[Les Meehan]

Another with the 37mm fish-eye on the RB67

[chrisa]

Interesting shot. Like the way the water is frozen and the hazy sun.

Did you get wet a few seconds later ?

[Les Meehan]

Originally Posted by chrisa

Did you get wet a few seconds later ?

Had me snorkel stuck in me'ere!

[Vinny]

Wow very interesting shot. Lots going on that gets you thinking. Did you take it in colour first and then convert to greyscale I wonder?

[Les Meehan]

Originally Posted by Vinny

Wow very interesting shot. Lots going on that gets you thinking. Did you take it in colour first and then convert to greyscale I wonder?

Can I leave you guessing for a while longer?

[Rob Barron]

I can't honestly say this one does a whole lot for me Les. Not saying it's bad, you've done a good job technically, it just doesn't have any subject matter that really interests me. The top half of the picture is fine with clean lines, the misty sun and so forth. But the bottom half just loks a bit derelict and busy. Interesting shape caused by the lens you used there but overall this one just doesn't grab me, sorry!

Cheers,
Rob

[Les Meehan]

Anyone guess this is a 'constructed' image? The sky, sun, and water were not on the image of the dam. Also, the impression of speed on the water i.e. sharper at top, softer at bottom, was also 'constructed'.

Bet that's a disappointment, eh?

You know what they say, the camera never lies, but don't trust the bloody photographers!

[Rob Barron]

Must confess the water being sharper at the top than the bottom isn't something I can even notice that much here, I think it's a bit too msall to really get it. As the whole thing is distorted by the fisheye lens, it would be hard to tell that anything is not as it should be or whatever, simply because it isn't as it 'should' be anyway!

Not sure it is a disappointment as such, a lot of shots have new skies put on them, it doesn't bother me one way or the other. I guess part of the problem for me is it never even occured to me that this was a dam in the first place, I thought it was just one of these park sculpture-fountains that we tend to see popping up all over the place these days.

I guess the reason I wouldn't tend to notice if this is a composite image is simply the fact it isn't the kind of image I imagine people constructing. Must say I doubt there are many people arund today who believe the old cliche about the camera never lying.... it's not true now and never has been!

As for not trusting us photographers, I think that's a given LOL!

Cheers,
Rob

[nursepayne]

I love the subject but the sun in the sky didn't origionally look natural when I 1st saw it.How did it look before you fixed the sky?

[Les Meehan]

Originally Posted by nursepayne

I love the subject but the sun in the sky didn't origionally look natural when I 1st saw it.How did it look before you fixed the sky?

Hi Elle, nice to see you here again (still have your last email on my 'needs a reply' list so will be in touch).

The 'sun' isn't the Sun, it is just something I stuck in the sky to add a point of 'something??' The image was used in one of my books as an example of compositing several elements together, but I quite like the result. As with most images, looks better as an A3 print.