Vote for who's photo you think is best
Lagonda
A macro experiment
Date taken: 14/01/2007
Nikon D70S + Micro Nikkor 60mm
speedy_2
Around the Berm
1-26-07
Canon 350D
Vote for who's photo you think is best
Lagonda
A macro experiment
Date taken: 14/01/2007
Nikon D70S + Micro Nikkor 60mm
speedy_2
Around the Berm
1-26-07
Canon 350D
Lagondas has alot of noise, speedy's is overexposed in some areas. I think in this case its deciding which of those is more important
Very good photos though.
speedy_2, excellent shot, I appreciate how hard motorsport action shots are to take, let alone getting a nice berm shot. Very well done!
' For the tenacious, no road is impassable '.
A lot of noise ?
Can't you hear it??
wreoo-wreoo...
those noisy two strokes....
erm , i don't see ANY noise in lagondas...
He came dancing across the water
With his galleons and guns
Looking for the new world
In that palace in the sun
On the shore lay Montezuma
With his cocoa leaves and pearls
I'm going with lagondas' on grounds of creativity
Reutlingen/ San Francisco
Originally Posted by Lagonda
I think they're confusing the extremely shallow depth of field for noise. Beautiful picture btw.
On this day, Cotterik realises that the photo > perfect exposure or no noise.Originally Posted by Cotterik
And bells rang.
Faster, faster, faster, until the thrill of speed overcomes the fear of death...
– Hunter Thompson
whats wrong with a little creative criticism
i speak of the 'noise' in the very center of the photo, where the shadow creates a huge amount of noise. The ISO is just right at the top of the photo but at that point it becomes extremely grainy because of the balance of light and dark that the camera has to deal with. Either that or the brightness has been messed with on photoshop. Either way I just thought I'd point it out but I guess this mustnt be a real competition if you cant give the entrants positive/negative feedback.
Tough decision, I like the coloring in Speed's good contrast. I like Lagonda's picture but I think that to much of it is out of focus (my preference).
"Horsepower sells motor cars, but torque wins motor races."
-Carrol Shelby
Noise doesn't make or break a photo, it's an unavoidable part of all photography. You shouldn't judge any shots because they are noisy, you should be judging them on whether it's a good shot or not.Originally Posted by Cotterik
Faster, faster, faster, until the thrill of speed overcomes the fear of death...
– Hunter Thompson
I think whether or not there is noise in the photo is a factor as to whether it is a good shot or not.Originally Posted by 2ndclasscitizen
But whether or not there is noise or not is partly down to correct exposure, but mostly (and that's a big mostly) down to the camera/film (and processing, but that's not really relevant here as there isn't supposed to be any PP done) which isn't the idea of these comps, who has the best camera, but who took the best photo.
Faster, faster, faster, until the thrill of speed overcomes the fear of death...
– Hunter Thompson
I'm a bit confused, I'm on a college PC with a 19" CRT (low refresh rate) monitor, and there appears to be very little noise. Infact I cant make out the detail I was pointing out earlier. My LCD screen at home obviously picks out everything in the photo
as concerns your argument, I understand the point you're making is completely justified, however based on my perspective at home I could see every little detail on my monitor. Which lead me to identify the noise. Which, I agree, is an inevitable part of un-edited photography at times however it seemed to me like the dark areas had alot of noise. Maybe other users monitors dont show it? Besides, my original post was to say that both photos were good, and only by comparing the bad points could I decide which is better.
Last edited by Cotterik; 02-01-2007 at 02:48 AM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)