Some of my best Photographs

[PiccoloNamek]

They're fairly large files, so I won't link to them directly.

Magical Sakura (http://www.gamingforce.com/xchange/data/userwork/id972/photos-photos/photos-photos_1112753345_Magical_Sakura.jpg)

Floating Along (http://www.gamingforce.com/xchange/data/userwork/id972/photos-photos/photos-photos_1088103921_Floating.jpg)

Dreamscene (http://www.gamingforce.com/xchange/data/userwork/id972/photos-photos/photos-photos_1087688525_Dreamscene.jpg)

Face of Innocence (http://www.gamingforce.com/xchange/data/userwork/id972/photos-photos/photos-photos_1087608492_1047165-lg.jpg)

Steel in Juxtaposition (http://www.gamingforce.com/xchange/data/userwork/id972/photos-photos/photos-photos_1087593873_Poles.jpg)

Gone Fishing (http://www.gamingforce.com/xchange/data/userwork/id972/photos-photos/photos-photos_1112656408_Kidfishing.jpg)

Deep Blue Skynorama (http://www.gamingforce.com/xchange/data/userwork/id972/photos-photos/photos-photos_1087726913_Deep_Blue_Skynorama.jpg)

Sunflower Profile (http://www.gamingforce.com/xchange/data/userwork/id972/photos-photos/photos-photos_1087592723_Sunflowerprofile2.jpg)

Refuge (http://www.gamingforce.com/xchange/data/userwork/id972/photos-photos/photos-photos_1111976878_1Rainywindow.jpg)

Pretty Sakura (http://www.gamingforce.com/xchange/data/userwork/id972/photos-photos/photos-photos_1112134169_PrettySakura.jpg)



And what I personally think is my best photograph ever: (It was even in the top rated photos section on photo.net for a while!)

Energy Arc (http://www.gamingforce.com/xchange/data/userwork/id972/photos-photos/photos-photos_1087592507_Energy_Arc.jpg)

You can view the rest of my portfolio here:
http://www.gamingforce.com/xchange/xbrowser.php?id=972

[Serotonin]

Dreamscene is way cool.

And I think ohno and indiejade might like "Face of Innocence".

Well done. :thumbup:

[PiccoloNamek]

Face of Innocence actually won me 1st place in the pets section of Olympus's Fall 2002 photo contest. :D

[sandwich]

How.. how did you make Energy Arc?

[PiccoloNamek]

You know those plasma spheres you can buy at the mall? I have a really old one from Radio Shack. "Illuminastorm" it's called. I turned off all of the lights in my room, put my camera in macro mode, and set the exposure time to eight seconds. I put my palm over the top of the sphere to draw all of the current straight up. And that picture was the result.

[nobarcode]

Dreamscene gets my vote as well. Good job. It's too bad they couldn't have moved those power lines (?) out of the way for you in Sunflower Profile. Robert Crumb has ruined me forever in that regard.

[glassmoon]

All are great photos. How long does it take you to get a photo like that?

[Hypnos]

"Refuge" has an exquisite timbre -- got me immediately.

[Vagabond]

...speechless. :o

[Geoff]

I like face of innocence.. it's an excellent photograph.

You blow the highlights on quite a lot of these photos (like dreamscene)... is that intentional? It's an interesting technique to play with but one which will usually lead to you be criticised in a technical competition unless you had really good reason to do so!

Interesting composition though. An enjoyable collection.

-Geoff

[euterpenc]

Amazing. Very good. I like the first one and the dreamscene. Very very nice.

[PiccoloNamek]

I like face of innocence.. it's an excellent photograph.

You blow the highlights on quite a lot of these photos (like dreamscene)... is that intentional? It's an interesting technique to play with but one which will usually lead to you be criticised in a technical competition unless you had really good reason to do so!

Interesting composition though. An enjoyable collection.

-Geoff

Eh? I'm not quite sure what you're talking about. Are you sure it's not just your monitor? Actually, I think I see what you're talking about, at least in Deep Blue Skynorama. But not in the others. Anyway, Dreamscene was very heavily post processed. The original picture was actually rather bland and was taken in the daytime. But I had a vision, and photoshop helped me achieve my vision!


All are great photos. How long does it take you to get a photo like that?

A long time. Out of the literally thousands of photographs I've taken, maybe 20 of them are really, truly good.

Thank you for all of the wonderful comments people, it really means a lot to me. Even the criticism! :)

[indie]

While Serotionin is right that I like "Face of Innocence," ;) my favorite one is "Steel in Juxtaposition". . . there is something very cool about the angle of the shot and how the lampposts come together. Very nice work. (And welcome to the Forum)

[SheepDog]

I'd really like to see a nice print of Dreamscene. I'm sure that my monitor isn't doing it justice. I'm a sucker for shadow detail, and I am pretty sure there's more there than I'm seeing.

Refuge also deserves more detail than I can see on my monitor, I presume. I forget the effect, but the screen looks strange from the pixelation.

I see a theme of a geometric order in your composition. I wonder if that's intentional, or if that's a more intuitive thing for you.

I like the way you use the technical aspects, especially a very shallow depth of field, as design element. I do the same thing, and see photography as an interesting combination of technical and aesthetic.

[PiccoloNamek]

I'd really like to see a nice print of Dreamscene. I'm sure that my monitor isn't doing it justice. I'm a sucker for shadow detail, and I am pretty sure there's more there than I'm seeing.

Refuge also deserves more detail than I can see on my monitor, I presume. I forget the effect, but the screen looks strange from the pixelation.

Moire? Anwyay, that's true about monitors. What looks good to me might look bad to someone else. Right now I'm using a 19 inch Viewsonic PF790 monitor, so everything looks bright and sharp, abeit with an intense blue-cast, even at the lowest color temperature. On my other monitors, Dreamscene looks nearly black and white with a slight yellow tint, but on this monitor all of the shadows are dark blue instead.


I see a theme of a geometric order in your composition. I wonder if that's intentional, or if that's a more intuitive thing for you.

I'm not really sure what you mean, so it must be an N thing. You've piqued my interest though; could you give me an example of what you're talking about?



I like the way you use the technical aspects, especially a very shallow depth of field, as design element. I do the same thing, and see photography as an interesting combination of technical and aesthetic.

Speaking of which...

http://www.gamingforce.com/xchange/data/userwork/id972/photos-photos/photos-photos_1087686335_DOF.jpg

;)

[SheepDog]

Let's see if I can back up my point... ;)

You have several triangle themes. "Face of Innocence" is three circles in a triangle. So is "Rainchime". "Floating Along" is three lines in a triangle. "Pull Me Up" is more literally triangles, but the angle of the shot repeats the angles.

You also have several that are converging vertical lines (with the convergence representing a triangle itself). "Dreamscenes" and "Magical Sakura" have a very different tone, but are a series of repeating vertical lines with a central vanishing point. "Lights and Stripes" has a different POV (and vanishing point), but also shares that theme. In "Abandoned, Empty", it's done with chains. In "Scorching Hot", it's the barrels, but it's more subtle.

This is the most obvious description I can articulate. Part of my impression was also intuitive, I'm afraid.

[PiccoloNamek]

Interesting theory, but the truth is, none of that was intentional. I just did what I thought felt right when framing the shot. I guess it really is intuitive. Or maybe just a coincidence?

[Zero Angel]

Thats incredibly perceptive, SD. I have a very different take on the pictures.

- I liked Magical Sakura the best. The pink-white and green are a nice color combination, I also like the 'shimmering' look. I wish the ground wasnt so overdone.

- Dreamscene, the asymmetry of how the right side encroaches over the road while the left side is more 'normal'. I dont get that, and it kinda bothers me.

- Steel in juxtaposition: Technically well done but looks so grey and lifeless and 'industrial'. Not my cup o' tea.

However I'm not a photo connoseur (so take it with a grain of salt), more into nature/landscape pictures.

[PiccoloNamek]

Thats incredibly perceptive, SD. I have a very different take on the pictures.

- I liked Magical Sakura the best. The pink-white and green are a nice color combination, I also like the 'shimmering' look. I wish the ground wasnt so overdone.

The shimmering look is the magic of post-processing. :D


- Dreamscene, the asymmetry of how the right side encroaches over the road while the left side is more 'normal'. I dont get that, and it kinda bothers me.

Well, if I had just stood in the middle of the road and taken a picture, it would have ended up bland, with no personality.


- Steel in juxtaposition: Technically well done but looks so grey and lifeless and 'industrial'. Not my cup o' tea.

I HATE YOU! I mean, that's fine if you don't like it. :D But the dreary look is what I was going for.


However I'm not a photo connoseur (so take it with a grain of salt), more into nature/landscape pictures.

Heh, no worries. ;)

[Zero Angel]

Thanks for responding. You have an interesting signature. Not sure but I think its my N that says something along the lines of we could rule men with fear if we took the right approach (evil laugh).

[Edit: Off topic rant removed]

[Geoff]

Eh? I'm not quite sure what you're talking about. Are you sure it's not just your monitor? Actually, I think I see what you're talking about, at least in Deep Blue Skynorama. But not in the others. Anyway, Dreamscene was very heavily post processed. The original picture was actually rather bland and was taken in the daytime. But I had a vision, and photoshop helped me achieve my vision!


Thank you for all of the wonderful comments people, it really means a lot to me. Even the criticism! :)

Yes.. not my monitor.. I just mean here and there the whites are over exposed (off the dynamic range of the camera/film?). it is also a little visible in one or two of the water areas.

I am being overcritical because you clearly know what you are doing! It is intended to be constructive criticism. I like the composition (you have a good eye for the rule of thirds and when to break it) and you make much of some simple subjects.

More would be nice :)

Feel free to critique some of my photos further down the Atelier (there is a few threads started by me in this bit of the forum).

-Geoff

[PiccoloNamek]

I think one of the problems is, is that I feel I can always have 'just a little more' contrast in my photos. Sometimes I suppose I end up blowing out the highlights after playing with the levels one too many times.

Sometimes I do this on purpose, like in "Gone Fishing", but sometimes, it might just be an accident. I have a very expensive camera, so I doubt that's the problem.

As for the rule of thirds, until recently, I had no idea what that was. It's a very intuitive thing for me. Like, I said, I just do what "feels" right.

[Apostasius]

Nice pics. I like energy arc. Photo.net is a pretty cool resource too.

I have to agree with Geoff about the highlights. It seems to me that you like to go for strong contrast in some of your images. I can't say that the contrast doesn't work for what you are trying to communicate, but for me personally, I cannot stand having blown out highlights in my pics. But then, I am not particularly creative either.

I also like "Zorak" from your portfolio. I have a tough time getting macro shots right, so I always appreciate a good macro shot.

[Nighthawk]

Totally marvelous! The arc is also my favorite. You do some very nice work.

[Sackanaka]

Would you take

1) it as a compliment
2) legal action*

if I used your photos for a desktop?
They're so damn awesome.

*I know it's free to dl and I won't sell it as my own, but just had to ask. Same feeling I get when handling crystals and dishes at the mall.

[PiccoloNamek]

It's ok if you use them as your wallpapers, lots of people have. I take it as a compliment that someone likes it enough to actually save it.

I have another portfolio at http://piccolonamek.deviantart.com/gallery/?view=1&order=6&limit=24

But be warned, a lot of my crappier photos have been dumped there. A lot of them were taken before I had a lot of experience, and with an older, low-end Olympus D-series camera. These days I use an Olympus C-5050 and am much more skilled with photoshop. :D

[philonightmare]

All were beautiful! I especially liked these three: Pretty Sakura, Refuge, and Energy Arc. Nice job on the focusing and tints. :)

[In...TP]

I thoroughly enjoyed that, PiccoloNamek. Thanks for sharing.

[PsiKik]

Went to your gallery at

http://piccolonamek.deviantart.com/gallery/

Must say I was very pleased I took the trouble.
Excellent pictures!

I especially liked
cross on a hill - looks like a snowman surfing in the clouds!
eye of belldandy
bamboo twist
bursting forth - how did you do that?
bathing in amber lake
Depth Of Field - I get it!

This has inspired me to put some of my pictures in the atelier.

Recommend others who liked the pics in this thread to look at picollos gallery.

[Hypnos]

Recommend others who liked the pics in this thread to look at picollos gallery.
Awesome! Here is the correct link (http://piccolonamek.deviantart.com/gallery/).

There are too many photos I like to list them here ... :thumbup:

[Geoff]

I think one of the problems is, is that I feel I can always have 'just a little more' contrast in my photos. Sometimes I suppose I end up blowing out the highlights after playing with the levels one too many times.

Sometimes I do this on purpose, like in "Gone Fishing", but sometimes, it might just be an accident. I have a very expensive camera, so I doubt that's the problem.

As for the rule of thirds, until recently, I had no idea what that was. It's a very intuitive thing for me. Like, I said, I just do what "feels" right.

Well, dynamic range is a feature of the type of camera and if using film, the type of film. Cost is pretty much irrelevant :). The trick is to expose for the highlights (which often means you have an underexposed picture - which you can then bring the detail out of on photoshop while preserving the highlights).

If your camera allows you an instant review of the graph of the image exposure (I forget the name of it d'oh') - look for anything 'flashing' as overexposed and then if necessary retake the shot.

-Geoff

[PiccoloNamek]

Cost is far from irrelevant. Obviously, an 11 megapixel Canon EOS digital camera will have a much better dynamic range than a 2 megapixel Nikon handheld. Just like how my Olympus C-5050 has a much better dynamic range than my Olympus D-460.

As for pushing in photoshop, that's usually what I do. A dark picture can be fixed with the auto levels command, a light picture much less so.

My camera has an instant review option and I also have the option to have a realtime histogram of the light levels. I also make good use of the exposure compensation option. So, I can assure you I'm not taking overexposed pictures. I'm making them, hehe.

[Geoff]

Cost is far from irrelevant. Obviously, an 11 megapixel Canon EOS digital camera will have a much better dynamic range than a 2 megapixel Nikon handheld. Just like how my Olympus C-5050 has a much better dynamic range than my Olympus D-460.

As for pushing in photoshop, that's usually what I do. A dark picture can be fixed with the auto levels command, a light picture much less so.

My camera has an instant review option and I also have the option to have a realtime histogram of the light levels. I also make good use of the exposure compensation option. So, I can assure you I'm not taking overexposed pictures. I'm making them, hehe.

Which is why all along I asked if it was intentional. If intentional that's good!
If you like the effect. It is a strange side effect of digital that you expose for the highlights.. when on film you exposed for the right exposure (ie you would leave highlights blown to get the right shot). Digital has more flexibility, yet less dynamic range. It is a difficult game to play, sometimes.

Digital has until very recently much worse dynamic range than 35mm film.. and is probably comparable with slide (which has a narrower dynamic range). The very latest digitals are finally improving dynamic range, but typically there is little difference until say the last 12months on this between a 2mp and 11mp camera. Finally they are getting it sorted though :).

Still going to be a while before you can backlight safely with a digital though, I fear.

-Geoff

[TPol]

I like your photos. Went to your portfolio (thanks for sharing). The dogwood tree against the dark blue sky is my favorite.

[moni]

Great pictures!! i hope you don't mind if i save some of them (i love the sakura and sunflower pictures). :)

[waxwing]

You beautifully render life.

I viewed your portfolio and am thoroughly captivated by this one:

http://www.gamingforce.com/xchange/chocoview.php?xid=3295

Engaging, evokative.

[PiccoloNamek]

Wow, thank you. Comments like that mean a lot to me.

[waxwing]

Well, I would be remiss not to tell you that your work has spawned story ideas for two days straight -- not directly related to the "fliers" one, but inspired by it.

so, thank you.