On 26/01/2010, Bruce Dayton <[email protected]> wrote: > Well I rather fancy the 2nd one - all are great, but there is > something about it that catches my eye. I think it might be the > strip of land in the center of a pano...or something.
Hi Bruce, I'm always in two minds about this image, don't think it would have worked at all well had I not included enough of the area to the sides. Thanks for commenting. Oh and thanks too Mr Savage. On 26/01/2010, David Mann <[email protected]> wrote: > Yes it is interesting, it's a bit of a break from the usual horizontalness of > panoramas. > > I've always found pans to be really hard to do well. I still do! Cheers On 26/01/2010, Bob W <[email protected]> wrote: > Beautiful shots individually. Doesn't work as a unit. The top one is really > lovely - just needs Jennifer Agutter swimming around in there. Thanks Bob, I agree about the concept, it was the constraints of the image sizing for the book that prompted the attempt. At least I didn't have to Google Jennifer this time, the view was instantly in my mind! On 26/01/2010, Cotty <[email protected]> wrote: > I really like that, always been partial to compilations like that. Thanks for the kind comment ;-) On 27/01/2010, paul stenquist <[email protected]> wrote: > Very nice. Makes me want to visit. You'll always be made welcome Paul On 27/01/2010, David J Brooks <[email protected]> wrote: > The 2nd and the last one works for me. Hi Dave, thanks, I think they all work independently, I suspect it would require sifting through quite a lot of material to get four panos to sync harmoniously in this type of format. Cheers On 27/01/2010, Mark Roberts <[email protected]> wrote: > They're all nice but I like the top one best. I think you could > slightly burn in the sand at bottom center and left, but that's > quibbling. Hi Mark, you're right and I've been caught. The sand was a little burnt out, maybe I should have used the RAW files instead of just being lazy and resorting to the in-camera produced jpgs as my source files ;-) > The next one down is also really good. I can't decide if the lens > flare detracts or adds character to the shot. :) I don't mind it so much, I just wish the loss of contrast wasn't so great, I guess I could mask it with a gradient and then apply USM with a very large radius to restore some contrast? > The third one down isn't anything special and the blown-out highlights > in the clouds are really obvious. It's quite impressive at full res, and again the source files are only jpeg but in my defence the day was particularly bring and if I had held the exposure to maintain the detail in the clouds I would have lost a lot of detail at ground level. Unfortunately it was grabbed quite quickly during a site visit and I couldn't even think of shooting HDR due to time and equipment constraints. > The bottom pano of Sydney is really good, but it's been done a lot. Indeed, that was shot when I was taking some overseas visitors around to see the sights, it was just a grab shot really. Cheers. On 27/01/2010, John Sessoms <[email protected]> wrote: > Still, it's very nice, although I wonder what's going on with the bridge in > the bottom one. Thanks for commenting John, it's a bit sad but for many months the bridge simply had a great section of lights out of action. Cheers On 27/01/2010, Daniel J. Matyola <[email protected]> wrote: > The individual images are great, and I like the composite as well. Thanks Dan! On 27/01/2010, Derby Chang <[email protected]> wrote: > What? Why not? Could one of these not be a centrefold? Hey D, you're makin' me blush ;-) The plight of the pano, really only good for a damn long print, a pain to put in a book and not really suited to most electronic displays, but I still like em. Thanks for taking the time to comment. I did finally make a single submission for the PDML book (thanks for all the hard work Mark et al.), I think it's OK, it was a hard slog this year, not the most inspiring and relatively few opportunities (barring my little guy and work). Cheers, -- Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
