Competition #66 - Five Tiny Seconds
-
- Iconic Photographer
- Posts: 813
- Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 11:39 pm
- Spam Protection: Maybe
- Location: Westhoughton (nub of the universe).
- Contact:
Competition #66 - Five Tiny Seconds
While on holiday in Marakech last year, I took a photo of a small boy who sat absolutely still on a milk crate in the middle of the bustling market square. However, the market square was so busy that I struggled to get a good shot of him. I put my camera on a gorillapod, set to TV mode with a five second exposure and miraculously, all the people disappeared.
What I would like to see is a five second exposure of any subject of your choosing. I will not ask to see the EXIF information to prove this, however, trust that your entry will be five seconds exposure exactly.
Closing date is midnight, Sunday February 13th.
For inspiration, you might want to take a look at this: http://www.popphoto.com/Features/Master ... d-Exposure
Good luck.
What I would like to see is a five second exposure of any subject of your choosing. I will not ask to see the EXIF information to prove this, however, trust that your entry will be five seconds exposure exactly.
Closing date is midnight, Sunday February 13th.
For inspiration, you might want to take a look at this: http://www.popphoto.com/Features/Master ... d-Exposure
Good luck.
http://philiphowe.co.uk
http://facebook.com/PhilipHowe
"Twelve significant photographs in any one year is a good crop" -Ansel Adams and Philip Howe
Free Dropbox account link! http://db.tt/XvrZgQ68
http://facebook.com/PhilipHowe
"Twelve significant photographs in any one year is a good crop" -Ansel Adams and Philip Howe
Free Dropbox account link! http://db.tt/XvrZgQ68
Re: Competition #66 - Five Tiny Seconds
My shot is called "Meeting The Challenge" and is a response to white's opening move. The shot was done "live" using a Pentax X90 bridge camera on its longest shutter speed of 4 seconds, just within the parameters of four to eight seconds. It was the fifth attempt that clinched the shot.
Best regards
John
John
Re: Competition #66 - Five Tiny Seconds
this was an 8sec exposure to make the water look milky
Best wishes
Sue
Sue
- Ianuk50
- Elite Member
- Posts: 107
- Joined: Sun May 09, 2010 10:12 pm
- Spam Protection: Maybe
- Location: Westhoughton
Re: Competition #66 - Five Tiny Seconds
5 seconds exposure of Middlebrook sporting heroes statue
- Attachments
-
- Middlebrook
- night light.jpg (177.13 KiB) Viewed 8392 times
"I look up to Pammie....especially when I am grovelling to her to let me win!!"
Re: Competition #66 - Five Tiny Seconds
Hi well this is 5.3 seconds of the Halo up on the moors
- Attachments
-
- adaps 5 sec.jpg (120.56 KiB) Viewed 8369 times
Re: Competition #66 - Five Tiny Seconds
Liver Building 4 sec exposure
- Attachments
-
- Live 2.jpg (112.46 KiB) Viewed 8327 times
Re: Competition #66 - Five Tiny Seconds
That's it, deadline passed, and now we just await our judge's pronouncement!
Best regards
John
John
-
- Iconic Photographer
- Posts: 813
- Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 11:39 pm
- Spam Protection: Maybe
- Location: Westhoughton (nub of the universe).
- Contact:
Re: Competition #66 - Five Tiny Seconds
Sorry for the delay, thanks to all who entered.
John - Meeting The Challenge (4 seconds)
This is one of the images I was looking for. You can see there is plenty of movement in the hand and the piece being moved has been held in place just long enough to see it. I wonder if the shot could have been enhanced in any way by positioning the camera overhead. The board is completely static, no blur at all. I don't know if I feel that the crop is too tight, or not tight enough, it seams in the middle as the bottom right is cut off. I don't know if I would prefer a tighter crop into the board.
Anyway, you saw the competition details, got out your camera and some props and had a go. As you say, it was your fifth attempt and a very good go at the subject.
It's a pity that the camera only allows 4 seconds, but I have to mark down one point for that.
Sue - Untitled (8 seconds)
I like this, the detail on the castle is good. Any longer and I think it woiuld have blown the lights. I like the silhouette of the top part of the catle, with just the low red light on the right. The sky has a decent orange tone over to the left which sits nicely in the open on the left. I am a big fan of blank space in photography, but it doesn't have to be completely empty (?). The water is milky, however, I sometimes think milky water looks a little bit flat. There is texture in the bottom left of the shot, which breaks this up only slightly. It's such a pity that they haven't put a light either pointing into the water, or just lighting up the bottom of the wall. I do like the fact the lights appear slightly different colours though.
Exposure time is eight seconds, that's a full three seconds over, so I have to doc 1.5 marks for that, however, I couldn't expect you to trounce back there and retake. I don't know the location by the way.
Ian - Sporting Heroes (5 seconds)
I keep meaning to park in the DeVere and have a look at the boards explaining who this is dedicated to, however, I always remember when I'm sat at the roundabout on my way home. I think the boards are directly behind where you are stood.
To be honest, I though there might be a few more light trails entered, although five seconds may not have been long enough for a motorway shot etc.
The street lights at the back are slightly burnt, and there are a few distractions here. There is a railing at the bottom and a traffic light to the left. It would be hard to get the trails in without the railing though. I wonder if it would have been better to raise the tripod to it's highest and move it over the railing, or back to where the information boards are. I also thing the crop and distractions have been left in order to keep the moon in there. I think I would have prefered to see just the statue itself as there is plenty of colour in it with the lights and it may have been quite a lot sharper.
This is the only entry to follow the competition exactly, so I will award an extra point for that.
Pammie - Halo (5.3 seconds)
I went to the Halo in October of last year. It was really cold, it was 11pm and my wife drove me up there. We parked right next to it and I jumped the fence to get myself up there. It was really eerie, just me and a couple of wandering badgers. My wife was in a panic when I got back to the car as she had a load of urban legend horror stories going through her head. It was a delightful drive home!
I like the positioning in the frame. I like the dark area to the bottom which gives it something to sit on and the clouds look just right to me, they are in the perfect position. The legs are also easy to see, the contrast between them and the background allows them to stand out. The lights are not burnt at all. There is a slightly distracting little bump between the left two legs, but that is natures fault, not yours. I wonder if it's a badger...
Exposure time is 5.3 seconds, I can't really find fault with that, but can't allow any bonus points, nor will I take any away.
Bazzasmeg - Liver Building (4 seconds)
I like the clean lines of the walls of the buildings. The colours are really good. There is very little burn in the photo; where there is, it is unavoidable and doesn't distract at all. Good use of thirds. I can see that the photo shows the building leaning back slightly, obviously from the convergence of your lens. This is particularly seen over to the bottom left where the light is seen at an angle. I think I would prefer this cropped out and maybe fix that convergence slightly. In fact, I wonder whether it just needs straightening.
At four seconds, it is a full second short, so again, one mark off for that, but there is loads of detail, maybe 5 seconds would have lost some of this.
So, with the judging over, we come to the scores.
3rd - John, you got the camera out a gave it a go, well done.
2nd - Pammie, I like this photo, there is just enough detail without blowing out the lights.
1st - Bazzasmeg, at 4 seconds, I did mark it down slightly, but the detail in it brought it back.
Well done to all who entered, thanks for sharing.
John - Meeting The Challenge (4 seconds)
This is one of the images I was looking for. You can see there is plenty of movement in the hand and the piece being moved has been held in place just long enough to see it. I wonder if the shot could have been enhanced in any way by positioning the camera overhead. The board is completely static, no blur at all. I don't know if I feel that the crop is too tight, or not tight enough, it seams in the middle as the bottom right is cut off. I don't know if I would prefer a tighter crop into the board.
Anyway, you saw the competition details, got out your camera and some props and had a go. As you say, it was your fifth attempt and a very good go at the subject.
It's a pity that the camera only allows 4 seconds, but I have to mark down one point for that.
Sue - Untitled (8 seconds)
I like this, the detail on the castle is good. Any longer and I think it woiuld have blown the lights. I like the silhouette of the top part of the catle, with just the low red light on the right. The sky has a decent orange tone over to the left which sits nicely in the open on the left. I am a big fan of blank space in photography, but it doesn't have to be completely empty (?). The water is milky, however, I sometimes think milky water looks a little bit flat. There is texture in the bottom left of the shot, which breaks this up only slightly. It's such a pity that they haven't put a light either pointing into the water, or just lighting up the bottom of the wall. I do like the fact the lights appear slightly different colours though.
Exposure time is eight seconds, that's a full three seconds over, so I have to doc 1.5 marks for that, however, I couldn't expect you to trounce back there and retake. I don't know the location by the way.
Ian - Sporting Heroes (5 seconds)
I keep meaning to park in the DeVere and have a look at the boards explaining who this is dedicated to, however, I always remember when I'm sat at the roundabout on my way home. I think the boards are directly behind where you are stood.
To be honest, I though there might be a few more light trails entered, although five seconds may not have been long enough for a motorway shot etc.
The street lights at the back are slightly burnt, and there are a few distractions here. There is a railing at the bottom and a traffic light to the left. It would be hard to get the trails in without the railing though. I wonder if it would have been better to raise the tripod to it's highest and move it over the railing, or back to where the information boards are. I also thing the crop and distractions have been left in order to keep the moon in there. I think I would have prefered to see just the statue itself as there is plenty of colour in it with the lights and it may have been quite a lot sharper.
This is the only entry to follow the competition exactly, so I will award an extra point for that.
Pammie - Halo (5.3 seconds)
I went to the Halo in October of last year. It was really cold, it was 11pm and my wife drove me up there. We parked right next to it and I jumped the fence to get myself up there. It was really eerie, just me and a couple of wandering badgers. My wife was in a panic when I got back to the car as she had a load of urban legend horror stories going through her head. It was a delightful drive home!
I like the positioning in the frame. I like the dark area to the bottom which gives it something to sit on and the clouds look just right to me, they are in the perfect position. The legs are also easy to see, the contrast between them and the background allows them to stand out. The lights are not burnt at all. There is a slightly distracting little bump between the left two legs, but that is natures fault, not yours. I wonder if it's a badger...
Exposure time is 5.3 seconds, I can't really find fault with that, but can't allow any bonus points, nor will I take any away.
Bazzasmeg - Liver Building (4 seconds)
I like the clean lines of the walls of the buildings. The colours are really good. There is very little burn in the photo; where there is, it is unavoidable and doesn't distract at all. Good use of thirds. I can see that the photo shows the building leaning back slightly, obviously from the convergence of your lens. This is particularly seen over to the bottom left where the light is seen at an angle. I think I would prefer this cropped out and maybe fix that convergence slightly. In fact, I wonder whether it just needs straightening.
At four seconds, it is a full second short, so again, one mark off for that, but there is loads of detail, maybe 5 seconds would have lost some of this.
So, with the judging over, we come to the scores.
3rd - John, you got the camera out a gave it a go, well done.
2nd - Pammie, I like this photo, there is just enough detail without blowing out the lights.
1st - Bazzasmeg, at 4 seconds, I did mark it down slightly, but the detail in it brought it back.
Well done to all who entered, thanks for sharing.
http://philiphowe.co.uk
http://facebook.com/PhilipHowe
"Twelve significant photographs in any one year is a good crop" -Ansel Adams and Philip Howe
Free Dropbox account link! http://db.tt/XvrZgQ68
http://facebook.com/PhilipHowe
"Twelve significant photographs in any one year is a good crop" -Ansel Adams and Philip Howe
Free Dropbox account link! http://db.tt/XvrZgQ68
Re: Competition #66 - Five Tiny Seconds
Many thanks for that, we have a result and Bazzasmeg triumphs! He really should join us at the club. He's been once and we kinow he is a real Human Being!
Over to you Bazzasmeg!
Over to you Bazzasmeg!
Best regards
John
John
Re: Competition #66 - Five Tiny Seconds
Thanks Philip / John
I will think of a subject for comp 67 in the next day or so.
As for coming to the club one night, I will try to make a visit soon.
Best regards, Barry
I will think of a subject for comp 67 in the next day or so.
As for coming to the club one night, I will try to make a visit soon.
Best regards, Barry