that it, but it has been apparent in many photos. I admit to being "creative" and pasting in a moon that appears more correct size-wize - after all, my goal is to represent what I saw and the "as-shot" photo with the moon is not what I saw.Then I'm puzzled as to why the moon looks so large when you were using a 28 mm lens? Or did you crop a lot? (Doesn't look like it from the perspective.) Or is it simply the halo?
I've often shot the moon and in my pix it doesn't look that big even with a standard 80 mm lens. Please enlighten me!
Bill