comment byTroy at 08:54 PM (GMT) on 12 November, 2007
Not too impressed with this one in regards to your talent level. I think the depth of field is way too shallow, it actually looks like fake blurring?? If real, way to shallow (1.2 or 1.4?)
Think your stuff rocks, sorry to give a not so positive review, just being honest.
Like all the wedding photos lately!
comment bydjn1 at 09:03 PM (GMT) on 12 November, 2007
Troy: yes, it was 1.4 - the blurring is real. Personally, I like the effect, but I'd be interested to hear what other people thing. And don't apologise, I'd much rather people spoke their mind than say nothing at all.
comment byJennifer at 09:45 PM (GMT) on 12 November, 2007
I adore very shallow DOF shots but there is a tendency to over do it (or so some think!) if you have capable glass. However this is just dandy if a little weirdl!
comment byChris Johnson at 10:12 PM (GMT) on 12 November, 2007
I'd have kept the aperture down just enough so that "shoots himself" is in focus. The name is hilarious.
comment by Saito at 12:45 AM (GMT) on 13 November, 2007
Oh the joys of poor translation. :D There's an entire website called engrish.com full of photos like this of awkward/funny translations from Asian languages to English.
comment byMichael George at 02:22 AM (GMT) on 13 November, 2007
This really gave me a laugh. Although I don't necessarily think the shallow DoF is necessary, I think the point of the picture-- the saying on the fireworks --is all that really matters anyway.
comment byNavin Harish at 04:18 AM (GMT) on 13 November, 2007
Obviously the people who named it are not fans of Pandas or Peta. Last weekend we celebrated the biggest festival of Hindus called Diwali and everyone indulges in firecrackers. There are some with very bizarre names and graphics here too.
comment byPeter at 04:48 AM (GMT) on 13 November, 2007
you need to submit this to http://www.engrish.com It would fit perfectly there.
comment bynjr at 07:32 AM (GMT) on 13 November, 2007
Well, it brought a smile to my face this morning.
comment byJosef Renklint at 08:01 AM (GMT) on 13 November, 2007
Rather twisted shot.. I must say I like the shallow dof.
comment byOne Way at 09:32 AM (GMT) on 13 November, 2007
Thats some cool effect there: feels like there is a bokeh between the sand and the box. Cool.
comment bycsj at 01:51 PM (GMT) on 13 November, 2007
Reads more like a 'headline' rather than a firework!..... ;-), I like the image for the pure reason, you bothered to take it, and edit it, and that you saw something in it with showing, and that to break the horizon like this you were either in a hole in the ground, or you risked your camera in the sand, so good on you!
comment byJamey at 03:25 PM (GMT) on 13 November, 2007
Very nice. Was there much balancing of sky and ground here or were they naturally at similar levels?
comment by Isi at 04:28 PM (GMT) on 13 November, 2007
I don't know why, but this photo almost depressed me imediatly upon viewing it. Great technic nevertheless
comment byfabrizio at 07:28 PM (GMT) on 13 November, 2007
Absolutly PERFECT photoblog, i give you a wonderful bookmark on photoblog.org
comment bydjn1 at 08:50 PM (GMT) on 13 November, 2007
Thanks everyone :-)
comment by sam at 08:31 PM (GMT) on 9 December, 2007
hahahahahhahahahahhahaha send it into vice magazine they'll love it.
I'm not an expert on fireworks, but I suspect that there are few that are more bizarrely named than this one ;-)
camera
lens
aperture
shutter speed
shooting mode
exposure bias
metering mode
ISO
flash
image quality
RAW converter
cropped?
Canon 1Ds Mark II
EF 35mm f/1.4L USM
f/1.4
1/400
aperture priority
+0.0
evaluative
100
no
RAW
C1 Pro
1x1
Not too impressed with this one in regards to your talent level. I think the depth of field is way too shallow, it actually looks like fake blurring?? If real, way to shallow (1.2 or 1.4?)
Think your stuff rocks, sorry to give a not so positive review, just being honest.
Like all the wedding photos lately!
Troy: yes, it was 1.4 - the blurring is real. Personally, I like the effect, but I'd be interested to hear what other people thing. And don't apologise, I'd much rather people spoke their mind than say nothing at all.
I adore very shallow DOF shots but there is a tendency to over do it (or so some think!) if you have capable glass. However this is just dandy if a little weirdl!
I'd have kept the aperture down just enough so that "shoots himself" is in focus. The name is hilarious.
Oh the joys of poor translation. :D There's an entire website called engrish.com full of photos like this of awkward/funny translations from Asian languages to English.
This really gave me a laugh. Although I don't necessarily think the shallow DoF is necessary, I think the point of the picture-- the saying on the fireworks --is all that really matters anyway.
Obviously the people who named it are not fans of Pandas or Peta. Last weekend we celebrated the biggest festival of Hindus called Diwali and everyone indulges in firecrackers. There are some with very bizarre names and graphics here too.
you need to submit this to http://www.engrish.com It would fit perfectly there.
Well, it brought a smile to my face this morning.
Rather twisted shot.. I must say I like the shallow dof.
Very humourous ;-)
Scary name for fireworks :)
Thats some cool effect there: feels like there is a bokeh between the sand and the box. Cool.
Reads more like a 'headline' rather than a firework!..... ;-), I like the image for the pure reason, you bothered to take it, and edit it, and that you saw something in it with showing, and that to break the horizon like this you were either in a hole in the ground, or you risked your camera in the sand, so good on you!
Very nice. Was there much balancing of sky and ground here or were they naturally at similar levels?
I don't know why, but this photo almost depressed me imediatly upon viewing it. Great technic nevertheless
Absolutly PERFECT photoblog, i give you a wonderful bookmark on photoblog.org
Thanks everyone :-)
hahahahahhahahahahhahaha send it into vice magazine they'll love it.