A Nature Shot

[Todd Suttles]

Is this appealing to anyone? C&C appreciated. thanks t

[N80]

It is a pretty common subject matter but the subject still appeals to me. At first I thought it looked over-sharpened, which seems popular these days but which I don't like and hope is just a fad. However, looking at it full sized it did not look over-sharpened. It does appear a bit de-saturated to me. If this was intentional I probably don't prefer it. At the same time, I dislike over-saturation as much as I do over-sharpening for effect. I think if this image was a little more saturated it would be one that I'd be proud of.

[RSL]

Todd, you might print this, say, 20 x 26 and see if you can find a bank to buy it. It's very pleasant and your composition is good. I can see it hanging there next to me as I fill out a loan request.

[Todd Suttles]

It is a pretty common subject matter but the subject still appeals to me. At first I thought it looked over-sharpened, which seems popular these days but which I don't like and hope is just a fad. However, looking at it full sized it did not look over-sharpened. It does appear a bit de-saturated to me. If this was intentional I probably don't prefer it. At the same time, I dislike over-saturation as much as I do over-sharpening for effect. I think if this image was a little more saturated it would be one that I'd be proud of.

Todd, you might print this, say, 20 x 26 and see if you can find a bank to buy it. It's very pleasant and your composition is good. I can see it hanging there next to me as I fill out a loan request.

Yes, it is just another "nature shot", one of the millions. the desaturation was intentional and I wanted to see reactions to it. Thanks for the input.

And another run at it..

[N80]

Yes, it is just another "nature shot", one of the millions.

Nature is nature and there is pretty wide agreement on which parts of it people see as beautiful. I did not intend to 'knock' the subject matter. As mentioned, I like the subject matter.

the desaturation was intentional and I wanted to see reactions to it. Thanks for the input.

And another run at it..

I like the more saturated one better.

[Todd Suttles]

Nature is nature and there is pretty wide agreement on which parts of it people see as beautiful. I did not intend to 'knock' the subject matter. As mentioned, I like the subject matter.

I like the more saturated one better.

oh no!  I didn't think you were. What I meant was that I didn't mean io be any more than a "pretty picture". What I wanted to see was the reaction to what I did to the saturation and sharpness; which you and Russ helped me with. So, Thank you. T

[N80]

Todd, would you mind sharing your equipment and settings used in this shot?

[luxborealis]

A couple of questions I find helpful to ask myself before posting/sharing:

1.  Has this subject been "done" before? (Almost everything has, so go to #2)

     If "no", then GO FOR IT!

     If "yes", then:

2.  Have I done something different to make my portrayal of the subject different or unique?

     If "yes", then: GO FOR IT!

     If "no", then:

3.  Does the photo I'm sharing represent my best use of the photographic aesthetic, technique and process including lighting, perspective (choice of lens), angle of view (position), composition, time-of-day, (not to mention, focus, exposure, exp. compensation, shutter speed, aperture, etc.). In other words, this is my absolute best work; I could not conceive of improving on this photograph!

     If "yes", then: GO FOR IT

     If "no", then: don't post.

There is a fourth question... Might I learn something valuable from posting/sharing?

     If "yes", then: GO FOR IT (but only if you're open to learning; you are, some aren't).

     If "no", then: don't post.

Frankly, the photo you posted has many flaws: flat light, harsh light, burnt-out highlights, little tonal depth, too "straight-on", no flow through the scene (despite it being of moving water).

I know this comes across rather harshly, but... you asked. Don't hate me for it.

[N80]

Terry, I disagree with a couple of your points. First, despite the apparent high standards of this site and the obviously distinguished membership I don't see why the posting criteria need be so stringent. As far as I know there is no skill level requirement for membership or for posting. The only requirement I saw was $12. Granted, "question" 4 opens things up a bit. So it seems that the main question should be whether or not you can handle the criticism.

And while I agree with the points of your final assessment I've seen similar shots with all the qualities you found lacking in this image that were no better for having them and I've seen nature shots with none of them, that were far better.  This is not to suggest that you are not right but I hate seeing new photographers bombarded with the 'rules'. (Which is not to suggest that the OP is a new photographer but I do not know his experience level.)

Which brings up another point in regard to question 1. All subjects have been done before. And especially in the case of an amateur or a beginner, mastering the techniques of typical subject matter is a valuable process.

[seamus finn]

A couple of questions I find helpful to ask myself before posting/sharing:

1.  Has this subject been "done" before? (Almost everything has, so go to #2)

     If "no", then GO FOR IT!

     If "yes", then:

2.  Have I done something different to make my portrayal of the subject different or unique?

     If "yes", then: GO FOR IT!

     If "no", then:

3.  Does the photo I'm sharing represent my best use of the photographic aesthetic, technique and process including lighting, perspective (choice of lens), angle of view (position), composition, time-of-day, (not to mention, focus, exposure, exp. compensation, shutter speed, aperture, etc.). In other words, this is my absolute best work; I could not conceive of improving on this photograph!

     If "yes", then: GO FOR IT

     If "no", then: don't post.

There is a fourth question... Might I learn something valuable from posting/sharing?

     If "yes", then: GO FOR IT (but only if you're open to learning; you are, some aren't).

     If "no", then: don't post.

Frankly, the photo you posted has many flaws: flat light, harsh light, burnt-out highlights, little tonal depth, too "straight-on", no flow through the scene (despite it being of moving water).

I know this comes across rather harshly, but... you asked. Don't hate me for it.

A brilliant critique in itself!

[BobDavid]

A brilliant critique indeed. However, some folks are thick-skinned and others aren't. I'm of the former camp. But I suspect Todd is fairly new to photography, and the last thing I'd want to do is dampen his interest.

My best advice to students was to practice, practice, practice. My suggestion to Todd is to study the work of the great landscape photographers from the past and the present. He seems to be drawn to the rural South. That's a rich subject and it has captivated photographers for 150 years.

I'd then suggest that he spend a couple of weeks just going back to the waterfall site, without camera, just to observe it under several different lighting/weather conditions. Then, when he's become extremely familiar with the site, go back and start taking pictures. One of the hardest skills to acquire is that of learning how to see. And then being able to know in your mind what you want the final picture to look like.

I respect good photo journalists and street photographers because they are excellent observers and are rapid decision makers. I tend to be on the opposite side of the spectrum. It took me years to realize that I like to study and observe situations before I start a project. I usually spend one or two years working through a couple themes.

Todd's been working on a series about the South. I am sure if he sticks with it and practices, he'll find what it is that he's looking for. Once that happens, he'll advance to the next rung on the infinite ladder.

[kencameron]

Frankly, the photo you posted has many flaws: flat light, harsh light, burnt-out highlights, little tonal depth, too "straight-on", no flow through the scene (despite it being of moving water).

It certainly does have these characteristics. Are they flaws? That depends. The image improved in these respects would be prettier, for sure, but I am not sure if it would be that much more interesting. As it is, it has a certain up-yours  in-your-face anti landscape photography quality which does make me more inclined to look at it again than I would if it had more conventional virtues, even if the experience of doing so is not an entirely pleasant one. This is a perverse reaction, I know, but a genuine one.

[stamper]

I vote for the second image. It is difficult or near impossible to get something original and studying the masters will mean that it will be impossible to get something original. The image is straight on but the placement of the rocks on either side of the flow means that the flow twists and turns which makes it an attractive image. A nice pleasurable shot.

[kencameron]

Taking another look, at the second version, it gave me a strong sense of the uniqueness of the particular place, with the processing working to that effect.

[luxborealis]

Terry, I disagree with a couple of your points. First, despite the apparent high standards of this site and the obviously distinguished membership I don't see why the posting criteria need be so stringent. As far as I know there is no skill level requirement for membership or for posting. The only requirement I saw was $12. Granted, "question" 4 opens things up a bit. So it seems that the main question should be whether or not you can handle the criticism.

And while I agree with the points of your final assessment I've seen similar shots with all the qualities you found lacking in this image that were no better for having them and I've seen nature shots with none of them, that were far better.  This is not to suggest that you are not right but I hate seeing new photographers bombarded with the 'rules'. (Which is not to suggest that the OP is a new photographer but I do not know his experience level.)

Which brings up another point in regard to question 1. All subjects have been done before. And especially in the case of an amateur or a beginner, mastering the techniques of typical subject matter is a valuable process.

Appently, you missed, ignored or forgot the very first line in my post...

"A couple of questions I find helpful to ask myself before posting/sharing:" (emphasis added)

[N80]

Appently, you missed, ignored or forgot the very first line in my post...

"A couple of questions I find helpful to ask myself before posting/sharing:" (emphasis added)

No, I did not miss, ignore or forget it. And your reply above sounds just a little disingenuous.  I think if someone posts "this is how I do it" that comes as an offer of advice if not an outright suggestion, particularly when the OP did not ask you or me of anyone else for posting advice. Not saying you shouldn't offer such advice, I think it is valuable. I just disagreed with some of it.

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

Here's my advice.

When I'm considering posting something, I ask myself one question: "should I bother?"

And frequently the answer is, "Sure. Why not?"   

[luxborealis]

No, I did not miss, ignore or forget it. And your reply above sounds just a little disingenuous.  I think if someone posts "this is how I do it" that comes as an offer of advice if not an outright suggestion, particularly when the OP did not ask you or me of anyone else for posting advice. Not saying you shouldn't offer such advice, I think it is valuable. I just disagreed with some of it.

Disagree all you want, that's part of the forum experience, but not out of context. Yes, it is advice, but I'm not changing the rules of the forum as you insinuate.

BTW, when a photo is posted in "User Critiques", it's an invitation to give feedback. Helping users to think before posting is part of the feedback. If it causes a user to spend an extra few moments to rework an image before posting - great. If, not, oh well.

[N80]

Disagree all you want, that's part of the forum experience,

Of course.

Yes, it is advice, but I'm not changing the rules of the forum as you insinuate.

Never suggested you had instituted a forum rule change. Sorry if it seems like I did.

BTW, when a photo is posted in "User Critiques", it's an invitation to give feedback.

Obviously.
 

Helping users to think before posting is part of the feedback.

That seems less obvious. But if that's what you feel like you need to do then that's fine...all part of the forum experience. Just like being disagreed with.

[Todd Suttles]

Whoa!!! I just logged back in after posting this. This is the most activity anything I have put up here has generated. LOL! Terry- don't worry about being harsh. How could I know without someone telling me. And no, I didn't know there was that much wrong with it, but I do now.  Progress.

 I know it must be very frustrating for you guys to constantly be subjected to stuff from someone as green as myself. I have consciously tried to be respectful. And I know it must appear sometimes I don't listen and learn because I repeat the same errors. Everyone in this thread, and many more who aren't, have been very helpful over the past year I've been posting here and all are very much appreciated.

One of my photos was juried into the SlowExposures 2016 show which just ended last Sunday. The jurors were David J Carol, Eliot Dudik and John A Bennette. I paid for and participated in a critique by them with a group of 11 other photographers; the one and only critique I have ever done. They eviscerated me. So it is what it is, and I am where I am: lots of work to do if I want to be any better.

Terry- I will take your guidelines to heart and do my best to not violate them. I appreciate your honest forthright reply. And yes, not only did I ask, I wanted to know. Thanks everyone, t.