View Full Version : Critique #66 *Open Theme* 5 Participants + 1 Guest
Welcome to this critique thread. Please read the purpose statement and the guidelines/ground rules regarding participation.
Purpose
The primary purpose of this thread is to provide a forum where photographers can give and receive constructive criticism on one another's photographs. By setting up some basic guidelines we hope that this thread will provide a forum where the give and take of honest constructive criticism can help us become better photographers.
Guidelines/Ground Rules
The thread has very specific rules regarding participation. The one basic rule is that you cannot provide criticism on an image or comment in a critique thread unless you also have an image posted. To post an image to this thread you must be a participant. Participation in this thread is limited. Here are the guidelines and ground rules for participation:
Participation in this thread is limited to 5 photographers
Participants join the thread by posting their intention. You can simply reply with your intent to join by posting something like: "I'm joining," "I'm in," or just state your name
Joining is on a "first come, first served" basis. The first 5 to reply become the participants.
Please, only join this thread if you are able post an image within 24 hours of joining.
Once the thread has 5 participants, no other photographers can join or participate in the thread
Once the thread is full of participants all photographers will upload their image(s)
Please abide by any thematic requirement (e.g., landscape, portrait, etc.)
The number of photos for each participant is limited to one
Photographers attach photos as thumbnails (no inline images or links)
Photos should be standard screen resolution (72~90) and the longest side of the image approximately 10 inches in length.
Photographers post their images supplying titles (if any) and other pertinent information (the amount of information should be minimal)
Photographers can only comment on their own images and reply to comments only when everyone else in the thread has posted their comments on the image
Every participant must comment on every photo (except their owninitially)
Every participant must make at least two comments, one positive comment, and one constructive criticism (which is actually two positive comments)
Once every photographer has commented then a free flowing discussion begins. It is at this point that every photographer can comment on their own work and reply to comments, ask questions, etc.
The participants decide when the thread closes.
If you'd like to participate in a critique thread and need some ideas about how to proceed with viewing images critically, you may find this thread helpful:
How do you look at photos (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=26459)
You can also provide feedback on critique threads here:
Critique Feedback Thread (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=26611)
Remember: Please do not provide criticism on an image or comment in a critique thread unless you also have an image posted.
This thread is now active, please follow the guidelines if you'd like to participate! Have Fun!
.
A member requested that we try a critique session in which we invite a Guest to sit in and comment/critique without posting an image. The member suggested this as a means to bring out a little more constructive criticism/participation.
The guest will join in just as the thread participants do. Also, the guest position is first come, first serve.
Note: Guest participation is an option here.
If you've any questions about how this will work, post them in this thread.
As usual, have some fun!!
.
Here is a photo from Lisbon, Portugal.
- edit - OK, I removed my photo.
Here is a photo from Lisbon, Portugal.
Hi Sirius,
Welcome to the critique! Be sure you read the guidelines. :) You're posting your image a little early. ;)
You still need 4 more participants.
:)
I want to participate in this new format as a guest, unless you (Ray) prefer another guest. Both are fine with me.
Raid
I would also like to participate.
Thanks.
davidbivins
01-06-2007, 09:02
I'd like to give this a shot.
...invite a Guest to sit in and comment/critique without posting an image. ...suggested as a means to bring out a little more constructive criticism/participation.
Ray, could you explain/elaborate on this bit further?
...invite a Guest to sit in and comment/critique without posting an image. ...suggested as a means to bring out a little more constructive criticism/participation.
Ray, could you explain/elaborate on this bit further?
No. :) Other than the guest would sit in an offer criticism along the same lines as the other participants, AND that this came in as a request from a good strong participant in these threads who wanted to experiment a little with the arrangement.
If you want to take the guest position then it's yours. I think these folks are ready to proceed.
.
Gabriel M.A.
01-06-2007, 15:56
A member requested that we try a critique session in which we invite a Guest
So the guest is invited by the people in the thread, right? That's a great idea. Let's see how it develops.
Who are then the five participants and who is the guest? Are Frank and Gabriel participating? Hopefully so.
Raid
So the guest is invited by the people in the thread, right? That's a great idea. Let's see how it develops.
Well the guest is invited by way of the "+1 Guest." Anyone can be a guest, they don't need an invite, but if you want to invite someone go ahead! :)
.
Without Frank and Gabriel there are five participants who indicated they want in. Maybe Frank or Gabriel could be the"Guest"?
Raid
I'm afraid I would not be a polite enough critiquer. Some people have the gift of being very nice and saying positive things whereas at times I see no opportunity to do so.
I'd be happy to critique as a guest, if you will accept a very critical eye and a lack of ability to be nice nice.
edit: Thinking about it, it'd be best if I didn't. RFF is a nice place, and it'd be best to stay that way. Any real criticism could be done by PM to save hurt feelings.
Gabriel M.A.
01-06-2007, 20:23
I'm afraid I would not be a polite enough critiquer. Some people have the gift of being very nice and saying positive things whereas at times I see no opportunity to do so.
Good critiques when you only see positive things is also being a bad critiquer.
Being a good critiquer is about giving constructive feedback, no matter whether you see positive or negative things. Disagreement is not impolite. Getting upset about disagreement and pontificating is impolite.
Being nice all the time is not necessarily a positive thing. Always-positive feedback can be counterproductive, as well as passive-agressive silent treatment, while some may think it's "the right thing to do", is many times a very negative, impolite thing.
One can only become good at something while doing it and learning. Some just do the same thing over and over and over and think that's the best thing to do.
I guess I've been invited to join, but I'll skip this one.
Maybe Ray can invite a guest of his choice. This may be better than first come first serve.
Raid
Good critiques when you only see positive things is also being a bad critiquer.
Being a good critiquer is about giving constructive feedback, no matter whether you see positive or negative things. Disagreement is not impolite. Getting upset about disagreement and pontificating is impolite.
Being nice all the time is not necessarily a positive thing. Always-positive feedback can be counterproductive, as well as passive-agressive silent treatment, while some may think it's "the right thing to do", is many times a very negative, impolite thing.
I agree. I run a print exchange and the most useful criticism I have received over the years has also been the most painful. But I learned a lot by taking the criticism seriously. I pretty much gave up landscape photography because of it, but this was because I realised I was probably not ever going to be any good at it with my current working practices. So it was better that I concentrated on what I was good at.
You just have to take criticism on the chin and get on with it. You don't have to agree with it all the time. But there are polite ways of being constructive and I think the current format where you say one positive and one constructive criticism is a good thing. I am thinking of suggesting this format in my own print exchange.
Maybe Ray can invite a guest of his choice. This may be better than first come first serve.
Raid
Raid I sent some invites out. The Guest is optional, so don't wait too long. If no one volunteers the group can go ahead without one.
:)
I'm responding to an invite from Ray. I'd be pleased to be a guest on this one if it's still available. Thanks.
I'm responding to an invite from Ray. I'd be pleased to be a guest on this one if it's still available. Thanks.
Thanks! Let's try this approach and see what will develop here.
Raid
davidbivins
01-07-2007, 10:17
And here is mine:
Here is a photo taken with a 90mm Summicron.
I hope that I have not had it critiqued before in this forum.
Raid
Here is mine taken with a Holga. "Roadworkers' tools".
davidbivins
01-08-2007, 07:47
sirius
The way you've captured the light on this street seems very natural to me. I work in Manhattan and at this time of year the stretch of 5th Avenue near my office blows out with light like this at lunchtime. You create the perception that there's little to be seen outside the stark silhouettes, yet that's not really the case--you leave enough range in the shadows that a deeper look reveals more
detail. I think the flaring is also very appropriate and wonderfully starry.
The street is grabbed by your frame with a little excitement. The angle and harsh lighting brace me for something more than I ultimately find. While so much of the photo is worth a deeper look, I feel that a piece is missing. Perhaps being closer or further away from the people would have created a different
relationship or geometric idea that would have made this image more complete. Is there a story? A statement? Simply a pleasure-inducing formality? Not quite. It's very close.
I must say that this image gave me a lot to feel and think about. I just wanted a little more.
Thanks for showing it!
David.
davidbivins
01-08-2007, 07:50
raid:
Every time I look at this photo I see it somewhat differently. I think that's a good thing.
My first reaction was slight annoyance. Here's a sparsely populated scene, an empty bar with surveillance cameras... "why cut off the bottom of the building and kill our frame of reference?" I thought.
But wait. I closed it and looked again later, seeing a very graphic presentation. Now the things in the photograph were free to be shapes and work abstractly. Everything from the unlit neon sign to the "peeling" awning, the man on the beach to the cameras became objects on the tabletop of the photographer's eye. The wide areas of flat tone started to make a lot of sense at this point. I wouldn't want any more detail in the sky for example.
I would want to spend more time looking at your work to see how this fits or doesn't fit.
I think this photo offers a puzzle that's fun to play with. I think it would be much
stronger presented with images in a similar vein. That's not really the point of this thread, but if you had this between two other photos of equal abstraction, it could be quite exhilirating.
Thanks for showing it!
David.
davidbivins
01-08-2007, 07:55
Mark:
Your Holga seems to behave very well. The focus aberrations are pleasant and this isn't a subject that would gain anything from the effects of light leaks.
This photograph is pleasing. Your choice of film and exposure (such control as you have with a Holga) makes for a meaty image, crispy sharp in the middle and velvety smooth around it. The tools are a quick pun on legs and feet. Sticking with the pun, one of them might trip over the hose or cable.
I have a love/hate relationship with punny photographs like this. Full disclosure: I take them myself all the time. They're fun to take, even better when they turn out well, amuse my friends, and generally don't have much meaning or interest beyond the pun itself. So my constructive criticism is probably as much me talking to myself as it is to you.
I take away two distinct feelings after viewing this that aren't necessarily what you want to viewer to feel: first, the photograph is well-executed from a technical perspective, and second, the tools look like they're walking up the stairs. If that's all you were after, I think you got it. If you wanted minds to linger on the photo longer and let the technical expertise be transparent in favor of a deeper narrative or relationship with the subject, this composition, or perhaps subject, may not have been the best choice.
Either way, you've gotten me interested in viewing your other work, and spreading awareness of your work is never a bad thing.
davidbivins
01-08-2007, 08:04
Dave:
Beautiful exposure and choice of film and speed: the grain has a soft texture that suits the boy's face and helps the surrounding details dissolve pleasantly.
Your choice of a triptych works well because the repetition of the background helps it disappear so that it's all about the child's face. By the time we get to the third face, the ever-growing blob in the lower-right corner of the frame is irrelevant. The triptych format also allows us to say the boy's face is "animated," something more implied if we only look at one frame.
The caption interests me because it suggests that this boy has been caught in some sort of act, probably harmless. But what is it? What mischevious fun did he get into? Or is it just his self-consciousness at being "caught" by the photographer? The triptych format suggests a linear narrative, a sequence in time, but I'm not sure what's happened. You've demonstrated a gift for capturing the boy's nature; both the second and third photos could work well on their own in this way. I would bet this his adult face will still carry these expressions in its repertoire.
Coincidentally, he looks remarkably like a child version of one of my art directors.
In short: Really nicely done, though I wish I could see better what the story is.
Thanks!
David.
My comments. I'm new to this forum so I hope I don't upset anyone :o
Sirius:
I like the dynamics of the image. Strong leading lines and dramatic contrast. On the other hand the strength of the contrast can also be interpreted as a weakness. The viewer would like to see what is going on in the shadows, but there is no way you can see. For example, it looks like the man is looking back at something, but it is pitch black so we can't see it. Also with the sun's rays it is difficult to make out what the tower is in the background. It seems to be of a strange architectural design. On the other hand this all lends to the mystery of the image.
David:
I really like this a lot. Beautiful lighting and atmosphere. A very nice portrait. Minor criticism might be the pose of the hands. It almost looks like he is pulling a face. The hands somehow do not look very natural to me. Slightly uncomfortable maybe.
Raid:
A nice abstract shot. At least initially I see this as an abstract composition of shapes. It is nicely balanced then by noticing the figure on the far left in the distance. It also helps that the sky was fairly clear and it has been darkened perhaps by a filter. Perhaps an alternative version might include a little more of the beach itself in the foreground.
AusDLK:
A nice triptych. You really get a sense of a happy go lucky kid just daydreaming or watching the world going by. And then the last shot where he has noticed the photographer gives it a nice sense of 'closure' moving from candid shot to awareness. Only criticism might be the slightly distracting grey in the bottom right corner of the 2nd and 3rd shots.
sirius - an excellent street alley shot in bright sunlight, with the sun just above the gap of the two buildings. I like the exposure, and how the sun rays show well, while still preserving some shadow detail in the buildings and the texture of the cobblestones. I would try straightening it slightly. Even if it is straight, something appears tilted right just a small bit. very nice.
davidbivins - the offset symmetry makes this interesting, along with the lighting, and expression and gestures made by the subject. I like the clean background and grainy texture. The photo is sharp and highlights his face and forehead, making an excellent portrait. The one imperfection I see in this print or scan is the texture of the grain to the upper right seems a little swirly/painty, where throughout the rest of the background it is relatively consistent. excellent.
mrtoml - sharp b&w photo of tools, possibly being cleaned after use. The tools are interesting, but the framing leaves my eyes searching for more context, as to the location, or the workers. Perhaps less cropping, or wider field of view encompassing the whole set of steps would tell a bigger story. The wet cement being very sharp, along with the tools, does however give a sense of the hardness and messiness of the work these tools make. very nice.
Dave - This is a nice series of 3 photos likely taken in rapid succession. I like the 3rd one the best with the boy smiling and looking at the camera. There is not enough detail in the frame for me to immediately recognize if this is a train or bus, and the bottom portion (seat?) with the reflection to the right is slightly distracting to my eye. They might work well as square photos with the bottom of the seat cropped. All 3 are great photos, my favorites in order are the 3rd, 2nd, then first. Excellent.
Raid - this is a very sharp photo of a building on the beach. The window on the building with lights and security camera seem less interesting than the background with people walking on the beach, but the sun shade on the building is interesting. The photo is tilted to the left very slightly and there may be a small negative scratch on the far right, but the texture of the grain and the subject of the sky with clouds works well. I wonder how this would work with an extra inch of sand at the bottom? Very nice photo.
Sirius: I have some initial comments on your posted image:
1. Composition: I find it very interesting and dynamic to see the man going sideways across the street while two women are going up and down the street. The vertical composition allowed you to capture the sun rays as they illuminate the scene.
2. Exposure: Your chosen exposure gives the street paving a perfect exposure while it covers the individuals in semi-darkness. I wonder howthe photo wouldlike if you had increased exposure by 1-2 f-stops. The people would be more illuminated while the sun burst would be more exteremein its intensity. There isno guarantee that it would be any "better". Right now, the shadows of the people show very well, whereas with added exposure the shadows may diminish in strength.
3. Tilt: The image is slightly tilted. Was this a part of the composition or a side effect?
I may return to this image later on.
Raid
David: I have some comments on your image:
1. Composition: You chose a horizontal composition that seems to work very well with the open space on the right. The man does not look at the camera but at someone else on the right. Sometimes I think he is looking at me. There is a graphics component here; his two hands seem to hold his head like a support for a statue. How would the imahe have looked like if taken from the frontin a vertical composition?
2. Exosure: The exposure is very well chosen here,with excellent choice of light for the face of the man. The man is mostly in the dark except for his face and two hands which emphasizes these two parts.
3. Message: Is the man laughing with the photographer?
Raid
mrtoml: I see the following in your image:
1. Composition: A stork/man is walking up the stairs and its two legs are shown! The background is a little distracting though. Still, you have chosen a very interesting composition here. A different composition would be to have taken the photo from a different angle, shooting more up the stairs.
2. The waiter hose: Will the stork/man stumble and fall? I like the way the water hose is laying on the ground. It adds to the graphical nature of this image.
3. Exposure seems to be well chosen.
Raid
Dave: I like the choice of the three images. There is life in the set ofphotos, as if I know the little boy somehow. The chosen exposure is really nice,with light hitting the boy's face as if there is a beam of light illuminating the boy. Yes, there is a white ghost showing up in the last two images, but the effect is minimal. I would have preferred not to have these white areas. Was this a bus theme? Nice idea in action.
Raid
Thanks for your comments everyone. Sorry, I was a little slow in responding here.
- - -
David:
The picture looks well exposed to me. The forms are defined and well-rounded in space. The tones are silky.
I don't really know what is intended by the photo. He appears to be massaging his jaw, but I'm not sure what is interesting about this. Maybe there is a story there that I am missing.
- - -
Raid:
It appears to be a photo exploring abstraction. Large shapes are defined with small quirky details. I like the shapes. The tones are velvety in the photo and I can sense the strong colour and bright light, even though the photo is monotone.
Is that a negative scratch on the right? What are your feelings about retouching that?
The picture feels a little unbalanced in the composition. In painting class my abstract teacher would talk about creating a "push-pull" in how you portion out your shapes to make the surface more dynamic. The building is very heavy in the left-hand side and is not counter-balanced enough by the composition. Though I'm not suggesting that you crop this photo, I have attached crop below that seems more balanced from the perspective I'm discussing here. I hope you don't mind and that this is a useful exercise.
- - -
mrtoml:
I like this photo. It is fun and anamorphic. The roughness of the lens just adds character here.
I'm not sure what to suggest. Perhaps if you waited for someone's foot to come into the frame as the walk down or up the stairs there might have been an interesting contrast set-up.
- - -
AusDLK:
In a way this is the most appealing of the photos to me because of the gesture and expression---kids are great. I love sequencing and story-telling. I can feel the emotion of that gaze and remember being "busted" myself.
Somehow I wish there was a little more information about the environment. Were the pictures cropped?
If these photos were meant to be viewed on the screen like this, I think the font you chose is hard to read at that size. Small points, nice series.
- - -
David:
I made my comments and then went back and read everyone else's.
David, if your subject is massaging his jaw from laughing---as Raid observed---it would explain the photo to me more. Still the lighting seems very moody for a jocular moment.
I hope this is helpful.
raid:
Every time I look at this photo I see it somewhat differently. I think that's a good thing.
My first reaction was slight annoyance. Here's a sparsely populated scene, an empty bar with surveillance cameras... "why cut off the bottom of the building and kill our frame of reference?" I thought.
But wait. I closed it and looked again later, seeing a very graphic presentation. Now the things in the photograph were free to be shapes and work abstractly. Everything from the unlit neon sign to the "peeling" awning, the man on the beach to the cameras became objects on the tabletop of the photographer's eye. The wide areas of flat tone started to make a lot of sense at this point. I wouldn't want any more detail in the sky for example.
I would want to spend more time looking at your work to see how this fits or doesn't fit.
I think this photo offers a puzzle that's fun to play with. I think it would be much
stronger presented with images in a similar vein. That's not really the point of this thread, but if you had this between two other photos of equal abstraction, it could be quite exhilirating.
Thanks for showing it!
David.
__________________
Raid:
A nice abstract shot. At least initially I see this as an abstract composition of shapes. It is nicely balanced then by noticing the figure on the far left in the distance. It also helps that the sky was fairly clear and it has been darkened perhaps by a filter. Perhaps an alternative version might include a little more of the beach itself in the foreground.
__________________
Mark Tomlinson
It appears to be a photo exploring abstraction. Large shapes are defined with small quirky details. I like the shapes. The tones are velvety in the photo and I can sense the strong colour and bright light, even though the photo is monotone.
Is that a negative scratch on the right? What are your feelings about retouching that?
The picture feels a little unbalanced in the composition. In painting class my abstract teacher would talk about creating a "push-pull" in how you portion out your shapes to make the surface more dynamic. The building is very heavy in the left-hand side and is not counter-balanced enough by the composition. Though I'm not suggesting that you crop this photo, I have attached crop below that seems more balanced from the perspective I'm discussing here. I hope you don't mind and that this is a useful exercise.cise.
Serius
Raid - this is a very sharp photo of a building on the beach. The window on the building with lights and security camera seem less interesting than the background with people walking on the beach, but the sun shade on the building is interesting. The photo is tilted to the left very slightly and there may be a small negative scratch on the far right, but the texture of the grain and the subject of the sky with clouds works well. I wonder how this would work with an extra inch of sand at the bottom? Very nice photo.
Ted (AMPGUY)
=============================================
Thanks for all the comments on my image of the building at the beach. I started out taking beach photos, but then I wanted an abstract image. I had the Summicron lens on a camera, and I was looking for something more interesting than waves and sand. The geometry of the building caught my eyes, and I found the beach as a complementing factor to the building. I deliberately downplayed the role of the beach since I wanted to keep the building be the main factor. I will post the original color slide here. The posted image is a B&W converted image from a color slide.
I don’t mind the suggested cropping. I know that some people take offense that their masterpieces have been altered The image is very sharp, and it was a test of the old 90mm Summicron lens hand-held.
I need to check whether this is a negative scratch or something else, Ted and Serius.
I took this image in color,and when I compose with color film I compose often differently than when using a B&W film. With B&W film it is more important to balance composition since everything is a shade of grey, but with color, sometimes a small part of an image area wise is actually "large" impact wise. For example, I added a small slice of the water, but it is blue and I envision the vastness of the ocean, so the small part of the image is [to my eyes] large. In that sense, I composed the image as balanced to my eyes. Changing the image to B&W, it may have become "corrupted" in the eyes of some people. I am trying out the B&W conversion to see if it is now graphically stronger than before or not. What is your opinion on this point?
I find Ted’s input fair and balanced and definitely a contributing positive factor as a “Guest”,don’t you think so?
Raid
Sorry for the delay in offering my comments.
You'll see them tomorrow.
I guess, we have broken all kind of rules then. I am not supposed to have commented on the comments unless everybody has posted their comments first. I forgot about Dave.
Raid
sirius -- Whoa nelly! I am listening to XM right now... Sorry brain fart. (Think about it.) Your image could be categorized in the "right up my alley" file. I want to like it and at first glance it was rather striking. But as the image was resized on my screen where I would see it in its entirety I was ultimately disappointed. The sun burst affect is quite nice (I'd like to know how to do this consistently) but as a whole the image is less than compelling. I think mainly I find the composition unsettling. The shadows of the pedestrians cry to be complete -- but both are chopped off with the man's more disconcertingly so. Overall the image seems crooked to me -- that is to say that the horizon line seems to be cocked clockwise too far. The person on the far left is distracting and does not add anything to image overall. And the people in the image are neither exactly centered nor qualify for the ubiquitous rule of thirds. In general the composition as presented does not serve the sun burst in the top third of the image that is quite nice. The exposure, contrast, and density as I see it on my screen are excellent. A much tighter crop that cuts most of the shadows, the person on the left, straightens the horizon, and that creates more of a "rule of thirds" composition might save the image. Try it.
davidbivins -- Stunning. Who cares who the man might be? I liked at first glance and as it sits on my screen I see no reason to change my mind. On my screen the there isn't much detail in the shadows of the man's shoulder but I'm sure in a real print or a higher-rez image this isn't an issue. There is a hotspot on the man's forehead that could be softened a tad. This jpg is a little more dense then I would have presented it but that's just a nit-pick. The lightening in the backdrop toward the upper right is a perfect touch. As a portrait for a wall frame this might be just a notch or two beneath a masterpiece.
raid -- This is an engrossing image; technically very nice (with one exception noted below). The image invites a long, deep look. My gut reaction is that as it is presented that overall the image is rather flat -- that is to say I'd be happier with more contrast. The grain works nicely. The composition works but the overhanging awning kind of throws it off. I actually think it would have be a better image without the awning -- but, yes, I also acknowledge that it is the awning that makes the image different. So, clearly I have mixed feelings about your contribution. Other than my suggestion for more contrast, I don't have any other constructive criticism. (For example, I often think that cropping helps an image but not in this case.) This image falls in the category of either you like it or not (obviously you can't do anything about the awning). While I think my calling it engrossing applies in any case, it ultimately leaves me feeling that something just isn't right.
mrtoml -- Needs to gets me a Holga... Except for one (correctable) flaw, I think that your image is wonderful. The sense that we're seeing some stick figure climbing those steps is wonderfully suggested. The upper hoe is a little bit hot in my opinion and could stand some burning. My problem is the chain link background. I find this very distracting. It is not out of focus enough to keep from grabbing my eye and taking me out of the moment. I suggest blurring it and/or burning it almost to black. I suspect the Holga esthetic is to print everything full frame but if you're open to it, I think a slight crop to remove some of the less interesting portion of the steps in the lower right would serve the image significantly. (Is that a dust spot in the center of the hose curl? If so, shame, shame...) All told, I think that you have a winner here and it can only get better with a little bit on work here and there.
>The caption interests me because it suggests that this boy has been caught
>in some sort of act, probably harmless. But what is it?
Perhaps it would have been better to omit the "Busted" text from the image.
What I meant to imply was not that the boy was busted -- but rather I, the photographer, was busted because after several photographs the boy noticed me.
I've read the comments now and have the following to add...
Raid -- I actually like your image better in color.
My series was taken on an Amtrak train but I don't really think it matters whether it was a plane, train, or automobile.
I think that this is the most intelligent, thoughtful, and knowledgeable critique that I have participated in to date. Kudos and thanks to y'all.
I share Dave in his assessment of this thread.
Dave, I also like the color version more.
Raid
Sounds like this was a good critique. Maybe we'll try a couple more Guest threads. Thanks everyone, and thanks Ted!
:)
AusDLK, I like your sense of humor! Thanks for your comments everyone. I found them useful.
Raid, I like the colour one much more too. It seems to be a photo all about the colour: those contrasts between blue and orange, those touches of cream-coloured sand and red beer sign.
A number of people have mentioned straightening my photo. I can't really see that it would improve the photo. Perhaps someone would like to try so that I can see what was on your mind?
I am attaching my photo in colour so you can see how it originally looked. The colour really seems to do nothing for the photo so I played around with it in black and white. You can probably guess by the format that this was a digital photo. I took it with a Ricoh GRD camera, which has a 28mm equivalent lens.
I really liked the drawing of shapes on that street with the harsh light. I under exposed it about two stops and took a number of shots. This was the only one that really connected with a human element.
Lisbon has truly beautiful light. While walking around there I saw three photographers shooting models in the street. I think it may be from the cream coloured stone that they put on the streets. It reflects a lot of light. The sea air maybe has an effect too. Cartier Bresson made many lovely photos in Lisbon.
Thanks to all for the useful comments.
Just to note that originally I didn't actually think about the image as a man walking up the steps. I was surrounded by road workers and just noticed an interesting composition which I had to snap very quickly before the workers grabbed the tools and the moment passed. It was when I developed the roll that I noticed the potential.
I agree with AusDLK about the chain being distracting. I will have a go at blurring it.
Raid: I also preferred your colour image.
Cheers.
davidbivins
01-12-2007, 10:47
Thanks, everyone. I agree that this is a useful discussion and much better than I had hoped for. I learned a lot while composing my responses.
For what it's worth, I took my photo at a party. I had taken a lot of 35mm and SX70 already, so I was pretty transparent to the other people and this shot was not at all posed. I guess the subject (a very, very funny man and artist) was telling a story. The wall behind him was blood red I recall.
I'll have to go back to the negative and see if there was some more detail in the shoulder. I may have let it go to black for more dramatic contrast.
I do agree that it's a bit contextless. I like it and think it works on its own, but seen with a couple others from that evening it might make some more sense--for example, a reaction shot of other people there.
Thank you all for being honest and critical. Compliments are nice, but I can't learn from others without some down-and-dirty critique now and then.
davidbivins
01-12-2007, 10:49
sirius - I don't agree with the others about rotating your image to straighten the horizon. I think that part of the shot works well. Anyway, that's what you meant to do, right? The shot might also work well straight, and had you taken it that way you'd probably want to present it that way.
I also sometimes shoot slightly crooked horizons when I take photos of the ocean, and most times it was my intention to capture just what I saw in the viewfinder. Sometimes the horizon looks crooked but other things are just right, and this can be most important to the photographer. There is no need to make this issue a "must" just as the rule of thirds may be broken or that not all excellent images are tack sharp.
Raid
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.