Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2013/09/13

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] [LRflex] IMGs: Friday: Framing Flowers
From: imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser)
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2013 13:18:51 -0500
References: <73357BF8-2DF8-4A50-A63F-D0908831930A@mac.com> <BLU173-DS1C4A68B19A55DCCE1E091B83B0@phx.gbl>

On Sep 13, 2013, at 12:36 PM, Aram Langhans wrote:

> Hi George.  #2 for sure.  Too many competing things in #1.  The central, 
> the shadow and the petal on the right.  #2 eliminates the petal on the 
> right, and to my eye is much better.
> 
> Aram
> 
> -----Original Message----- From: George Lottermoser
> Sent: Friday, September 13, 2013 7:59 AM
> To: Group Users Leica
> Cc: LRF reflex
> Subject: [LRflex] IMGs: Friday: Framing Flowers
> 
> c & c always welcome and appreciated
> 
> <http://www.imagist.com/blog/?p=7938>

Thanks Ted and Aram.

I certainly can see what you mean Aram.
And I think I agree.
Sometimes it's hard to give up little details we enjoy looking at.


The "original" full frame includes both [of course]
and it just wouldn't work for the reasons you cite: too many competing 
things;
as well as just too damn symmetrical.

So I tried both of these;
and thought they're both better than the original un-cropped frame.

Regards,
George Lottermoser 
george at imagist.com
http://www.imagist.com
http://www.imagist.com/blog
http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist







In reply to: Message from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] IMGs: Friday: Framing Flowers)
Message from leica_r8 at hotmail.com (Aram Langhans) ([Leica] [LRflex] IMGs: Friday: Framing Flowers)