Can -> I agree with you but again I never tryed to make a perfect picture here. The technical aspect was my only motivation. For sure if one day i have the possibility to work with a nicer and newer watch I will do this photo again with a different aim. When it come to the signature, please read my comment on my next photo and try not to tell me the same remark all the time. i know you don't like the signature but I am asking you to comment the photo only. Best regards and keep in touch.
lorek => sound what u sayin, but still what i wanna point out is that the effect you wanted to have here (of these three seconds movement) is totally overridden by the rest of the pic, which stands for what i have said in my previous comment. I don't say that its a bad pic but it does lack rather few features which are really crucial to make it perfect. slaunche :)
can -> thank you for your comments and advises. I took a look at your porfolio. it is good you don't put your signature on your photos. When it come to my whatch, well for sure it is not new but the idea was not to make a picture of a new watch for a magazine but to work on the technical aspect of photography: here a 3 seconds exposure time in order to see the mouvement of the pointer. Did you at least notice this?
I like that movement of a second hand. you'd better cut the top as well as the bottom of the image. and I hardly ever like things like "lorek photography" on photos... they make me sick :/ nice watch, anyway.
this is unsharp, the watch itself seems to be kinda crappy and scratched (not that i expect some patek philippe, but still you gotta choose some perfect watches to take such pictures of those), and pretty much i dont like this picture for that signature in left top corner. well its not sheit pic, but it just looks odd to me, and since i took a look into your folio, i can only admit that you got way, way better pics out there. stick to acts and models, will be way better 4 u. regards
ok. Thank you for the compliment but as all photographer I do not do only excellent photo ;) In this case, I was working on the technical aspect and not at all on the aesthetical aspect.
Lorek no, i do not like nude clocks ;) I mean that: this photo is great, but You are very good photograph so I expected some excellent photo... This is "only" very good. That's all ;)
Kristafari -> thank you for the comment but what is "something better"? Czy to mam byc jakis nagi zegarek czy co? Please read my here under comment to understand my motivations.
I love the technical aspect of photography but unfortunately, too often, people don't take it into consideration before rating a photo. Just the aesthetical aspect is seen and it is sad because behind most pictures there is a lot of work. Pozdrawiam
Komentarze
Can -> I agree with you but again I never tryed to make a perfect picture here. The technical aspect was my only motivation. For sure if one day i have the possibility to work with a nicer and newer watch I will do this photo again with a different aim. When it come to the signature, please read my comment on my next photo and try not to tell me the same remark all the time. i know you don't like the signature but I am asking you to comment the photo only. Best regards and keep in touch.
lorek => sound what u sayin, but still what i wanna point out is that the effect you wanted to have here (of these three seconds movement) is totally overridden by the rest of the pic, which stands for what i have said in my previous comment. I don't say that its a bad pic but it does lack rather few features which are really crucial to make it perfect. slaunche :)
can -> thank you for your comments and advises. I took a look at your porfolio. it is good you don't put your signature on your photos. When it come to my whatch, well for sure it is not new but the idea was not to make a picture of a new watch for a magazine but to work on the technical aspect of photography: here a 3 seconds exposure time in order to see the mouvement of the pointer. Did you at least notice this?
I like that movement of a second hand. you'd better cut the top as well as the bottom of the image. and I hardly ever like things like "lorek photography" on photos... they make me sick :/ nice watch, anyway.
this is unsharp, the watch itself seems to be kinda crappy and scratched (not that i expect some patek philippe, but still you gotta choose some perfect watches to take such pictures of those), and pretty much i dont like this picture for that signature in left top corner. well its not sheit pic, but it just looks odd to me, and since i took a look into your folio, i can only admit that you got way, way better pics out there. stick to acts and models, will be way better 4 u. regards
ok. Thank you for the compliment but as all photographer I do not do only excellent photo ;) In this case, I was working on the technical aspect and not at all on the aesthetical aspect.
Lorek no, i do not like nude clocks ;) I mean that: this photo is great, but You are very good photograph so I expected some excellent photo... This is "only" very good. That's all ;)
Passage of time
aga5. Robi wrazenie wsrod Twoich aktow... ;o)
Kristafari -> thank you for the comment but what is "something better"? Czy to mam byc jakis nagi zegarek czy co? Please read my here under comment to understand my motivations.
This foto is very nice, but I expected something better from You... ;)
I love the technical aspect of photography but unfortunately, too often, people don't take it into consideration before rating a photo. Just the aesthetical aspect is seen and it is sad because behind most pictures there is a lot of work. Pozdrawiam
thank you Rockabilly! (I like your alias!)
good idea,simple but very nice.
lorek, a jak po polsku przeczytałeś instrukcję, jak opublikować to zdjęcie?? bułachacha... obcokrajowiec :))))
sorry I don't understand. can you write in english? If not, I will get someone to translate later.
lorek z allegro ci sie pomylilo?