Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => User Critiques => Topic started by: seamus finn on January 01, 2014, 12:46:12 pm
-
This piece of sculpture is entitled 'Waiting on Shore'. It represents all the women down the ages who waited in vain on shore for their sea-going loved ones to return home safely. It's located at Rosses Point, Sligo and is more or less straight out of the camera on an amazing evening of light there.
-
Simple, beautiful and evocative.
-
Another winner, Seamus. Again, bravo!
-
What they said!
Rob C
-
Simple, beautiful and evocative.
[/quote
My thoughts too.
-
Very nice.
Well done !
-
What everybody else said.
Really nice.
-
All been said. Congrats!
Mike.
-
Perfect ---~! For fun "move " the sun between her hands :-)
-
As usual, I'll dissent.
I find the image too "pretty," too postcard-ish, too orange-y blue-y, to convey the longing, loneliness, possibly tragedy, implied in the monument. I would probably go for a different treatment: possibly gritty b&w, or bleached color? Something that creates the same sense of uneasiness I feel when I think of the concept embodied in the monument. I hope you do not mind the lone dissenting voice, Seamus?
-
Lovely sunset, nice composition, but I agree with Slobodan (!) that a less happy sky would fit better.
-
Nice image...but one thing that is a little bothersome to me is that there is not enough of that "wedge of black" at bottom right of frame...it is almost like the figure is standing on the bottom edge of the picture plane. I think a fraction more of that and a little less off the top...would suit the image. /B
-
As usual, I'll dissent.
I find the image too "pretty," too postcard-ish, too orange-y blue-y, to convey the longing, loneliness, possibly tragedy, implied in the monument. I would probably go for a different treatment: possibly gritty b&w, or bleached color? Something that creates the same sense of uneasiness I feel when I think of the concept embodied in the monument. I hope you do not mind the lone dissenting voice, Seamus?
Not in the slightest,Slobodan.
-
I like number two; thanks for showing it.
-
They're both very fine pictures but they're very different pictures. I find the color version more moving than the B&W. I'm not quite sure why, but it has something to do with the fact that though the sun is sinking, the beautiful sky tells us there's still a modicum of hope left. In the B&W all hope is lost. The B&W reminds me of a haiku I wrote many years ago:
Her needle pauses,
Eyes searching the empty sea.
A wind is rising.
-
As usual, I'll dissent.
I find the image too "pretty," too postcard-ish, too orange-y blue-y, to convey the longing, loneliness, possibly tragedy, implied in the monument. I would probably go for a different treatment: possibly gritty b&w, or bleached color? Something that creates the same sense of uneasiness I feel when I think of the concept embodied in the monument. I hope you do not mind the lone dissenting voice, Seamus?
I can see this point of view, but for me, the sunset is more evocative of drama than of generic prettiness, so I think it works well for the context. If anything, the setting sun is a metaphor for the onset of darkness, no?
Brian
-
If anything, the setting sun is a metaphor for the onset of darkness, no?
Yes. In the colour version, with the setting sun at her feet and the heavens lit up as they are, there is hope, but once that light dies, as it soon will, all hope dies with it and the new dawn will bring only despair.
-
This is one of the best images -imo - seen on the site for a long time. Colour is the winner. There is more emotion in the colour version than the B&W. Definitely no nit picks from me. I don't believe an image should be perfect. :)
-
It may seem quite strange for me to say this ..... but in this instance it is the colour and not the B&W that holds the magic.
-
It may seem quite strange for me to say this .....
Yes, it does, Walter. But it shows that you're not unreasonably biased.
-
Nice image...but one thing that is a little bothersome to me is that there is not enough of that "wedge of black" at bottom right of frame...it is almost like the figure is standing on the bottom edge of the picture plane. I think a fraction more of that and a little less off the top...would suit the image. /B
It seems to me that including more silhouetted black horizon worked in the B&W. However, in the color version brandtb had his finger on the problem, but not the solution there. If the horizon, and not the sculpture, were less black in the color version they would not tend to be seen as one thing, which they aren't. Or, to use fewer negatives, separate the sculpture from the horizon somehow.
-
... once that light dies, as it soon will, all hope dies with it and the new dawn will bring only despair.
Not all hope is lost... there is always moonlight ;)
-
Not all hope is lost... there is always moonlight ;)
Beautiful shot, Slobodan.
Rob C
-
In the spirit of standard LuLa criticism, Slobodan, let me point out that it would have been better if you'd gotten the moon on the tip of that trident.
-
I found myself thinking "Wow, that's OOC?? I'm jealous, I mean, uh, I gotta get out more."
-
In the spirit of standard LuLa criticism, Slobodan, let me point out that it would have been better if you'd gotten the moon on the tip of that trident.
The moon close to the wreath, as is, is good. The trident would have its point, but under her left toe ... She could dance.
-
Good point Bruce. Next time see about that, Slobodan.
-
[quoteIt seems to me that including more silhouetted black horizon worked in the B&W. However, in the color version brandtb had his finger on the problem, but not the solution there. If the horizon, and not the sculpture, were less black in the color version they would not tend to be seen as one thing, which they aren't. Or, to use fewer negatives, separate the sculpture from the horizon somehow.][/quote]
OK, forget about the moonlight.
Let's give her something to stand on. The ground and sculpture are pure black - nothing to be done. Take it or leave it,
-
NO! Now it looks as if she's waiting for her husband to come back from the city.
Damn! Leave it alone, Seamus. The first post was excellent. It's been going downhill with each iteration.
-
OK Russ,
Point taken.
-
Didn't mean to make trouble. It's the mind's eye that matters anyhow. Mine should have known better.
-
The second color post is a different shot and different framing...apples and oranges.
-
Yes - a different shot, about two seconds apart. It's all about the light in the end. And I'm done with nit-pickers, if you'll pardon the expression.
-
To OP...you posted your image in "User's Critques: A place for reasoned and civilized discussion about user submitted photographs". If you don't want any comments/critiques/otherwise which is what Michael Reichmann set this particular forum up for , perhaps it should have been posted in one of the other forums...such as "Landscape & Nature Photography"? A thought.
-
To OP...you posted your image in "User's Critques: A place for reasoned and civilized discussion about user submitted photographs". If you don't want any comments/critiques/otherwise which is what Michael Reichmann set this particular forum up for , perhaps it should have been posted in one of the other forums...such as "Landscape & Nature Photography"? A thought.
I appreciate that thought and if I have offended you in any way, I apologise.
Over the years, I've discovered that more often than not, the first shot is the best shot. After that it's all technical.
-
Everybody considers himself a genius post-processor, but damned few are competent photographers. You can second-guess any photograph you see. I can nit-pick HCB's and Ansel's stuff too, but that kind of nit-picking hasn't anything to do with reality. As Seamus says, almost always the first shot -- the view that made you lift the camera -- is the right one. What's more, there are very few situations where a picture contains enough information about what might be beyond the frame to warrant a recommendation for a change of point of view. Sometimes a suggestion about post-processing actually can improve a picture, but even then, on LuLa you're basing your suggestion on a small, compressed JPEG. Most people haven't a clue whether or not or how post-processing can improve a picture. Slobodan's one of the few who has a clue (though we often disagree), and there are a couple others here who understand enough to make a reasonable, if not always correct recommendation. But most of what passes for constructive criticism here is, in fact, nit-picking.
-
A couple of thought on the previous post. Again, the forum is called "User Critiques: A place for reasoned and civilized discussion about user submitted photographs". From the title one can gather that it is not per se limited to what you call "post-processing" (whatever that may be to you). Surely you know a critique can be a myriad of things - from content, the composition/framing of content, the exposure, focus etc. etc. ad infinitum (unfortunately the first two are often times the ones that are left least considered sadly).
Does this really make sense? there are very few situations where a picture contains enough information about what might be beyond the frame to warrant a recommendation for a change of point of view
I'm not so sure. In the instance of the originally posted image - a good example. My feeling was that based on the what was posted that it needed more landscape, and sure enough there was another similar image that wasn't framed so tight. But what if that wasn't the case. If I or anyone else sees an image put up for critique, they can make any sort of recommendation they feel appropriate based on that image - does it matter that it would have been virtually impossible to do differently? Hardly. What would that matter anyway...we don't make critiques about only what was possible sic...but only in what is presented. /B
-
If I or anyone else sees an image put up for critique, they can make any sort of recommendation they feel appropriate based on that image
Yes, and often they do, resulting in some of the most asinine comments you'll ever in this life see.