Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • 4 weeks later...

Hiya. My thoughts that may help a bit

#1: Pretty dull, I personally would dump this one
#2: Interesting pic. I wonder if a slightly changed viewpoint to show a bit more of the scene that the monk is contemplating would enhance the Image more
#3: Again not that interesting for me. I went back to this several times to see if it kindled any better interest but sorry, no.
#4: I rather liked this one. The bowed head slowly trudging to church with the cross showing just near, but the composition is a bit off tho. Maybe slightly lower and panned more right to cut out that distracting building and tree on the left?
#5: I like this one. The simplicity and sparseness. Matbe a slightly tighter crop to remove the door handle showing on the right and the starting of the second cross on the left might improve it?
#6: Not as good as 5 but ok. If you had panned 2 inches more to the left so that you had not cut into the alter cloth it would look better. I would also play with cropping the top to see if removing one or two of the lights works better as well however it may not if it affects the cross too much. If at all possible I would see if I could re-take this image next visit but from a lower perspective and standing more to the left, then I would crop the windows out to make a panoramic type of image to see how that looked 
#7: Another one that I would personally dump. #4 was far more powerful. Also the tree does not help it rather hinders it
#8: looks like an image taken from a car window. Again, not one that I would personally keep. If the idea was to show the church/monument? isolation, you need to be the other side of that fence'
 
Hope that helped some, it will be interesting to see some more images when you next visit. If so, try to put them together so that they are telling a story
 
Steve
 
 

 
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 months later...
  • 3 months later...
  • 4 months later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Here is the solution to using the Eterna 55 file simulation LUTs in Davinci Resolve.   In general, do not use the FLog2C to film simulation LUTs as they are not supported by Davinci Resolve for two reasons: 1) Davinci Resolve does not support Fuji Gamut Color Space and 2) Davinci Resolve does not support FLog2C gamma.  Instead, use Flog2 which is supported by Davinci Resolve.  Here is an example.  Let's say that you want to use Classic Chrome simulation.  Do the following: Complete your color grade and use a CST to get to Rec 709. Add a node.  Use a CST to convert from Rec 709 to FLog2.  Output Color space is Rec 2020 and Outout Gamut is FLog2. Add a node.  Apply the FLog2 to Classic Chrome LUT Create a combination node from node in steps 2 and 3. Apply a Key to the combination node and adjust the Key Output Gain to get the amount of the combination node that you want applied. So that you do not have to do this over and over again, generate a LUT for the combination node.  Remember to turn off all other nodes before generating the LUT. Hope this helps others. Don  
    • Thanks for the insights. I think it's really hard to make a decision without having the two side by side! 
    • I don’t have the 23 f2 but I have read several times that it is considered a little soft at close distance, compared to the 23 f1.4 lenses. These will also focus at shorter distance from the subject, esp. the new one. So that might make a difference. The new 23 f1.4 LM WR  has better resolution, esp. in regard to the 40Mpix sensors, which you don’t have on the X-T2. What practical difference that makes for the value of the pictures one makes is disputable and subjective.  f1.4 will gather more light but with a smaller DOF, which may be desirable in some situations but not so in others, depends. If you like to shoot close ups, you will probably use higher f numbers to get a bigger DOF. Same for landscapes. If you are a bokeh fan, yes the f1.4 lens are better.  The older 23 f1.4 lens that you are considering is a very good and respected lens. The f1.4 vs f2 aperture per se is perhaps not so important. The 23 f2 is very small, light and practical and a great lens for travel and landscapes. So, go figure. I am afraid I just sent you further down the road to insanity !
    • First post here but long time fuji shorter. I use the XT2 with the 23mm f2 / 35mm 1.4 / 16-80mm f4 I'm considering the 23mm f1.4 r (Non-WR) About me: - I shoot black and white only. - I like macro details to wide open landscapes and everything in-between. - I shoot mostly for art, intrigue and creativity of the image. My question - is the 23mm f1.4 going to offer me any meaningful difference over the f2 for the above scenarios Thanks and sorry for bringing it up again...
    • I discovered this unmarked government installation today.  

      Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

      Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

×
×
  • Create New...