May 12, 2014 at 4:47 pm #6464
Have attached 3 files. 2 are of a pictorial and pastoral nature soft focus and Hi Key. also a proper nature image but cropped in a way to try and have points of interest in the image lying along specific lines, for this reason it does not show the full bird. Do not know whether any of them really work. Your opions would be appreciated.
- This topic was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by wbaxter.
Attachments:You must be logged in to view attached files.May 13, 2014 at 7:47 am #6471
It may be easier for us to compare them if you were to embed them in a post, Wallace. Then we wouldn’t need to open them on separate pages or tabs.
Aren’t 1 and 3 exactly the same file? I can see almost no difference between them on my iPad, even when I switch rapidly between them to identify differences using the flicker effect that astronomers use to detect minute difference between star fields!May 13, 2014 at 10:47 am #6472
Could only say for me this is beautiful photography.Love the pose and pastoral effect. Thank goodness for our nature members.Ian my friend-there is a difference between one and three—listen-their squarks are not quite the same.May 13, 2014 at 5:36 pm #6474
Sorry Ian I do not know how to enbed a post. What I am trying to achive is a print for my own personal pleasure that is giving the impression of the delicate nature of the bird. The graceful flight and the form nearly angle like in the way it carries its wings. I will then have it printed on textured paper to give the impression of a water colour, I hope, that is plan A.
Have been printing some copies and find it is not easy to replicate what I want on the paper with what is seen on the screen. The screen is not light enough. After 4 atempts I think I am nearly there. This is not a competition image but one for artistic effect and my satisfaction in achiving it.May 13, 2014 at 8:03 pm #6475
The shape of the wings in versions one and three are beautiful Wallace. I like the pose you captured very much. I find the image a little too soft for me regardless of whether it is for competition of personal use. I like a little more definition especially with the eye. With the Angry Tern I find the tail feathers a bit distracting especially where the lhs is clipped at the bottom of the picture and the strong lines defining the outer edges. A beautiful bird and really worth persevering with. Well done in the LCPU Ann Ind by the way! 🙂May 13, 2014 at 10:50 pm #6480
Wallace said, “Sorry Ian I do not know how to embed a post.“
All I meant was you should insert the images in the post, rather than attach them – just like you did with your bluebells picture on the Monthly Theme forum. (Sorry for not being clear.)
[PS And I’ve looked again at 1 & 3 on my main computer – the images are the same. I’m assuming you intended to upload that wonderful, ethereally pale version you have on your Flickr stream, in which case I think you may have selected the wrong file.]May 14, 2014 at 1:46 pm #6494
OK Ian I understand now.
The second image on flickr is the same one as on the Forum only with a slightly blue ting. Here is the blue one againMay 14, 2014 at 2:06 pm #6495
This is the version I liked best, Wallace:
This looks paler and more delicate, the background not so blue as the others. As I said in my Flickr comment, “Beautiful ethereal picture… probably too poetic for ‘Nature’, but utterly lovely”
You said, “Have been printing some copies and find it is not easy to replicate what I want on the paper with what is seen on the screen. The screen is not light enough. After 4 atempts I think I am nearly there. This is not a competition image but one for artistic effect and my satisfaction in archiving it.”
I wonder if the problem is something to do with colour gamuts. The colours of these photographs are very delicate and subtly graduated on the screen; the printer colour gamut may not be able to match the very fine gradations of pale blue and off-white.May 14, 2014 at 3:46 pm #6501
I know judges would probably say they are “too poetic” but they are different from the usual images. I was going to argue that they could be competition images, but since they’ve already been altered it rules them out in that sense alone. (Though some day somebody might just challenge those rulings, even if not with these images.)May 14, 2014 at 5:16 pm #6502
If I were to enter this image it would be in the Colour general section.
Have now printed and mounted 4 of these and depending on the mounts which range from off white to light grey and dark grey they all look good. I will now have to find someone to print on textured paper, has anybody any suggestions as to where I could get it done possibly a profesional photo trade printer?May 14, 2014 at 6:51 pm #6504
I think the tern is a perfect subject for an arty hi-key image. I like the blue tint image of the full bird best and agree with Ian that I would like to a bit more definition in it. The position of the wings is perfect for me. It’s very difficult to print an picture to look the came as on screen because of they are different mediums. The colours are made up differently. On screen the image is back projected and will look more contrasty that on a print which is front lit. When you’ve got fine colours like this I would think it’s a;most impossibale to get them to match even if you’ve fully calibrated your screen and printer.
I would recommend Didsbury Colour Labs for prints. They offer a fine art service that use quality papers. Check out this link:May 14, 2014 at 8:25 pm #6508
I can’t say what a judge might think as I have no idea but I love the first image Wallace. It’s almost ethereal but the red of the beak and legs stop it fading away completely!
For me, the only thing stopping it being really wonderful is the tag on its right leg … but that’s me being picky.May 15, 2014 at 5:15 pm #6510
Thank you Peter, have a couple of other options I am following which may be FOC. Have used DS Colour Labs in the past and had forgotten about them.
The latest printed edition of the Artic Tern seems to have lost it’s tag!
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.