more scenery
Posted: 02 May 2017, 13:33
Page 1 of 1
Re: more scenery
Posted: 02 May 2017, 15:50
Looks like the remains of an old castle. Unless we are talking Syria, then it's the remains of the old neighborhoods. Then again, why would there be llamas in Syria?
Re: more scenery
Posted: 02 May 2017, 18:26
Looks like somebody forgot to do their tuckpointing work.
Re: more scenery
Posted: 03 May 2017, 13:50
Re: more scenery
Posted: 03 May 2017, 15:44
Continuing on with the critical review ...
TOP PICTURE
This is one of the most difficult types of photograph to make look good. The problem is the very bright sky verses the details in the shadows on the ground. The light meters of most cameras will average out this high contrast lighting situation and make the entire photo dull. In this case the details of the wall are infinitely more interesting than the sky, but the rest of the building looks a bit washed out. The foreground in focus is eye catching and tends to offset the blank sky. The mix of vertical and horizontal lines seems appropriate, but the most attention goes to the tree. This is good because it also draws attention to what is in back of the tree. I think I'd want to be sitting in the tree with my camera, but that's just me. The picture is pretty good overall.
BOTTOM PICTURE
I'm just guessing it's a llama, and it looks like your run of the mill llama picture to me. The animal's head is exactly dead center in the shot, which would be a good idea if there was less background surrounding the animal. Or, if the trees were the intended subject, then Mr llama should be off to the side somewhere but still in the picture. This is a situation where a telephoto lens would have come in handy. An up close and personal picture of the animal would be stunning. In this shot the mass of background takes away from the beauty of the beast. I'm also thinking that rotating the camera 90 degrees would have mitigated some of the distraction in the background. It's an ok picture, but probably not a contest winner.
TOP PICTURE
This is one of the most difficult types of photograph to make look good. The problem is the very bright sky verses the details in the shadows on the ground. The light meters of most cameras will average out this high contrast lighting situation and make the entire photo dull. In this case the details of the wall are infinitely more interesting than the sky, but the rest of the building looks a bit washed out. The foreground in focus is eye catching and tends to offset the blank sky. The mix of vertical and horizontal lines seems appropriate, but the most attention goes to the tree. This is good because it also draws attention to what is in back of the tree. I think I'd want to be sitting in the tree with my camera, but that's just me. The picture is pretty good overall.
BOTTOM PICTURE
I'm just guessing it's a llama, and it looks like your run of the mill llama picture to me. The animal's head is exactly dead center in the shot, which would be a good idea if there was less background surrounding the animal. Or, if the trees were the intended subject, then Mr llama should be off to the side somewhere but still in the picture. This is a situation where a telephoto lens would have come in handy. An up close and personal picture of the animal would be stunning. In this shot the mass of background takes away from the beauty of the beast. I'm also thinking that rotating the camera 90 degrees would have mitigated some of the distraction in the background. It's an ok picture, but probably not a contest winner.
Re: more scenery
Posted: 05 May 2017, 12:59
here's the rest of the castle...
it has a 62 meters deep well in the middle of the courtyard and wouldn't i love to know what's at the bottom of it....
Re: more scenery
Posted: 05 May 2017, 15:35
They don't build castles like they use to.
Probably just a family of toads live in the well.
Probably just a family of toads live in the well.