|
|
|
Robert Lloyd
{K:9943} 4/24/2005
|
very lovely capture great colors well done
|
|
|
|
Roger Williams
{K:86139} 12/5/2004
|
Thanks, Lori, I always appreciate your comments. This is a favourite of mine, and I love it when such a picture strikes a chord with others...
|
|
|
|
|
Lori Stitt
{K:75282} 12/4/2004
|
Hi Roger,
This is really a nice scene and a delightful photograph you have expertly created!
Most interesting as you are drawn right into it. Also love the textured feeling it has,
Very nice work and good eye!!
Lori ;)
|
|
|
|
Hugo de Wolf
{K:185110} 11/27/2004
|
Hi Roger, I can imagine you are surprised by my "lecture"...:) I did misread your about, and I feel pretty stupid now. Never intended to lecture, nor to make stupid comments, though. Sorry about this misheap, won't happen again. I guess were on the same wavelenght; after rereading your about, I think you express my exact same feelings, only shorter and more to the point...:)
Cheers,
Hugo
|
|
|
|
|
Roger Williams
{K:86139} 11/26/2004
|
You have misread the "about," Hugo. This was taken with a fisheye lens, and I avoided the tell-tale fisheye "look" by keeping the straight line radial. Lines through the center of a fisheye shot are the only lines that don't get bent! I chose the fisheye for this because I needed the field of view. I am rather surprised by the lecture. Perhaps if you re-read the "about" in the light of the above explanation it will make more sense?
|
|
|
|
|
Hugo de Wolf
{K:185110} 11/26/2004
|
Hi Roger, I'm not sure I agree with the conclusion that keeping the straight line running through the center makes it look as if taken with a fish eye.
But I think that shouldn't be the real issue; a 16 mm lens is only the mean used to capture a scene, and present the atmosphere of a scene. It's not the other way around; I don't think the scene should be used to create the feeling of any lense. (Except for studies and experiments, that is) And Photographically, I think it's interesting to know how a shot has been achieved, but IMO the selection of focl lenght is of subsidary importance to the scene.
In all fairness, I do think the W/A shows, as the perspective, and the vanishing points are quite close together....
Cheers,
Hugo
|
|
|
|
|
Roger Williams
{K:86139} 11/24/2004
|
Chris, you mustn't feel that you have an obligation to comment. I do appreciate all your generous comments, particularly when you spot a neglected favourite of mine... but only when you have the time and inclination. You have many more important things to do in the care of souls!
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Spracklen
{K:32552} 11/24/2004
|
Wow!!! This is magnificent Roger!!
Fantastic colours and clarity and the usual impeccable composition!
Best regards, Chris
P.S. Please forgive me not catching up with every shot I've missed ~ much as I'd like to. I've just got too much on right now!
|
|
|
|
Bradley Prue
{K:30678} 11/24/2004
|
Stunning work, Roger! Beautiful depth, color, and wonderfully balanced. All of the elements come together naturally, and with an abundance of skill! ...Brad
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Thornton
{K:26442} 11/23/2004
|
A very pretty and inviting scene, Roger, framed just right with that horizon splitting the middle for no apparent distortion.
(To answer your question: I always give the actual lens focal lengths without regard to multiplication factors which, on a Nikon, is only 1.5X. So my 35-70 is actually a 52.5-105 in 35mm terms.)
|
|
|
|
|
The Armed Eye
{K:3563} 11/23/2004
|
Nice bright and clear shots, enjoyed the three Zenitar photos after all the phone pics ;-)
The old Spotmatic and this lens are still a powerful combo and well suited for such a demo of the japanese art of building parks and gardens.
|
|
|
|
|
Sony Kusumo
{K:7190} 11/23/2004
|
Lovely composition and very nice color cast. Very beautiful.... I never thought that Zenitar lens was this beautiful....
|
|
|
|
|
Diana Cornelissen
{K:26437} 11/23/2004
|
Beautiful autumn scenery Roger. Good composition too ! I like it a lot.
greetings,
Diana.
|
|
0 
