So what's there? The sky is still the same, I didn't even crop it, just black and white. Spots on the sensor? Possibly. P.S./ Don't look for things that aren't there (for me) – please. I'm long past the stage of cliches and clones, if that's what you're asking ;)
So what's there? The sky is still the same, I didn't even crop it, just black and white. Spots on the sensor? Possibly. P.S./ Don't look for things that aren't there (mine) – please. I'm long past the clichés and clones phase, if that's what you're asking ;)
Irinny, I'm not talking about clichés. Spots, yes, and the sky is a gradient. It's very noticeable.
So what's there? The sky is still the same, I didn't even crop it, just black and white. Spots on the sensor? Possibly. P.S./ Don't look for things that aren't there (mine) – please. I'm long past the cliché and clone stage, if that's what you're asking ;) Irinny, I'm not talking about clichés. Spots, yes, and the sky is gradient. It's striking.
Malakhov, I'm not known for my clean images – sorry
Irinny, I like your work, but here I just didn't get it. There are moments of imbalance. First: the tree on the left, the dog, and the girl form a single line of semantic objects that are shifted to the left of the frame, although the image's guideline moves to the right. And the viewing sequence and significance also lead to the right and down. The dog and 310 kV are there—good shawarma. Second: I believe the support mast on the right should have a counterweight on the left, otherwise it looks like a one-legged bench. You know what I mean... Much can be attributed to the fact that the shot is spontaneous, not a clearly thought-out plot, but still. As the author, this picture is probably dear to you for a moment :).
This picture is probably dear to you as the author
On the contrary, this photo is especially dear to me as a visual image.
Thank you for such a detailed analysis and attention to detail. I'm very familiar with the theory, believe me All of that isn't important here (to me).
Shopping matrix dirt in Photoshop isn't considered manipulation or something shameful =) Yeah, I'm just a bad photo editor; I'll get bullied later for clone stamps )) But I'll try ))
Irinny, you don't need to be a super-retoucher to do that) Just click the helling brush and there's no dust. I also "suffered" from dust until I cleaned it up. You can do it in a second, I'm sure
Spots on the sensor? Possibly.
P.S./ Don't look for things that aren't there (for me) – please. I'm long past the stage of cliches and clones, if that's what you're asking ;)
I'm not known for my clean images – sorry
One resource called it Angry Dogs )))
I like your work, but here I just didn't get it. There are moments of imbalance. First: the tree on the left, the dog, and the girl form a single line of semantic objects that are shifted to the left of the frame, although the image's guideline moves to the right. And the viewing sequence and significance also lead to the right and down. The dog and 310 kV are there—good shawarma.
Second: I believe the support mast on the right should have a counterweight on the left, otherwise it looks like a one-legged bench. You know what I mean...
Much can be attributed to the fact that the shot is spontaneous, not a clearly thought-out plot, but still. As the author, this picture is probably dear to you for a moment :).
Thank you for such a detailed analysis and attention to detail. I'm very familiar with the theory, believe me
Mostra ritaglio
I love squares
=)
You can do it in a second, I'm sure