Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => User Critiques => Topic started by: Saulius on February 27, 2010, 01:34:06 pm
-
Hello to everyone at this forum
I am photo enthusiast. Recently I took a look at my year old archive and found some pictures that i decided to reconsider their "values". Here is one of them.
What i like in it is light/dark, black/white contrast and maybe impression of moon landscape :-). But it is hard to evaluate it by myself. Be honest, should I take it from my dusty archive or put it back there.
Thanks
P.S. Pentax K20D; 31 mm f1.8 + cheap tripod
-
That is funny. I know you all are very busy out there and have no time for writing comments :-) . However, I thought this was a "User Critique" section. Was this that stupid to ask comments, or you don't do it with strangers? Or...
Is it a picture... that bad, below the level of critique?
When you are left without any comment you start thinking "oops, sorry for disturbing you all, please take no offense" .
Anyway, I'd really appreciate any comments on composition, cropping, exposure etc.
Thanks
P.S. Here is another one for your critique, please.
-
... I thought this was a "User Critique" section...
This is also a voluntary critique section... sarcasm and inducing guilt are not going to help much.
-
You are right. Sorry. But what's wrong with my pictures? Silence does mean something. Maybe there are mostly pros (no sarcasm) on this forum an this is no place for the amateur (no sarcasm)?
-
People are busy on the weekend so it might take a bit to get a review. Some images also take longer to figure out. In this case there is something about them that doesn't feel right but I'm not sure what. It might be the harsh lighting. It might be that my eye doesn't have a natural path through the images. Not sure. I do get the moonscape thing. And they seem to improve on multiple/longer viewings. Dunno.
-
... But what's wrong with my pictures? Silence does mean something. Maybe there are mostly pros (no sarcasm) on this forum an this is no place for the amateur (no sarcasm)?
There are plenty of amateurs here. Silence does mean something, though not necessarily that there is something "wrong" with your pictures. Several reasons come to mind:
1. People are busy (though there would be most likely someone having to say something, given enough time)
2. Pictures are "below critique", i.e., so uninteresting or bad that people would rather refrain from saying anything, than being negative (especially when it comes to new members - well established members have enough credibility to withstand an occasional "this image sucks" - just check reactions to MR's own photographs)
3. Pictures do not move enough, i.e., provoke enough reaction, mostly because they are neither here nor there, i.e., neither bad enough, nor good enough to cause people to react by writing a critique.
Now, about your pictures. They just do not move me enough. I see there is an interesting initial concept (contrasting light and dark, man-made vs. nature), but the execution is rather busy and lacks focus (conceptual focus, not sharpness). One way to handle this concept would be to "work the scene", to select, isolate and simplify, perhaps by coming closer. Also, if the Moon is to play any role, I would like to see it is the Moon indeed, rather than an overexposed blob or huge spec of dust, by providing some texture to it (I know, not always easy to achieve in a single shot, but still... in this case a second exposure, for the Moon only, would have helped... or trying to rescue it by highlight recovery function of your raw converter).
-
Thanks for comment.
"It might be the harsh lighting"
Does this harsh light seems overexposed a bit?
-
"Now, about your pictures. They just do not move me enough."
Yes, that is why I put it in to my archive a year ago. But at the same time I felt something I like in it. You confirm my feeling that this is good photo idea but underdeveloped somehow.
My 31 mm lens gives a very good results, but I had a feeling that my kit zoom 18-55 lens is more useful (zoomed out wide).
Thanks
-
Sorry for being so impatient. My apologies to everyone.
Saulius
-
Sorry for being so impatient. My apologies to everyone.
Saulius
no. 2 seems like it might work with a bit of selective burning of the machinery and foreground gravel. the exposure is fine but the large flood lights lighting your foreground illuminate the machinery so evenly harshly that it just isn't tonally interesting. burning might help, but sometimes you just can't overcome bad lighting in post.
-
Saulius, Keep working at it. Slobodan gave it to you straight. I think it's an interesting picture in some ways, but it looks to me like surrealism gone astray. I'm not sure what point you were trying to make with it. Not knowing that, it's pretty hard to criticize. Sometimes, filling out your profile can help because the profile can indicate whether you're a novice or a more advanced practitioner. Reasonable criticism is going to be different for a beginner than for someone who's been at it for a while. There are some pretty fine people on here and some very good photographers. Nobody's going to insult you if they can avoid it, but if you ask for criticism, I'd hope you're going to get the kind of specifics Saulius gave you. Just saying a picture's nice or not doesn't really help much.
-
Thanks, RSL
Of course, saying that picture is or isn't nice doesn't make any sense. And harsh, but reasonable critique is no problem for me. In a past I have been working with video editing in one TV studio. That was a school of hearing the main point deep within "eating you alive" words of the producer. The reason I ask for critique is that I want to somehow move on, advance in my photography skills.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
Saulius
-
I can't give you much help with a user critique but, I will say that the first photo really did make me smile as it certainly does conjure up the feeling that it is a scene from a moon landing.
Cheers John
-
Hi,
This very special light on your pictures reminds me of HMI fresnel light. When I was student in Fine Arts, I worked with these lights, one I took from an air force military base in France and became my main source of lighting during my experiments. If powerfull are very difficult to work with, specially in photography because there are made for cinema and specific purposes.
Well, your pictures reminds me this kind of light source.
I do not know if it was the case, but there is to me a too much powerfull light source, in order to have some details in background you had to overexposed the subject that lacks details. Or you did a "strange" convertion.
As John said, it reminded me a kind of moon landing (HMI fresnel gives very easily this effect).
If you can, try to come back in the same place with a screen between the source and the subject, trying different angles and exposure.
cheers,
Fred.
-
To paraphrase MR, what are your pictures about? To my eye, I see two pieces of machinery in harsh light with a moon in the background. I don't see any compositional elements in use (which isn't necessarily negative, but here they could've been used to hold the viewer's interest IMHO). What point are you trying to get across with these images?
-
First of all he obviously liked it and that what counts the most? Technically it isn't perfect but no image is? As to what he is trying to get across to the viewer .... I don't see how he could answer that question. The image is as seen and you take out of it what you see? If he sees something different from you then so be it. You either like it or not or like it with some reservations? From my experience of camera clubs is the worst thing you can do is try and present an image that you think that others might like but you are lukewarm about it.
This link explains a lot imo despite the commercial aspect of the blurb.
http://www.bythom.com/ (http://www.bythom.com/)
Walking in snow 2
Quote
Third, it only matters if you like it or not.
Unquote.
Having said all that if you post an image then you have to expect feedback, negative and positive.
-
Saulius,
my thoughts about the first one: The machinery in itself and also in this light is interesting. But the framing contradicts that, it does not appreciate the structure, instead it begins to focus onto something smaller and less important in the background, a bit like a judgement. Not interesting enough to appreciate it fully, it says to me, and so my attention drops. Maybe putting the machine full in the center, with the moon over it would have worked better. But probably you had good reasons to omit the left.
Christian
-
"If powerful are very difficult to work with, specially in photography"
About the light. Yes it was very powerful light. Three lamps light the hugged area. You could see every distant details of the machines out there. I deleted many overexposed shots and the contrast sometimes was unmanageable for photographer of my level. Though I did my best to calculate exposure right. As amateur, I found this harsh light and contrast made by it interesting, but maybe this is too much.
-
"What point are you trying to get across with these images?"
[/quote]
I was trying to picture unusual machinery in unusual conditions - night time under unusual light. Sleeping technical monster on a moon like landscape. But I agree, that composition is weak. I also played a bit with abilities of my 31 mm lens to picture every multiple details. So, this is night shot with unusual light and very clear sight. I thin a 'paradox' was what took my attention.
-
"Having said all that if you post an image then you have to expect feedback, negative and positive."
I appreciate negative critique. This is the only way you can grow as a photographer. Thanks
-
Just for another option I add color version of these images. The light was reduced, not that aggressive, and color balance I hit as hard as I can. Does it looks better?
-
Just for another option I add color version of these images. The light was reduced, not that aggressive, and color balance I hit as hard as I can. Does it looks better?
-
Just for another option I add color version of these images. The light was reduced, not that aggressive, and color balance I hit as hard as I can. Does it looks better?
The angled version appeals to me. The contrast between the colours are good. I think that you done a good job here. Normally it is the B&W that gives the pleasing contrast but this time it is the other way around? It seems that the feedback was worthwhile!
-
As photos they are ok, but nothing that grabs you, but, they are quite good for making look like a model
[attachment=20618:31_mm_test_41_copy.jpg]