|
overlord
Feb 8, 2006, 6:13 PM
Post #2 of 13
(3518 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2002
Posts: 14120
|
three thing that dont seem right to me:
a) weird compression
b) you cant see hes right hand
c) id crop the ppl on the right. try cropping just to the right of the green stuff on the rock.
the background is a bit overexposed, but nothing you can do there. and loose the headband :P
|
|
|
|
|
tarzan420
Feb 8, 2006, 6:34 PM
Post #3 of 13
(3518 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 19, 2002
Posts: 678
|
I agree with most of what overlord said.
EXCEPT
The climber seems awfully centered to me. Rather than cropping and making the climber even more centered, pull back some. A tighter DOF will make the folks on the ground less distracting.
You've got a nice set of lines in this picture, with the rock paralleling the climber's arms, and his eyes also drawing along that line. However, I can't think of a good way to use that line - I'm tempted to say move the climber up to the UL corner (with the shot zoomed out a little, of course), But i'm not sure how this will work - the lines drawing you away from the boring expanse of rock in the LR corner, or the lines directing your eye towards the LR corner. The other option is moving the climber down a little into the LL corner. The lines don't get used as strongly, but might be a better overall composition.
|
|
|
|
|
boondock_saint
Feb 8, 2006, 7:44 PM
Post #4 of 13
(3518 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 6, 2005
Posts: 2157
|
the compression: I had it put on a CD when I got the roll developed because i was using a scanner from 99. Well the quality of that sucked ass so I got a new scanner and I have not had them put files on CD ever again.
I should also be getting my Canon 350D this week which will completely eliminate the scanning process.
Thanks for the comments!
|
|
|
|
|
melekzek
Feb 8, 2006, 8:25 PM
Post #5 of 13
(3518 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 16, 2002
Posts: 1456
|
In reply to: I should also be getting my Canon 350D this week which will completely eliminate the scanning process.
canon 350d or 5d or 1d or nikon whatever etc will not solve your compression problems. You have to understand how jpeg works, and when you get those artifacts, especially when submitting to this site. Here, I pointed where the problem occurs
|
|
|
|
|
boondock_saint
Feb 8, 2006, 10:24 PM
Post #6 of 13
(3518 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 6, 2005
Posts: 2157
|
LOL, I understand how compression works. Again, I got the pic off a CD made by walgreens and the quality is just terrible, looks even worse on the full size image.
I also know what resizing does to a image (unless you're doing bicubic resampling) and that is not the case either. Here is a perfectly fine jpeg I scanned from a 4x6 print
see, no compression artifacts
http://www.umsl.edu/~zde99/compression.jpg
|
|
|
|
|
melekzek
Feb 13, 2006, 1:48 AM
Post #7 of 13
(3518 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 16, 2002
Posts: 1456
|
In reply to: I also know what resizing does to a image (unless you're doing bicubic resampling) and that is not the case either.
when i talk about resizing, i mean rc.com's evil resizing code, which might be the case here if you do not match width, height and filesize requirements when you submit.
In reply to: see, no compression artifacts
:roll:
|
|
|
|
|
krillen
Feb 13, 2006, 2:32 PM
Post #8 of 13
(3518 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 19, 2001
Posts: 4769
|
I still get distracted by the dead tree sticking pretty much straight up out of his head. :shock:
|
|
|
|
|
boondock_saint
Feb 13, 2006, 2:47 PM
Post #9 of 13
(3518 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 6, 2005
Posts: 2157
|
In reply to: I still get distracted by the dead tree sticking pretty much straight up out of his head. :shock:
would you suggest editing it out?
|
|
|
|
|
krillen
Feb 13, 2006, 3:25 PM
Post #10 of 13
(3518 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 19, 2001
Posts: 4769
|
The best option is to remove it when taking the pic. This can be done by making the DOF REALLY shallow, or rapping further down, then using your legs to move to the side and out from the wall as necessary (make sure you have a knot below your rap device when trying this so you can use both hands to shoot with.). Use your body and zoom options to achieve the best results, there are many ways to get to the same spot ;)
|
|
|
|
|
philbox
Moderator
Feb 16, 2006, 1:20 AM
Post #11 of 13
(3518 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2002
Posts: 13105
|
Yep Booney, you really need to get yourself out over his shoulder. Try setting up a second tyrolean/telfer line so that you can pull yourself out and away from the cliff. Else you could suck it up and stand out to take the pic.
|
|
|
|
|
boondock_saint
Feb 16, 2006, 1:55 AM
Post #12 of 13
(3518 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 6, 2005
Posts: 2157
|
Actually I have to correct myself, I was on belay for this shot and way off route standing on that little ledge, I looked at the original pic and my feet were visible in that shot.
Good advice though from all of you. I can't wait for spring and climbing season to start back up, I'll be taking a lot more pictures now that I have digital and don't have to spend a fortune on devolping pics.
|
|
|
|
|
sonyhome
Feb 17, 2006, 10:49 AM
Post #13 of 13
(3518 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 5, 2005
Posts: 337
|
Yup, the biggest problem is that from where you are the rock is not steep enough, and the climber is just 'turning the corner'. There's not much info on what he just climbed. So accept it and get a not so rewarding shot, or get some slingage and reposition yourself past the lip, to take the shot while he's climbing.
You'll have to ask the talent to look up at his holds or if he does it naturally (better climbers tend to look at what they grab :)), time the shot at the moment of the action.
And yeah, loose the bandana. Yuck!
|
|
|
|
|
|
