RE: PESO: Field Sparrow

John wrote: > And what's wrong with cat photos? :) > > Cheers, Dave > Nothing really. Unless you want to photograph birds - cats ain't birds. For John & Dave; a regular bird stalker here: http://flic.kr/p/MRdvah Malcolm -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net

Re: PESO: Field Sparrow

On 10/17/2016 12:42 AM, David Mann wrote: On Oct 17, 2016, at 2:43 AM, Malcolm Smith wrote: I 'll have to be more patient. We also have a very high cat population wandering about; I've got better pictures of them stalking pigeons in the garden than I have of the birds

Re: PESO: Field Sparrow

On Oct 17, 2016, at 2:43 AM, Malcolm Smith wrote: > I 'll have to be more patient. We also have a very high cat population > wandering about; I've got better pictures of them stalking pigeons in the > garden than I have of the birds themselves! And what's wrong with

RE: PESO: Field Sparrow

Paul Stenquist wrote: Thanks Malcolm. One key to getting bird pics is that the photographer stay still long enough that the birds become accustomed to seeing you. I 'll have to be more patient. We also have a very high cat population wandering about; I've got better pictures of them stalking

Re: PESO: Field Sparrow

and he nailed the species too! ann On 10/16/2016 12:11 AM, Larry Colen wrote: Very nice. You make getting good photographs of birds seem easy, or at least possible. On October 15, 2016 4:56:34 PM MST, Paul Stenquist wrote: I don’t recall seeing one of these guys

Re: PESO: Field Sparrow

Thanks Malcolm. One key to getting bird pics is that the photographer stay still long enough that the birds become accustomed to seeing you. Paul via phone > On Oct 16, 2016, at 3:28 AM, Malcolm Smith wrote: > > Paul Stenquist wrote: > > I don’t recall seeing one of

RE: PESO: Field Sparrow

Paul Stenquist wrote: I don’t recall seeing one of these guys before, but it’s entirely possible that I’ve just been missing them.Based on what I’ve read, they thrash around in the brush an aren’t likely to perch in a visible spot. He didn’t seem interested in my bird seed, but he may do

Re: PESO: Field Sparrow

Very nice. You make getting good photographs of birds seem easy, or at least possible. On October 15, 2016 4:56:34 PM MST, Paul Stenquist wrote: >I don’t recall seeing one of these guys before, but it’s entirely >possible that I’ve just been missing them.Based on what I’ve

Re: PESO: Field Sparrow

Thanks Dan. Great Pentax glass. Paul via phone > On Oct 15, 2016, at 11:17 PM, Daniel J. Matyola wrote: > > Nice clear shot and great depth of field control -- the bird really stand > out well from the background. > > > Dan Matyola >

Re: PESO: Field Sparrow

Nice clear shot and great depth of field control -- the bird really stand out well from the background. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 7:56 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: > I don’t recall seeing one of these guys before,

Re: PESO: Field Sparrow

Couple of sharp cuties, Paul! Well done! J Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 15, 2016, at 4:56 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: > > I don’t recall seeing one of these guys before, but it’s entirely possible > that I’ve just been missing them.Based on what I’ve read, they thrash

Re: PESO - Field of Flowers - Take 2

Bruce Dayton wrote: Another attempt at the field of flowers type of thing. Different location, different lens, same photographer. I'm curios whether you think this one works better or worse than the previous one. Pentax K10D, Tokina AT-X SD 400/5.6, Handheld ISO 400, 1/250 sec @ f/11

Re: PESO - Field of Flowers - Take 2

In a message dated 4/8/2007 11:44:58 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Another attempt at the field of flowers type of thing. Different location, different lens, same photographer. I'm curios whether you think this one works better or worse than the previous one. Pentax

Re: PESO - Field of Flowers - Take 2

Good feedback, thanks. -- Bruce Monday, April 9, 2007, 7:28:21 AM, you wrote: C Bruce Dayton wrote: Another attempt at the field of flowers type of thing. Different location, different lens, same photographer. I'm curios whether you think this one works better or worse than the previous

Re: PESO - Field of Flowers - Take 2

On Apr 8, 2007, at 11:43 AM, Bruce Dayton wrote: Another attempt at the field of flowers type of thing. Different location, different lens, same photographer. I'm curios whether you think this one works better or worse than the previous one. Pentax K10D, Tokina AT-X SD 400/5.6, Handheld

Re: PESO - Field of Flowers - Take 2

Better. But still needs more DOF. This is one of those shots where you have to bite the bullet and pull out the tripod. Paul On Apr 8, 2007, at 2:43 PM, Bruce Dayton wrote: Another attempt at the field of flowers type of thing. Different location, different lens, same photographer. I'm

Re: PESO - Field

In a message dated 4/1/2007 9:22:14 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Many thanks to those of you who took the time to comment. This shot evoked some mixed feelings. I have taken Ken's suggestion and tried a crop: http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/bkd_4616a.htm Original:

Re: PESO - Field

Hi Bruce, I like this photo quite a bit. Somehow it seems a step or two removed from the more typical bird closeup - putting the little winged creature into a larger context than just a closeup on a branch seems to get me more involved with the scene, somewhat akin to having been there as

Re: PESO - Field

Much better, IMO. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: PESO - Field Many thanks to those of you who took the time to comment. This shot evoked some mixed feelings. I have taken Ken's suggestion and tried a crop: http

Re: PESO - Field

SIGH This was supposed to be about your bird pic, not the field pic, which I've net yet looked at. I think the posting error is all Marnie's fault. Bad Girl! Marnie LOL Shel [Original Message] From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi Bruce, I like this photo quite a bit. Somehow it

Re: PESO - Field

Bruce, I agree with Jens and Jack. Rick --- Jack Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think it needs an anchor of some sort. Just too homogeneous with no direction for the eye. As composed, I feel the foreground should be in focus. Jack --- Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm

Re: PESO - Field

Thanks for your comments. I tend to agree with you. I think that is why it works for me too. -- Bruce Monday, April 2, 2007, 10:06:31 AM, you wrote: SB Hi Bruce, SB I like this photo quite a bit. Somehow it seems a step or two removed from SB the more typical bird closeup - putting the

RE: PESO - Field

Hi Bruce It does not work for me. I would love a really full field of flowers here and more of them in DOF. Maybe you could have concentrated on the middle part leaving out the top and bottom green and use another angle. Can't explain it better... Greetings Markus -Original Message-

Re: PESO - Field

I like the concept. Not sure about the composition and the lack of DOF. Paul On Apr 1, 2007, at 12:43 AM, Bruce Dayton wrote: I'm trying to decide what I think of this shot. I would appreciate your opinions on it. Pentax K10D, Sigma 100-300/4 EX @ 110mm, Handheld ISO 280, 1/250 sec @ f/8

Re: PESO - Field

Hi Bruce, On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 21:43:37 -0700, Bruce Dayton wrote: I'm trying to decide what I think of this shot. I would appreciate your opinions on it. Pentax K10D, Sigma 100-300/4 EX @ 110mm, Handheld ISO 280, 1/250 sec @ f/8 http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/bkd_4616.htm Hmm, doe not do

RE: PESO - Field

Very nice. But as to the DOF it seems you are sitting between two chairs. The DOF is either too shallow (to get all flowers sharp) or to wide in order to use the DOF for isolating / emphasising some of the flowers. Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype:

Re: PESO - Field

I think it needs an anchor of some sort. Just too homogeneous with no direction for the eye. As composed, I feel the foreground should be in focus. Jack --- Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm trying to decide what I think of this shot. I would appreciate your opinions on it. Pentax

Re: PESO - Field

Exactly what i was thinking. I like the single out of place flower. Dave On 4/1/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I like the soft blur in the foreground that takes your view to the sharp center, and then falls off to a blur in the background. Jim A. I'm trying to decide

Re: PESO - Field

On Mar 31, 2007, at 9:43 PM, Bruce Dayton wrote: I'm trying to decide what I think of this shot. I would appreciate your opinions on it. Pentax K10D, Sigma 100-300/4 EX @ 110mm, Handheld ISO 280, 1/250 sec @ f/8 http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/bkd_4616.htm Doesn't do much for me, Bruce. I

Re: PESO - Field

In a message dated 3/31/2007 9:46:03 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'm trying to decide what I think of this shot. I would appreciate your opinions on it. Pentax K10D, Sigma 100-300/4 EX @ 110mm, Handheld ISO 280, 1/250 sec @ f/8

Re: PESO - Field

I like it. I would probably crop out the less populated portions in the URH LRH corners Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: PESO - Field I'm trying to decide what I think of this shot. I would appreciate your opinions on it.

Re: PESO - Field

Many thanks to those of you who took the time to comment. This shot evoked some mixed feelings. I have taken Ken's suggestion and tried a crop: http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/bkd_4616a.htm Original: http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/bkd_4616.htm I think with Ken's suggestion, I am happier with

Re: PESO - Field

I have to concur... One of the things that still keeps eluding me is a shot such as this one. Ken's suggestion was right on the money. Cheers. Boris On 4/2/07, Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Many thanks to those of you who took the time to comment. This shot evoked some mixed

Re: PESO - Field

It's trite, cliched and works very, very well. Excellent job on shooting a subject most never pull off. -Adam Bruce Dayton wrote: I'm trying to decide what I think of this shot. I would appreciate your opinions on it. Pentax K10D, Sigma 100-300/4 EX @ 110mm, Handheld ISO 280, 1/250 sec

Re: PESO - Field

I like the soft blur in the foreground that takes your view to the sharp center, and then falls off to a blur in the background. Jim A. I'm trying to decide what I think of this shot. I would appreciate your opinions on it. Pentax K10D, Sigma 100-300/4 EX @ 110mm, Handheld ISO 280,

RE: PESO - Field of trees

Brrr, it looks cold there. The perspective or lack of perspective makes this semi abstract intriguing. There is more grain than I'd expect with 50 ISO Velvia, but I like the effect. Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL

Re: PESO - Field of trees

I'm generally a sucker for this type of photo. The fog and layers always intrigue me. So for that reason, I like this photo. The scan seems to be showing quite a bit of grain - kind of surprised me being Velvia. I know it has been mentioned, but it is really blue. I'm curious if the original

Re: PESO - Field of trees

Great shot Ken Dave Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Check out http://mypeoplepc.com/members/kwaller/offwallphoto/id2.html Taken in the fall, in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. Comment appreciated Thanks in advance Kenneth Waller -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net

Re: PESO - Field of trees

of under exposure. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: PESO - Field of trees I'm generally a sucker for this type of photo. The fog and layers always intrigue me. So for that reason, I like this photo. The scan seems

Re: PESO - Field of trees

Very, very nice! Was the image so blue even on film, or have you enhanced the effect? This is not to criticize it, as I like a lot the blue cast on that image. Just out of curisity. Dario - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Sent:

Re: PESO - Field of trees

Good eye! Beautifully exposed. It is, however, very blue.(?) A little additional symmetry might have helped it for me, but I get it and like it. Jack --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Check out http://mypeoplepc.com/members/kwaller/offwallphoto/id2.html Taken in the fall, in the Upper

Re: PESO - Field of trees

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mypeoplepc.com/members/kwaller/offwallphoto/id2.html Taken in the fall, in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. Very very nice! Love it. Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: PESO - Field of trees

Excellent, Ken. I love the monotone effect. It works wonderfully here. Paul From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mypeoplepc.com/members/kwaller/offwallphoto/id2.html Taken in the fall, in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net

Re: PESO - Field of trees

Hi Ken! Check out http://mypeoplepc.com/members/kwaller/offwallphoto/id2.html Taken in the fall, in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. all I can say is - wow! Very nice, the tree on the right looks almost translucent to me. Bedo. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net

Re: PESO - Field of trees

Jack, thanks for the comments. I actually dialed out some blue for the posted version. Originally captured with out the help of filters. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Jack Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: PESO - Field of trees Good eye! Beautifully exposed

Re: PESO - Field of trees

Paul, thanks for commenting. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: PESO - Field of trees Excellent, Ken. I love the monotone effect. It works wonderfully here. Paul From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mypeoplepc.com/members/kwaller/offwallphoto/id2

Re: PESO - Field of trees

Dario, thanks for commenting. The original image is slightly bluer - I dialed some out in PS CS2. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Dario Bonazza [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: PESO - Field of trees Very, very nice! Was the image so blue even on film, or have you enhanced

RE: PESO: Field

Hi Jens, Much to like about this shot and the geometry/texture! I might suggest cropping the relatively narrow layer at the top. Even though it removes one ripple, I think it makes for a stronger image by removing, to me at least, a distracting element. Thanks for sharing. Tom C.

RE: PESO: Field

funnily enough, I rather like that extra ripple at the top (quickly checks for typos...). -- Cheers, Bob -Original Message- From: Tom C [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 08 August 2005 21:51 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: RE: PESO: Field Hi Jens, Much to like about

RE: PESO: Field

Easy to armchair quarterback... If that last ripple were twice as thick I would likely agree. A delightful shot though. Tom C. From: Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: RE: PESO: Field Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2005 22:10:43 +0100 funnily

Re: PESO: Field

I tend to agree with Tom on this one. G On Aug 8, 2005, at 2:10 PM, Bob W wrote: funnily enough, I rather like that extra ripple at the top (quickly checks for typos...). Much to like about this shot and the geometry/texture! I might suggest cropping the relatively narrow layer at the