Newbie's Sydney Trip Part 2
- Thread starter gan
- Start date
- Status
Can see that you're a very technical photographer.
Very impressive. Scanned from slides?
How did you do the metering? Camera or external hand-held meter? Darned if I can get exposures like that.
Didn't know the Pieta was in Sydney. Is that a replica?
Could have done with a little fill flash, but of course they probably did not allow flash photography. Maybe could have brought along a portable reflector and thrown some light onto the shadows.
Very impressive. Scanned from slides?
How did you do the metering? Camera or external hand-held meter? Darned if I can get exposures like that.
Didn't know the Pieta was in Sydney. Is that a replica?
Could have done with a little fill flash, but of course they probably did not allow flash photography. Maybe could have brought along a portable reflector and thrown some light onto the shadows.
I think what he meant is that he's a 'newbie' to this forum.
Oh man, look at those pics.......they'r simply awesome!!
Certainly doesn't qualify as works of a newbie photographer.
Oh man, look at those pics.......they'r simply awesome!!
Certainly doesn't qualify as works of a newbie photographer.
Thread has been moved from Critique Corner to Landscape and Travel Photography due to nature of content. Please refer to this thread for the guidelines of the Critique Corner.
gan,
lemme guess.. St. Mary's Cathedral? The one beside Hyde Park?
great use of indoor/available lighting.
care to share the settings your ye shots?
enjoy!
rOCh
lemme guess.. St. Mary's Cathedral? The one beside Hyde Park?
great use of indoor/available lighting.
care to share the settings your ye shots?
enjoy!
rOCh
Thanks again for the kind replies. Yes, I'm using a digital camera (Olympus C40Z). No metering devices. Jus relying on the camera's metering. The pano shot is very tricky. Have to do manual merging myself.
The St Mary's Cathedral is awesome. Really had a good time there.
Yes, I'm a newbie to photography, as in my reply in the Part 1.
I took hundreds of shots to choose the best.
The St Mary's Cathedral is awesome. Really had a good time there.
Yes, I'm a newbie to photography, as in my reply in the Part 1.
I took hundreds of shots to choose the best.
guys, guys. I really delighted for your comments. But it doesn't really have to take a good photographer to that these shots. You just have to be there, really. It's just plain beautiful there.
T
taen
Guest
forgive me for being critical. IMHO...
the 1st pix does no justice to architecture!
the beauty of a [gothic] church lies in the symmetry and the qualities of light and space...
the pix doesn't capture the volume of the church, the intricacies of the stain glass or the perspective enforced by the pews...
i don't find any focus... if pano is your intention, you got it.
perhaps the 3rd pix could be taken from the side of Christ's head, showing the beauty of the sculpture and the intensity of the facial expressions...
am i too harsh?
;p
the 1st pix does no justice to architecture!
the beauty of a [gothic] church lies in the symmetry and the qualities of light and space...
the pix doesn't capture the volume of the church, the intricacies of the stain glass or the perspective enforced by the pews...
i don't find any focus... if pano is your intention, you got it.
perhaps the 3rd pix could be taken from the side of Christ's head, showing the beauty of the sculpture and the intensity of the facial expressions...
am i too harsh?
;p
The statue was too tall, won't be able to see the face even if I shoot from the other side, so I chose this angle.
The first shot was meant to be a complete pano from top to bottom and from front to back. The purpose is to show how grand the church is. But I the shots that I have captured for the top failed to stitch. :cry:
The first shot was meant to be a complete pano from top to bottom and from front to back. The purpose is to show how grand the church is. But I the shots that I have captured for the top failed to stitch. :cry:
interesting comment...but i dunn think there is anything wrong for a photographer to shoot something based on his perception...as much as the essence of gothic architecture lies in its symmetry and aloof spaces which give human a sense of awe just like in full respect to the God.
there is nothing wrong in seeing things in a different light...i find it refreshing since the focus was on the length of the church, which showed the benches and hence the people...a church, no matter how awesome, is a huge white elephant without the people....the first picture shows a more humane side of the place...remember, architecture is nothing without people
(architecture encompasses more than the aspect of art itself...the beauty of architecture lies in its role by engaging art, engineering and people)
if light be called the life-blood of an architectonic form, darkness could rightly be called its soul.
xllms
T
taen
Guest
of course there is nothing wrong!any form of art is very personal... it is an extension of oneself to the public and reactions are subjective...
i've been to churches before... [lack of skills?] and could never find something to capture satisfactorily on film. anyway, most of the ones overseas don't allow photo-taking...
architecture is amazing. i remember going into a church in paris and felt so overwhelmed by the space that i cried.anyway, what's this church called in Sydney?.. i might want to check it out myself ;p
- Status