Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => User Critiques => Topic started by: Tony Jay on March 24, 2015, 09:12:16 pm
-
Found this old Ford Fairlane wrecked and burnt out on the Mary River floodplain.
Please tell me what you think.
-
wonderful shot...not 100% with the processing on this...little too hot the lower left area...but really great scene
-
Great capture! I agree with brandtb about the lower left, but it doesn't detract from this great photo.
-
Yes, great shot. Out of curiosity, I'd love to see a colour version.
-
Cracking shot and I wouldn't change anything. Processing fine. I just wonder if some people are deliberately looking for faults in corners? :-X
-
We recognize wrecked cars immediately. Next-time it might be interesting to try and hide the outline using tree trunks and shadows.
Who are We?
-
First, I like this shot and the subject is very cool. Since it is in User Critiques though, IMHO, I agree with Brandt, and further, I would crop in from the lower left corner keeping the same aspect ratio. There is nothing of interest in that portion of the frame to my eye and I seem to like a symmetrical crop relative to the front bumper. I'd even consider going to a ~1x2 AR to keep it really tight. Also, the tones in the car blend too much into the background and thus it doesn't "come forward" to my eye. This might be one of those shots where a color or split toning process could really pop that car, FWIW. Of course, in the end, it's personal choice. For me, this is a subject that would be worth exploring from a number of vantage points, somewhat along the lines that Isaac mentions. Hope this is helpful.
-
First, I like this shot and the subject is very cool. Since it is in User Critiques though, IMHO, I agree with Brandt, and further, I would crop in from the lower left corner keeping the same aspect ratio. There is nothing of interest in that portion of the frame to my eye and I seem to like a symmetrical crop relative to the front bumper. I'd even consider going to a ~1x2 AR to keep it really tight. Also, the tones in the car blend too much into the background and thus it doesn't "come forward" to my eye. This might be one of those shots where a color or split toning process could really pop that car, FWIW. Of course, in the end, it's personal choice. For me, this is a subject that would be worth exploring from a number of vantage points, somewhat along the lines that Isaac mentions. Hope this is helpful.
Hi David - very interesting critique.
I will look at different crops and I also think that your comments about split toning might be useful to explore.
As for different vantage points I definitely took a lot of images that day from a lot of different perspectives.
However, it was my boots on the ground that day, and I can tell you that with a cloudless sky and unbelievably strong mid-afternoon tropical sunshine and the thickness of the tropical monsoon forest surrounding this vehicle certain perspectives did not make for a worthwhile shot.
Nonetheless, on reflection I think I could have got a lot lower than I actually did.
At the end of the day this particular image appeared, to me at least, to be the best of the lot.
Nonetheless, I want exactly this kind of critique - honest and direct - that people are so kindly giving because it makes me consider aspects that I probably would not think of left to my own devices.
Tony Jay
-
First, I like this shot and the subject is very cool. Since it is in User Critiques though, IMHO, I agree with Brandt, and further, I would crop in from the lower left corner keeping the same aspect ratio. There is nothing of interest in that portion of the frame to my eye and I seem to like a symmetrical crop relative to the front bumper. I'd even consider going to a ~1x2 AR to keep it really tight. Also, the tones in the car blend too much into the background and thus it doesn't "come forward" to my eye. This might be one of those shots where a color or split toning process could really pop that car, FWIW. Of course, in the end, it's personal choice. For me, this is a subject that would be worth exploring from a number of vantage points, somewhat along the lines that Isaac mentions. Hope this is helpful.
Tony I apologise for appearing to hijack your thread but I feel that a line between critique and "imposing a view" has been crossed? You presented an image for critique but it seems that one or two members are suggesting that a different image should have been posted that is radically different from your vision as shot and presented? :'(
-
great photo, great processing, nice moody picture
-
Hi David - very interesting critique.
I will look at different crops and I also think that your comments about split toning might be useful to explore.
As for different vantage points I definitely took a lot of images that day from a lot of different perspectives.
However, it was my boots on the ground that day, and I can tell you that with a cloudless sky and unbelievably strong mid-afternoon tropical sunshine and the thickness of the tropical monsoon forest surrounding this vehicle certain perspectives did not make for a worthwhile shot.
Nonetheless, on reflection I think I could have got a lot lower than I actually did.
At the end of the day this particular image appeared, to me at least, to be the best of the lot.
Nonetheless, I want exactly this kind of critique - honest and direct - that people are so kindly giving because it makes me consider aspects that I probably would not think of left to my own devices.
Tony Jay
Tony when you shot the image of the old wreck did it enter your mind to shoot it in a way that others might shoot the image or did you decide to use your brain and experience - you are obviously an experienced photographer - to frame the shot? Personally I never try to think what others would do mainly because I am trying to capture my "vision" and not anyone else's "vision". I am not advocating that improvements and advice aren't needed but at the end of the day it is your image and the way you portray it gives you the greatest satisfaction and pleasure. If later someone decides they don't like it is their prerogative but suggestions that include radical changes as to how you should/shouldn't have done are dubious, especially if someone whose output isn't the best or non existent? You can't please all of the people all of the time and it is imo futile to try?
-
We recognize wrecked cars immediately. Next-time it might be interesting to try and hide the outline using tree trunks and shadows.
If there aren't any other tree trunks around then how do you accomplish this? I am sure if there had been and they obscured the wreck - the focal point - then there would have been criticism about not seeing the wreck clearly. At the end of the day you capture what is there and not what is in your imagination?
-
Ah yes, the croppers are at it again. I agree with Stamper. It's your shot, Tony, not someone else's shot. The aspect ratio is 2 x 3, which is standard 35mm stuff, but that doesn't tell me whether or not the frame has been cropped. If so, I'd wonder why, since it's shown at the aspect ratio of the camera, why not frame it on the camera -- HCB style -- and leave it alone. I have a feeling that's what you did.
I like it very much. Used to do a lot of this kind of thing myself, and I still can't pass up an old, rusted, abandoned vehicle.
-
I think the processing is quite good with that harsh light (or maybe you chose this postprocessing because of the harsh light). If it happens to be close to you a repeat visit in a different moment of the day might be worth it.
-
In my defense, Tony wanted a critique, and I gave him my opinion with intent to help make the image better, but I also think I was clear that it was only my opinion and was not necessarily his, even though I did not state it explicitly. Same for cropping: I don't have the same sensitivities as Russ, nor the same background obviously in street. Cropping in camera or in post, to me, depends on the image. Sometimes I find that if I am too connected to the subject through the viewfinder rather than looking in the VF, my in camera composition comes up short and it is only in post that I can assemble enough objectivity to define my vision better by cropping, YMMV. Your idea, Tony, of coming in lower (and perhaps tighter to accommodate what I was trying to get at) would work well, I think. As for the other comments (all reasonable BTW in my view), I cannot know what is in the mind of the photographer; I can only react to what I see. If an image is in User Critiques, I assume helpful criticism is being sought; that's why I post here. Stamper, obviously you didn't care for my critique or my ideas; both are different BTW, but I find it curious this unspoken rule about "don't mess with the photog's vision" (to paraphrase); why else post in User Critiques? We all get stymied by an image and profit from others' analyses at times. I may be inferring this, so forgive me if I have misunderstood your comments. I also do not post my best or most satisfying (to me) images here in UC, only the ones I truly want feedback on; if I am happy with it and I want to post it, I will put it elsewhere. Tony did not ask for specific advice about cropping or tonality or perspective, he asked what I thought. So I gave him what I could, just as you do so often and helpfully.
Perhaps there is another forum, thread, or discussion regarding whether it absolutely positively has to be gotten right in camera or not. Not trying to put words in anyone's mouth and did not mean to turn attention away from Tony's OP.
-
... I just wonder if some people are deliberately looking for faults in corners? :-X
Do not limit me to corners, Stamper, I look for faults everywhere ;)
For instance, I find faults in your criticism of our critiques.
Speaking about corners, I do have one in mind in particular: the lower left, and not just for reasons Brandt mentioned. There is a bright twig there, standing almost parallel with the image edge, and I find it distracting.
Also, since this is a b&w conversion, we do not know the color of the car (rusty?), but perhaps a different filtering might make the car lighter and foliage and grass darker (orange filter?). That would put the emphasis on the car, not the surrounding.
-
Gentlemen, I am very pleased that these images have excited some debate and interest.
Nothing that I have read, IMHO anyway, requires an apology.
Even if some of the opinions expressed cannot change the image, although some certainly could, I am finding the pinpointing of the various merits and demerits of my images highly instructive and helpful, particularly with a forward looking bias.
I think that I am slowly developing a style but there is much that is still in evolution. I have good, but growing skills with a camera, and good, but growing skills, in post-processing. Probably the area that needs the most attention is that slippery area of artistic intent - howsoever defined. Although I am an individual who has always ploughed his own furrow I have always very much enjoyed viewing the images of others for ideas and also enjoy the suggestions of others because the points raised may not only help the image in question but also give me ideas to implement when next I shoot.
Clearly, situational practicalities and my intent at the time, will modify how I shoot. Since I very rarely shoot anywhere except outdoors almost everything is fluid and cannot be predetermined in an absolute sense no matter what ideas one has or what equipment is at one's disposal.
So, thanks for participating and helping me.
Tony Jay
-
Do not limit me to corners, Stamper, I look for faults everywhere ;)
For instance, I find faults in your criticism of our critiques.
Speaking about corners, I do have one in mind in particular: the lower left, and not just for reasons Brandt mentioned. There is a bright twig there, standing almost parallel with the image edge, and I find it distracting.
Also, since this is a b&w conversion, we do not know the color of the car (rusty?), but perhaps a different filtering might make the car lighter and foliage and grass darker (orange filter?). That would put the emphasis on the car, not the surrounding.
If you find the twig distracting then I think you are possibly being hypersensitive? Looking for a "perfect" image is imo futile. Is it not better to ignore such small distractions if the image is overall a very good one - which I believe this one is - and give it praise without finding fault? It is also interesting that you want to highlight the wreck as opposed to the surroundings when another poster suggests looking for branches to possibly cover it. Both of you are entitled to your opinions but Tony must wonder which opinion carries the most merit. The bottom line for me is that some posters seem to take great delight in finding faults rather than finding worthwhile good points. I don't see any praise in your above comments. :(
-
Gentlemen, I am very pleased that these images have excited some debate and interest.
Nothing that I have read, IMHO anyway, requires an apology.
Even if some of the opinions expressed cannot change the image, although some certainly could, I am finding the pinpointing of the various merits and demerits of my images highly instructive and helpful, particularly with a forward looking bias.
I think that I am slowly developing a style but there is much that is still in evolution. I have good, but growing skills with a camera, and good, but growing skills, in post-processing. Probably the area that needs the most attention is that slippery area of artistic intent - howsoever defined. Although I am an individual who has always ploughed his own furrow I have always very much enjoyed viewing the images of others for ideas and also enjoy the suggestions of others because the points raised may not only help the image in question but also give me ideas to implement when next I shoot.
Clearly, situational practicalities and my intent at the time, will modify how I shoot. Since I very rarely shoot anywhere except outdoors almost everything is fluid and cannot be predetermined in an absolute sense no matter what ideas one has or what equipment is at one's disposal.
So, thanks for participating and helping me.
Tony Jay
Tony you summed it up nicely. :)
-
Slobodan with respect to you comment
Also, since this is a b&w conversion, we do not know the color of the car (rusty?), but perhaps a different filtering might make the car lighter and foliage and grass darker (orange filter?). That would put the emphasis on the car, not the surrounding.
I have had another close look at the image and I can't see how the car can be separated even more from the surrounding? If the shrubbery was in the background then possibly a defocus would help, but it isn't. Dodging and burning would be tedious and selective clarity would also be tedious. Even if the above were possible then what what you are proposing would be very different from Tony's intent. I would be interested in how you could achieve it and more importantly would it "improve" the image or make it just like you would have done if you had been there, and not Tony.
-
This discussion is fascinating.
I think I find myself pretty close to Stamper's attitude, so my suggestion to Tony is this:
Pay attention to each of these suggestions for "improvement," and ask yourself whether the suggestion feels right to you. Don't worry about the credentials or track record or rhetorical skills of the one who made the suggestion. If it feels right to you, then you might want to consider it.
I happen to find Tony's image very satisfying just as it is.
-Eric
-
This discussion is fascinating.
I think I find myself pretty close to Stamper's attitude, so my suggestion to Tony is this:
Pay attention to each of these suggestions for "improvement," and ask yourself whether the suggestion feels right to you. Don't worry about the credentials or track record or rhetorical skills of the one who made the suggestion. If it feels right to you, then you might want to consider it.
I happen to find Tony's image very satisfying just as it is.
-Eric
Absolutely agree on all counts. Well said, Eric.
-
...Don't worry about the credentials or track record or rhetorical skills of the one who made the suggestion. If it feels right to you, then you might want to consider it.
Might? Might!? Are you kidding me!? When I invest a few minutes of my life in trying to help others, I expect in return an absolute obedience. No ifs or buts about it. No vacillating. Just do it as I say or...else! I'll track you down, smoke you out, and teach you a lesson, damn it!
-
Might? Might!? Are you kidding me!? When I invest a few minutes of my life in trying to help others, I expect in return an absolute obedience. No ifs or buts about it. No vacillating. Just do it as I say or...else! I'll track you down, smoke you out, and teach you a lesson, damn it!
+1
-
Pay attention to each of these suggestions for "improvement," and ask yourself whether the suggestion feels right to you. Don't worry about the credentials or track record or rhetorical skills of the one who made the suggestion. If it feels right to you, then you might want to consider it.
What makes you think that Tony Jay (http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=99001.msg809883#msg809883) is in need of such advice?
Tony Jay seems perfectly able to hear other people's opinions and then do what he wants to do.
-
Both of you are entitled to your opinions but Tony must wonder which opinion carries the most merit. The bottom line for me is that some posters seem to take great delight in finding faults rather than finding worthwhile good points.
Tony Jay seems perfectly able to hear other people's opinions and then do what he wants to do.
Stamper, you seem to take great delight in finding faults with other posters.
-
Easy, Stamper. Don't hit him too hard. You can be sure his trigger finger is over the Report to Moderator button.
-
... I can't see how the car can be separated even more from the surrounding? If the shrubbery was in the background then possibly a defocus would help, but it isn't. Dodging and burning would be tedious and selective clarity would also be tedious... I would be interested in how you could achieve it...
No, I wasn't suggesting any of the above mentioned techniques (defocus, dodging, burning, clarity, etc. - although some, or all, might actually work) but a simple tonal separation, the one typically achieved with a particular filter in film days or its modern, digital equivalent (I suggested orange, but red might work as well) . It would make the car lighter and the greenery darker. As we all know, the brightest part of an image attracts our attention the most (which is the very reason I suggested getting rid of the twig in the lower left corner - too bright, but unimportant).
-
Might? Might!? Are you kidding me!? When I invest a few minutes of my life in trying to help others, I expect in return an absolute obedience. No ifs or buts about it. No vacillating. Just do it as I say or...else! I'll track you down, smoke you out, and teach you a lesson, damn it!
Let me rephrase my point. If you get any advice from me, you must immediately obey. If you get advice from anyone else, especially from Slobodan or Russ, you should ignore it completely.
Resistance is futile!!! :D
-
Any thoughts on my old wreck, pro or con?
Found this while climbing up the hillside to gain access to the junkyard in Mayer, AZ. There was no access from the road due to the dogs and the locked gate.
Sigma DP-1 Merrill, converted in Sigma Photo Pro.
-
Any thoughts on my old wreck, pro or con?...
I am going to surprise Stamper and say that I do not find any faults with this image :)
Great chrome rendering, btw.
-
Yes, look at that gleaming chrome! How can you call that a wreck? Why I think it just needs a tune-up and maybe a few accessories, like headlights, etc.
I'm partial to old wrecks, being one myself, so I like the photo.
-
I am going to surprise Stamper and say that I do not find any faults with this image :)
Great chrome rendering, btw.
Then you will have to look harder? There are one or two areas showing overexposure. They don't bother me but I am surprised that they don't bother you? ;)
-
Tony Jay seems perfectly able to hear other people's opinions and then do what he wants to do.
Stamper, you seem to take great delight in finding faults with other posters.
Isaac I have read many comments from you in the past but have failed to see humour in any of them. Is this the first humorous post that you have attempted? Were you laughing out loud when you typed the above statement? I won't say any more except that I suspect the members will splitting their sides laughing at your post. ;D
-
No, I wasn't suggesting any of the above mentioned techniques (defocus, dodging, burning, clarity, etc. - although some, or all, might actually work) but a simple tonal separation, the one typically achieved with a particular filter in film days or its modern, digital equivalent (I suggested orange, but red might work as well) . It would make the car lighter and the greenery darker. As we all know, the brightest part of an image attracts our attention the most (which is the very reason I suggested getting rid of the twig in the lower left corner - too bright, but unimportant).
Slobodan you would have needed to see the original coloured image before making a recommendation about the use of a filter. Personally speaking I find that the car stands out perfectly well and don't see any need for any alteration to the scene?
-
About the OP: I actually like the current framing. The clear foliage at the bottom left corner seems as it flooded out of the car's door. (I would probably ajdust slightly the tones a little bit to stress this).
Cropping the image will make it just a photo of the car wreck.
-
Any thoughts on my old wreck, pro or con?
Found this while climbing up the hillside to gain access to the junkyard in Mayer, AZ. There was no access from the road due to the dogs and the locked gate.
Sigma DP-1 Merrill, converted in Sigma Photo Pro.
An image that is every bit as good as Tony's fine image. Any small imperfections aren't a problem. :)
-
About the OP: I actually like the current framing. The clear foliage at the bottom left corner seems as it flooded out of the car's door. (I would probably ajdust slightly the tones a little bit to stress this).
Cropping the image will make it just a photo of the car wreck.
Correct. This where I differ from David. The wreck needs some space around it to show it's final resting place which in reality is it's grave. I am a cropper myself but in this instance it isn't needed.
-
Actually, I'd be the one to look around and photograph any "inhabitants" in situ. Interesting subject, well done.