Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => User Critiques => Topic started by: stamper on June 20, 2015, 05:44:09 am
-
You are never alone?
-
I like it, and fitting title too. So immersed in their respective books! A minor nit: the bike's logo (Raleigh) keeps attracting my eye away from the faces.
-
Nicely seen and done. All the elements came together to make this.
However, I'd like to see either more of the guy (especially the end of his nose :D ) on the right or not at all.
Kerry
-
I'm afraid there isn't more of the guy. That was the widest I could frame it. As it is I feel it I feel there is an enigmatic feel to the guy because he appears to be cut off. However I understand the reservations about it and thought twice about posting because of it.
-
Do you think the composition would improve if you cropped the guy out? The pillar/wall that she is leaning against would make a good frame.
This photograph brings up a concern I have that I would appreciate some advice on.
It is well known that if you include any writing in a photograph, the viewer's eye will be drawn to it. This can work for and against the artist. In this photograph, the title of the book brings the eye to the main subject of the photograph, however, the writing on the bicycle draws the eye away.
Would it be a good idea to intentionally blur, or even remove, the writing on the bicycle since it does not add anything to the composition and can actually be a distraction.
My issue is that I have a personal philosophy about such street photography -- don't alter the image. What is in the scene is in the photograph. I tend to only use PP to improve the image, not alter it.
But is that always a good rule? Dunno
Wadda ya guys think?
-
Wadda ya guys think?
The image would've been much more successful had the left third not been included - which would mean that more of the figure (and his face was ...as was commented on) on the right could have been included. The left third of the frame including the bicycle...is not interesting/non-important as it does nothing to support the strongest element(s) in the frame which is the two readers separated by the column base...it only distracts and takes away.
-
Do you think the composition would improve if you cropped the guy out? The pillar/wall that she is leaning against would make a good frame.
This photograph brings up a concern I have that I would appreciate some advice on.
It is well known that if you include any writing in a photograph, the viewer's eye will be drawn to it. This can work for and against the artist. In this photograph, the title of the book brings the eye to the main subject of the photograph, however, the writing on the bicycle draws the eye away.
Would it be a good idea to intentionally blur, or even remove, the writing on the bicycle since it does not add anything to the composition and can actually be a distraction.
My issue is that I have a personal philosophy about such street photography -- don't alter the image. What is in the scene is in the photograph. I tend to only use PP to improve the image, not alter it.
But is that always a good rule? Dunno
Wadda ya guys think?
Does that mean shop signs, bill hoardings, writing on buses etc etc would have to be blurred? Blurring the book and the bike would have looked odd imo. I took what was there and didn't consider blurring the writing and I don't look for perfection in an image.
-
The image would've been much more successful had the left third not been included - which would mean that more of the figure (and his face was ...as was commented on) on the right could have been included. The left third of the frame including the bicycle...is not interesting/non-important as it does nothing to support the strongest element(s) in the frame which is the two readers separated by the column base...it only distracts and takes away.
My vision of the image was the girl lying out beside the bike giving the impression that she was resting after dismounting from the bike. I don't know if it was hers. I thought about cropping the right hand side and leaving the girl on her own but decided the guy "helped" the composition. What you are suggesting is a different vision from what I saw. I think you should possibly state that you either like or don't like what is presented rather than suggesting something else. Because you wasn't there you don't know if there was anything interesting. :)
-
I thought about cropping the right hand side and leaving the girl on her own but decided the guy "helped" the composition. What you are suggesting is a different vision from what I saw.
I think I would have preferred the image without the guy on the right. In my opinion there's too little of him to help the composition and I find his face so close to the border distracting.
I think the B&W conversion is "spot on"
-
Orig poster. The forum you posted in, Michael Reichmann has designated... "User Critiques: A place for reasoned and civilized discussion about user submitted photographs". If it's difficult for you to get a critique/criticism of your work and your vision (and for some it is more than others) - perhaps you might consider posting in another forum? If you post images in this forum - they well get critiqued and there will be a world of different opinions and/or criticisms expressed in the myriad of different critiques...unfortunately there is now way around it. C'est la vie...
-
+1
Nicely seen and done. All the elements came together to make this.
However, I'd like to see either more of the guy (especially the end of his nose :D ) on the right or not at all.
Kerry
-
Orig poster. The forum you posted in, Michael Reichmann has designated... "User Critiques: A place for reasoned and civilized discussion about user submitted photographs". If it's difficult for you to get a critique/criticism of your work and your vision (and for some it is more than others) - perhaps you might consider posting in another forum? If you post images in this forum - they well get critiqued and there will be a world of different opinions and/or criticisms expressed in the myriad of different critiques...unfortunately there is now way around it. C'est la vie...
I have no problem with it being criticized. The problem arises when someone substitutes their " vision " for the one that is being presented. In other words stating that the poster's vision is wrong and theirs is correct. You thought that when I captured the image I should have captured more of what was on the right and less of what was on the left. I pointed out that there wasn't any thing on the right that was worthwhile including on the right. Personally I don't think - I have seen a lot of your comments - that you don't know much about critiquing and you generally only want to " show off " your photographic knowledge. :( BTW I had a look at your website. The first few images of the Hudson look underexposed imo. Nice compositions but you could improve them by increasing the exposure which would make them a little better looking.
-
Thanks to all the others for their feedback.
-
Otto Phocus,
...I have a personal philosophy about such street photography -- don't alter the image. What is in the scene is in the photograph. I tend to only use PP to improve the image, not alter it.
Wadda ya guys think?
To post-process is to alter.
-
Cropping (gasp!) might offer a compromise between the desire to keep "the impression that she was resting after dismounting from the bike" and suggestions to exclude distracting elements. A square crop offers that compromise and allows for a tighter composition at the same time. Just a suggestion.
-
Slobodan's crop solves the "Raleigh" problem, but I still am bothered by the guy's nose being cut off.
One way to fix that, and make it seem intentional, might be to crop a little more off the left side, so that part of her foot is missing to match the missing nose. ???
-
... I still am bothered by the guy's nose being cut off...
To spite his face?
-
To spite his face?
I was thinking maybe the guy was Pinocchio and would have required an ultra-wide lens to get it all in. ;)
-
I think Slobodan solved the composition problem, but I agree with Eric that the missing nose end is a problem. A few minutes with Photoshop could solve the problem, but I'd be against that kid of solution on principle.