|
cthcrockclimber
Aug 12, 2003, 12:34 PM
Post #2 of 5
(2585 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 16, 2003
Posts: 1007
|
not bad at all, film/camera quailty is alittle sub-par and some more movement/action would be nice.
|
|
|
|
|
thomasribiere
Aug 14, 2003, 5:42 PM
Post #3 of 5
(2585 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 24, 2002
Posts: 9306
|
colours are good maybe to saturated, the climber is ALL dark (too dark) but it's not that important as he's not really in action, I find this picture just SIMPLE and PLEASANT to look at. I think I gave it a 7 and maybe even an 8?
|
|
|
|
|
lollipopchic
Aug 15, 2003, 8:39 AM
Post #4 of 5
(2585 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 9, 2003
Posts: 183
|
hey guys,
thanks for the comments. The pic was taken with one of those automatic point and snap cameras, nothing fancy! don't really know what underexposure, colour saturation etc means, as you can see i don't think i'm going to become a photographer!! I'm just hoping to put some more pics of Western Australian climbing spots so other people can get a feel for the place. Hopefully next time I can get closer shots (was only me and my brother climbing so was rather limited).
|
|
|
|
|
sushislayer
Aug 15, 2003, 8:50 AM
Post #5 of 5
(2585 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2002
Posts: 709
|
I would suggest moving your subject away from the center of the frame. It makes for a more dynamic photo. In the shot you have posted, if you cropped the bottom off so that the climber is in the bottom third, it would look more asthetically pleasing. They call it "the rule of thirds." Basically, you want to divide your fram into thirds (like a tic-tac-toe grid) and put your subjects along the lines that make up the thirds. An intersection of thirds is even better.
As with all "rules" there are times when things look better when the "rule" is broken. This is a good rule of thumb though and used widely. Just look for it when you next watch a movie!
Happy shooting and climbing!
Sushi.
|
|
|
|
|
|
