Sturbridge Village

[escape]

[IMG]IMG_5961 by pongo now, on Flickr[/IMG]
Couple of weeks ago I went to Sturbridge Village in Massachusetts. It's a recreation of a New England colonial village. I took a few shots when I got there. They looked a bit underexposed so I increased the EV. When I finely veiwed them on my computer they were overexposed. I couldn't understand why. I gave it some thought and figured it out. I had left my sunglasses on while I was taking pictures. (Perscription transitional lenses.)
I've been hitting the lightroom tutorials and worked on the two photos below. I can't do more with them. The first one has two oxen's cropped out. I was more interested in the primary subject. The second photo of the woman dying wool had another pot in the photo. I cropped it to bring the pole more towards the center of the photo for better balance. It also eliminated some distracting elements. Comments appreciated.[IMG]Dying Yarn in colonial times by pongo now, on Flickr[/IMG]

[DanK]

Can’t see the photos


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[escape]

Can’t see the photos


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Oh, Probably something I did. I see them. My first time posting flicker. A lot of figuring out for me. I will try reposting them.

[escape]

[IMG]IMG_5961 by pongo now, on Flickr[/IMG]

[escape]

[IMG]Dying Yarn in colonial times by pongo now, on Flickr[/IMG]

[escape]

I hope that worked.

[xpatUSA]

I hope that worked.

Yes, two images visible in the first post and one each in your last two.

People who post from Flickr often get those redundant "IMG"s with an un-needed caption. I used to know why but I've forgotten (getting old).

[DanK]

I was viewing in Tapatalk on my iPad. None of them show up there. But I just looked in Firefox on the iPad, and they all show up there.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[pschlute]

When looking at the first image in a larger size on your Flickr page I can see that it is quite soft. A result of the 1/10 shutter speed I imagine. You could have got away with a wide open aperture on this one thereby upping the shutter speed. But a charming pose nonetheless.

[Manfred M]

Two interesting images. +1 to Peter's comment. The first image is the strongest, from a composition standpoint, but your shutter speed is far too slow to get a sharp image at that shutter speed, even with image stabilization. You don't need the depth of field of f/9 and that shot wide open would have given you a strong, sharp image.

The second image is a bit too busy to be effective and that is really driven by the position of the woman and the pot. Had they been closer together, you would have had more to work with.

[billtils]

People who post from Flickr often get those redundant "IMG"s with an un-needed caption. I used to know why but I've forgotten (getting old).

The BBC copied from flickr has a lot of redundant content for posting to CIC. All you need is the text starting with the first [img] and ending with the second one.

Delete everything else. (Don't delete the bracketing "[img]" text).

[escape]

Peter & Manfred. Thaank you for commenting. Hard to take a good picture when you can't see the settings. Putting a clear set of eyeglasses and a magnifying glass in my camera kit. I think my camera did exceptionaly well under the cercustances.

[escape]

The BBC copied from flickr has a lot of redundant content for posting to CIC. All you need is the text starting with the first [img] and ending with the second one.

Delete everything else. (Don't delete the bracketing "[img]" text).

Thank you for that very helpful information. I will do that next time.

[Shadowman]

Nice set.