09 Aug 05
Originally posted by NordlysI agree. a google seach reveals no great pics of the church. Maybe it just is not all that. On your second question...yes the golden figure is c3po. Never seen star wars i take it🙂 Not to worry. Just another failed attempt at humour on my part🙁 (I do that a lot it seems ) Re: Amalgamated... a meaningless potpourri is exactly what I was going for! 🙂 lol Thanks !
Being harsh is fine with me, harsh but honest comments are much better than polite and meaningless ones. 🙂 I found Temppeliaukio Church really difficult (but also very interesting) to photograph. I think the result is not too bad (most pictures of that church I have found on the internet look much worse IMO), but the pictures are certainly not among my best ...[text shortened]... etter if the foreground hadn't been pitch black, or if part of the foreground had been cropped.
Lincoln Memorial ....not sure..... If memory serve I just Darkened the foreground to remove any hint of greenery which I must have felt at the time was distracting.
Thanks for your comments.
09 Aug 05
Originally posted by NordlysTo be honest, i thought the untouched one was bit boring. Mind you it was taken doing about 60mph lol
Paulie: I have been wondering for a while, but always forgot to ask - why did you change the colours in your Stonehenge picture? Did you want it to look more mysterious, unreal or something?
09 Aug 05
Originally posted by NordlysI prefered the non-entered version, but I kind of like confusing photos, which invite me to study them and figure them out.
I would still like to get some comments on my pictures, especially which version of Temppeliaukio Church people liked best and why.
I also think that people are a blight on most photos. I'd love to have the ability to remove them from my Macchu Picchu pictures.
ps: I've downloaded both Picasa and The GIMP, and have to say they look good. I haven't a clue how to use The Gimp, but Picasa seems to be a better alternative to ACDSEE which I've used up to now for managing my photos.
D
09 Aug 05
1 edit
Originally posted by ictoanI wouldn't say that. I liked it very much, but it may be impossible to take a picture which comes close to the real impression. Maybe a very good photographer could do it.
I agree. a google seach reveals no great pics of the church. Maybe it just is not all that.
On your second question...yes the golden figure is c3po. Never seen star wars i take it
Nope.
Not to worry. Just another failed attempt at humour on my part🙁 (I do that a lot it seems )
Not to worry. It's not easy to make jokes which I understand. 😉
Re: Amalgamated... a meaningless potpourri is exactly what I was going for! 🙂 lol Thanks !
🙂 I am wondering, though - what's the point with a meaningless picture? Some sort of dadaism?
Lincoln Memorial ....not sure..... If memory serve I just Darkened the foreground to remove any hint of greenery which I must have felt at the time was distracting.
I don't think it would have been distracting, it would rather have added some depth. But others might disagree.
10 Aug 05
Originally posted by PaulieI am not sure that's a good idea. I probably wouldn't go to that forum as often as I go to this one. I would also guess that there are quite a few people who like to follow this thread or read it occasionally, without being interested enough to go to a different page to find it. And newcomers could easily miss the whole photo club. And it's just one thread here, so it's easy to avoid for people who don't care about photography. A separate photo forum would probably make sense if there were so many posts and subjects that it would be too confusing to put them all into one or two threads. But so far, this doesn't seem to happen.
Hey guys,
I could open a slot on the Hamburger Deluxe forum, for the RHP Camera Club, if anyones interested. It would save bumping this thread all the time at least.
Thoughts......................
10 Aug 05
Originally posted by RagnorakDid you figure it out? 🙂
I prefered the non-entered version, but I kind of like confusing photos, which invite me to study them and figure them out.
I also think that people are a blight on most photos. I'd love to have the ability to remove them from my Macchu Picchu pictures.
I'd love to have the ability to remove people. 😉
10 Aug 05
Originally posted by NordlysFair enough. Twas just a thought 😉
I am not sure that's a good idea. I probably wouldn't go to that forum as often as I go to this one. I would also guess that there are quite a few people who like to follow this thread or read it occasionally, without being interested enough to go to a different page to find it. And newcomers could easily miss the whole photo club. And it's just one threa ...[text shortened]... too confusing to put them all into one or two threads. But so far, this doesn't seem to happen.
10 Aug 05
Originally posted by ictoanBumping here! Come on folks get you entries in for the RHP photo competition. This round is "Natural Light" and Rag will update us as to when he is closing the round.. How many so far Rag?
Originally posted by Nordlys
🙂 I am wondering, though - what's the point with a meaningless picture? Some sort of dadaism?
I'm not that deep. It is what it is. No point - no meaning. Just manmade stuff. Dadaism? yeah ok🙂
Back to post:
I liked your potage of stuff for just that...it was a fun mix of things.
It was fun ... heck some twat paid millions for that painting of a soup can by warhol.. Doh! :
The people did put me off Maccu pichu but I have seen friends pics with no people there.. Sometimes a narrow more angular shot can have dramatic effect.
Having said that I thought the people in the Helsinki temple shot added to the scene.. I'm not sure why but it seemed to add warmth.
I'm looking forward to the People Round.
Got feeling the Nat Light round is gonna be hard to pick.. I could decide what to enter ...bound to have picked wrong again hahaha.
10 Aug 05
Originally posted by mokkoIf they seem more appropriate for a future round, I'd wait. Of course you'll have natural light in most pictures taken outside and some taken inside, but for this round, I believe the light should be the main point of interest. It could be pictures of cloud rays, halos, rainbows, sunsets, iridescent clouds, noctilucent clouds, aurora, lightning etc.
I have some pics I took, no flash, not sure if they're right for the natural light compitition though. What kind of shots would be suitable? Anything goes? Some of the pics seem more appropriate for other categories. What to do, what to do.....
10 Aug 05
Originally posted by NordlysThanks, that gives me a better idea. I've got a shot I'll throw in this round anyhow just for the fun of it. I think I'll save the rest though like you said.
If they seem more appropriate for a future round, I'd wait. Of course you'll have natural light in most pictures taken outside and some taken inside, but for this round, I believe the light should be the main point of interest. It could be pictures of cloud rays, halos, rainbows, sunsets, iridescent clouds, noctilucent clouds, aurora, lightning etc.
11 Aug 05
1 edit
Originally posted by Nordlysugh thats me bu'gred from the start again... wish I saw this earlier. Mine are concentrating on scene/items/etc highlighted by the natural light. geesh it was hard to choose between rainbows light beams and weird clouds or what I eventually put in. 😕
If they seem more appropriate for a future round, I'd wait. Of course you'll have natural light in most pictures taken outside and some taken inside, but for this round, I believe the light should be the main point of interest. It could b ...[text shortened]... ets, iridescent clouds, noctilucent clouds, aurora, lightning etc.
mmmm bare naked skin and body bits in soft light could win this ...hint hint 😉