by SkierSynergy » Tue Oct 24, 2006 10:45 pm
Hey Sidney
yeah, those are some impressive angles on the carvers! Anyone who spends time on the pavement knows that is real commitment. Going down on carvers is not at all like going down on snow.
If you look at the counter balance and the counter action of this shot and compare it with the first shot that started the thread there is a definite difference. I am holding off just saying so that there can be some practice seeing things. Before just jumping in with any recommendations or evaluative judgements, I think it's useful to just try to describe what is going on and how the description is arrived at -- what, in detail, do you see that supports the description.
Using a descriptive rubric of feet, legs, hips, torso, what do you see when comparing Ricks first shot (and also Diana's pic) and Rick#2 ?
Example: If you say his feet are tipped more, what do you see that makes you think so?
The outside wheels of the stance carver are higher off the pavement, etc.
Questions: If you say he is counter balanced more what do you see that makes you think so?
If you say he is counter acting more/earlier, what do you see that makes you think so?
There is one issue that Rick is working on related to all this. It is in the earlier pic, but it is more obvious in the second pic.
SkierSynergy.com -- comprehensive services for the girlfriends of skiers