Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/05/11
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Number two for me by far. I think that the texture and solidity of the rocky land is enhanced and the additional ocean to the left does not add much for me. In this size it appears to soften to that edge also. A bonus in the crop is that it removes the contrail that is against the cloud softness. I'm not sure that the horizons are 'off', rather there is visible curvature. That is correctable of course (and I would, as discussed off-list). I'd be honoured to hang ANY version myself. Gorgeous work. Cheers Geoff http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman On 12 May 2010 14:08, Bob Shaw <rsphotoimages at comcast.net> wrote: > Bob: > > Both are superb. > > To this observer, he first crop strikes me as having a nice balance between > earth and sky. > > so I pick #1. > > Cheers. > > Bob > > > > > Bob Shaw > rsphotoimages at comcast.net > > > On May 11, 2010, at 8:51 PM, slobodan Dimitrov wrote: > > > The second one looks a bit too 'glowy'. > > Also, you horizon is off on both of them. > > S.d. > > > > On May 11, 2010, at 8:20 PM, Bob Adler wrote: > > > >> I sure would appreciate opinions on which of these two variations of a > recent Big Sur photo you like best. If you want to share why, that would be > very helpful too. > >> > >> http://rgaphoto.com/2010-05-07-Big-Sur/index.html > >> > >> Thanks very much in advance, > >> Bob > >> Bob Adler > >> Palo Alto, CA > >> http://www.rgaphoto.com > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Leica Users Group. > >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Leica Users Group. > > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >