Daisy #2
Copyright ©2006, Kerland Elder
Viewed times
Taken the same time as shot #1
Photographer: |
Kerland Elder
|
Folder: |
rasputtin |
Uploaded: |
27-Feb-2006 01:58 CET |
Current Rating: |
8.50/2
View all ratings
Delete my rating
|
Model release available: |
|
Camera: |
Olympus C5060 |
Exposure time: |
2 sec |
Aperture: |
f8.0 |
Focal length: |
11.50mm |
Lens: |
|
Focusing method: |
Spot |
ISO: |
80 |
White balance: |
Incandescent |
Flash: |
no |
Image format: |
SHQ |
Processing applied: |
Resize to fit PS 6.0 |
Various: |
|
Image resized to: |
675x900 |
Comment/Rate
Share this Image
|
NO SUBJECT
Of your 2 shots I much prefer this one, it has a better composition and I like the DoF with the OoF stem and leaves nicely isolated against the Black background.
Cheers Steve
Steve Elliott at 09:07 CET on 27-Feb-2006 [Reply]
DAisy # 1 and 2
Two beautiful pictures ,I don't know witch one is better.
I agree with Steve about the DOF and OOF and the composition part in this picture , although I like the sharp first posted picture also.
Nice to have you back again.
Regards,
Fonzy - at 15:19 CET on 27-Feb-2006 [Reply]
NO SUBJECT
Steve Elliott wrote:
> Of your 2 shots I much prefer this one, it has a better composition and I like the DoF with
> the OoF stem and leaves nicely isolated against the Black background.
> Cheers Steve
>
Steve, thank you very much for viewing, commenting and rating. You are right about this composition compared to the other, it's bit more effective from that point of view. Regards
Kerland Elder at 01:44 CET on 01-Mar-2006 [Reply]
NO SUBJECT
Fons van Swaal wrote:
> Two beautiful pictures ,I don't know witch one is better.
> I agree with Steve about the DOF and OOF and the composition part in this picture , although
> I like the sharp first posted picture also.
>
> Nice to have you back again.
>
> Regards,
>
Fons, it's alway's good hearing from you, you're such an active and very respected man on this site, I'm happy to know that you like both shot's and thank you very much. Regards
Kerland Elder at 01:53 CET on 01-Mar-2006 [Reply]