<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Liverpool &#8211; A work in progress</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.vanilladays.com/gallery/2007/04/liverpool_-_a_work_in_progress/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.vanilladays.com/gallery/2007/04/liverpool_-_a_work_in_progress/</link>
	<description>Daily photography from Liverpool and beyond</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Mar 2010 22:42:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: chromafile</title>
		<link>http://www.vanilladays.com/gallery/2007/04/liverpool_-_a_work_in_progress/comment-page-1/#comment-8686</link>
		<dc:creator>chromafile</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Apr 2007 01:56:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vanilladays.com/gallery/2007/04/liverpool_-_a_work_in_progress/#comment-8686</guid>
		<description>Pete, I think I understand what you are thinking.  I&#039;ve thought the same about my stuff also.  Aesthetically pleasing, technically good but not too meaningful stuff is becomming a bit of a commodity these days.  Good exposure, focus, processing and composition etc are all pretty easy for lots of people now.  I feel it&#039;s a bit &#039;click, nice, click, nice, nice, next, next&#039; sort of experience.  On the other hand, some people have figured out how to restore interest.  There are often great series and features in filemagazine.com, I think.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Pete, I think I understand what you are thinking.  I&#8217;ve thought the same about my stuff also.  Aesthetically pleasing, technically good but not too meaningful stuff is becomming a bit of a commodity these days.  Good exposure, focus, processing and composition etc are all pretty easy for lots of people now.  I feel it&#8217;s a bit &#8216;click, nice, click, nice, nice, next, next&#8217; sort of experience.  On the other hand, some people have figured out how to restore interest.  There are often great series and features in filemagazine.com, I think.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Maarten</title>
		<link>http://www.vanilladays.com/gallery/2007/04/liverpool_-_a_work_in_progress/comment-page-1/#comment-8645</link>
		<dc:creator>Maarten</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Apr 2007 19:27:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vanilladays.com/gallery/2007/04/liverpool_-_a_work_in_progress/#comment-8645</guid>
		<description>The end result is, well, not bad. Your picture has a nice compo that really lets the viewer explore the whole image. The colors resulting from the processing add to the &#039;construction site&#039;-feeling (orange, brown, dust color etc...). Maybe the sky is a bit exaggerated... It is kinda hard to know when to stop with HDR. On the one hand, it gives some amazing effects, that can be very beautiful, on the other hand, the end result almost always looks the same : saturated colors and unnatural light. Both of them look great, but after I while, people get bored by them. 1 picture like that is fine, 2, 3, heck, maybe 10, but after that... nah,  just make good pictures with a nice compo and keep the colors as real as possible. But hey, that only  my personal opinion !</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The end result is, well, not bad. Your picture has a nice compo that really lets the viewer explore the whole image. The colors resulting from the processing add to the &#8216;construction site&#8217;-feeling (orange, brown, dust color etc&#8230;). Maybe the sky is a bit exaggerated&#8230; It is kinda hard to know when to stop with HDR. On the one hand, it gives some amazing effects, that can be very beautiful, on the other hand, the end result almost always looks the same : saturated colors and unnatural light. Both of them look great, but after I while, people get bored by them. 1 picture like that is fine, 2, 3, heck, maybe 10, but after that&#8230; nah,  just make good pictures with a nice compo and keep the colors as real as possible. But hey, that only  my personal opinion !</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
