Photo a Day: Wherein You Read The OP, Like A Smart Person

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > Creative Convention > The Dorkroom > Photo a Day: Wherein You Read The OP, Like A Smart Person

«‹›140 »

Freaquency: May 10, 2007; "Yes I can hear you, I don't have ear cancer!"

EatinCake posted:

In particular, the last one is my absolute favorite, for no other reason then how awkward that face is. There's no way I could get that guy to make that face through verbal request. Love that stuff.

The last one is my favorite too, very visually arresting. The first two do have somewhat of a snapshot-at-a-college-party quality to them; even though there's a man right there playing with fire, it feels as if the composition is too cluttered and busy. The third one however does a great job of framing the subject and isolating him from the background. You did an excellent job of following him and keeping him in focus while the cars and trees blur behind him. Overall, I think it's a great portrait.

Three recent ones of mine that I enjoyed:

Splash by StvnLunsford, on Flickr

One of my sister splashing through puddles in the yard. I was quickly snapping pictures one after the other as she ran through, hence the soft focus, but I think it adds to the picture in this case rather than detracts.

Rust by StvnLunsford, on Flickr

It rained really heavily here recently, and the creek nearby was considerably swollen, so I decided to try to get some shots of moving water when I saw this leftover construction debris. I really enjoyed the shot when I first took it, but now I can't help but think that maybe a tighter crop on the metal would have made it more interesting.

Leap by StvnLunsford, on Flickr

I like this one because even though I covered her face with her arm, you can still see her expression and the little glimmer of a smile. It also represents the lines of the move really well, I think. But maybe covering the face like this is a photography cardinal sin and I should try again!

# ? Mar 25, 2012 15:24

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 11, 2024 21:32

AceClown: Sep 11, 2005

Freaquency posted:

The last one is my favorite too, very visually arresting. The first two do have somewhat of a snapshot-at-a-college-party quality to them; even though there's a man right there playing with fire, it feels as if the composition is too cluttered and busy. The third one however does a great job of framing the subject and isolating him from the background. You did an excellent job of following him and keeping him in focus while the cars and trees blur behind him. Overall, I think it's a great portrait.

Three recent ones of mine that I enjoyed:

Splash by StvnLunsford, on Flickr

One of my sister splashing through puddles in the yard. I was quickly snapping pictures one after the other as she ran through, hence the soft focus, but I think it adds to the picture in this case rather than detracts.

Rust by StvnLunsford, on Flickr

It rained really heavily here recently, and the creek nearby was considerably swollen, so I decided to try to get some shots of moving water when I saw this leftover construction debris. I really enjoyed the shot when I first took it, but now I can't help but think that maybe a tighter crop on the metal would have made it more interesting.

Leap by StvnLunsford, on Flickr

I like this one because even though I covered her face with her arm, you can still see her expression and the little glimmer of a smile. It also represents the lines of the move really well, I think. But maybe covering the face like this is a photography cardinal sin and I should try again!

#1. This one suffers from a classic problem, and that's due to the fact that you know the person in the image. Thing is, we don't, and that leaves us with no emotional attachment to the picture. If you take out the emotion from this it just gives us a blurred, under exposed picture of a girls back. I get what you are saying about liking soft focus effects but there is a difference between soft focus and out of focus, have a look at a soft focused image and you'll still find a part of the image that is still in focus. Your image suffers from having no focal point at all leaving the viewer thinking they need to visit the optician.

#2. "now I can't help but think that maybe a tighter crop on the metal would have made it more interesting." I think the problem here is that the metal is just not very interesting (to me anyway). It just looks like some old junk by a river. This is also under exposed. The metal blends into the foreground and there is nothing to draw your eye to a certain point. "I really enjoyed the shot when I first took it" I'm interested to hear what you enjoyed about this.

#3. I like this one, good sense of movement and I don't think the arm affects the image too badly. I'm guessing you didn't process this and all these images are OOC?
Hope you don't mind but I took the liberty of taking this into Lightroom for 5 minutes.

No more than 5 minutes, I did the following:

Rotated the image to get that stage straight
One click of the white balance dropper on the dress
Ever so slight touch of the sharpness slider
Little bit of noise reduction to take the bulk of the noise out

Hope that helps!

# ? Mar 25, 2012 16:35

icke: Sep 3, 2009

Freaquency posted:

Rust by StvnLunsford, on Flickr

I like this one. On the small preview I thought I was looking at some sort of old building with really weird clouds in the background, before I realized what it was. I wonder if longer exposure would have added to that effect to make the water less recognizable and the foreground appear even more out of place.

This one came from a horribly overexposed shot, which for some reason I couldn't just throw away.

IMG_2527.jpg by florian.eilers, on Flickr

# ? Mar 26, 2012 17:11

Freaquency: May 10, 2007; "Yes I can hear you, I don't have ear cancer!"

AceClown posted:

#1. This one suffers from a classic problem, and that's due to the fact that you know the person in the image. Thing is, we don't, and that leaves us with no emotional attachment to the picture. If you take out the emotion from this it just gives us a blurred, under exposed picture of a girls back. I get what you are saying about liking soft focus effects but there is a difference between soft focus and out of focus, have a look at a soft focused image and you'll still find a part of the image that is still in focus. Your image suffers from having no focal point at all leaving the viewer thinking they need to visit the optician.

#2. "now I can't help but think that maybe a tighter crop on the metal would have made it more interesting." I think the problem here is that the metal is just not very interesting (to me anyway). It just looks like some old junk by a river. This is also under exposed. The metal blends into the foreground and there is nothing to draw your eye to a certain point. "I really enjoyed the shot when I first took it" I'm interested to hear what you enjoyed about this.

#3. I like this one, good sense of movement and I don't think the arm affects the image too badly. I'm guessing you didn't process this and all these images are OOC?
Hope you don't mind but I took the liberty of taking this into Lightroom for 5 minutes.

No more than 5 minutes, I did the following:

Rotated the image to get that stage straight
One click of the white balance dropper on the dress
Ever so slight touch of the sharpness slider
Little bit of noise reduction to take the bulk of the noise out

Hope that helps!

Thanks for the insight. I definitely get what you're saying about the first one, and have to agree. I'm still working on emotionally separating myself from photos to look at them objectively. I guess the second kind of has that going on too, since I'm a sucker for stories about old abandoned stuff. I still think there's something interesting to photograph there, but it's up to me to find a photo that proves it!

I had done some lite editing to all three pictures, but nothing major. I pulled the first two back up in Lightroom and saw instantly what you meant when you said they were underexposed. The last was tricky for me because of the stage lighting, but after seeing what you did I attempted to replicate it and learned how to manipulate those images a bit better. Your edit does look great, and I'm glad to be vindicated in my belief that there was in fact a good picture there somewhere. Thanks again for your help!

e: Thanks especially for cluing me in on the WB dropper. I'd been attempting it solely by the sliders and it was torturous. Your edit gave me a good baseline to work from to learn how to use it.

Freaquency fucked around with this message at 23:57 on Mar 26, 2012

# ? Mar 26, 2012 23:50

MrBlandAverage: Jul 2, 2003; GNNAAAARRRR

icke posted:

I like this one. On the small preview I thought I was looking at some sort of old building with really weird clouds in the background, before I realized what it was. I wonder if longer exposure would have added to that effect to make the water less recognizable and the foreground appear even more out of place.

This one came from a horribly overexposed shot, which for some reason I couldn't just throw away.

IMG_2527.jpg by florian.eilers, on Flickr

Are the muted colors a product of overexposure, or did you do that on purpose? Either way, it really suits the empty feel of the image. I would consider cloning out the bright spot in the middle of the shadow at the bottom of the stairs, I think it's a little distracting.

A smug sociopath posted:

I'm relatively new to photography, so I can't really give a professional insight, but there were a few things that this picture brought to mind.
Like other people have said, you would really benefit from using an ND filter. This picture in particular suffers from being stopped down, in my opinion. The waterfall itself is beautiful, but having everything in full focus distracts from it. The trees in the background make the image look cluttered and take away attention from the water. I love the scene, and I think it would be worth revisiting, but you should try to go for a more open aperture.

Here's two pictures, from my latest trip.

Some of my own remarks about these.
Like I mentioned, I'm pretty new to photography (I've had my 550D for a year, use it mostly for shooting video), but I have some background with cinematography. I have two major areas I think I still need practice in. First, being digital post production of the pictures. I simply haven't gotten into it at all. And second, I need to learn to stop down the aperture. I tend to shoot wide open, which is sometimes detrimental.
Both of these were shot on a Tair 11-A 135mm prime, at f/2.8. On the first picture I think the jet smokestream on the upper left combined with the color gradients made the image worth capturing. It looks a bit like a painting.

I think I'd actually prefer the first one without the contrail - it'd be like an abstract, almost, except anchored by the treeline.

As for the second, well, I think subject isolation is a good thing, but yes, I agree, not to the extent it's shown here. Besides stopping down some, it'd be interesting to see a little more context. What kind of road is this? Could that be relevant to the scene?

-----------------------------------------

I went on a walk and took pictures of trees. I wanted to get some more practice with the 4x5.

Untitled by RHITMrB, on Flickr

# ? Mar 27, 2012 00:29

Bob Socko: Feb 20, 2001

MrBlandAverage posted:

Green Valley by RHITMrB, on Flickr

I feel like this photo lacks focus. Cacti are cool, the high desert is beautiful, and you can go a lot of different directions with a perfectly manicured retirement community - uniformity, conformity, creepy, an aged and haggard vision of Leave it to Beaver, etc. I kind of feel like this photo has all three, but none of them really draw the viewer's attention. Maybe try a different composition so we get a clear view of the homes in the distance, or pointed the other way so we have wide open desert with one big cactus to draw attention?

MrBlandAverage posted:

I went on a walk and took pictures of trees. I wanted to get some more practice with the 4x5.

Untitled by RHITMrB, on Flickr

Untitled by RHITMrB, on Flickr

These, on the other hand, are great. I really like the composition of the top one - a trail down the middle, but not a straight trail as that would be dull. The flare from the sun is emphasized by the big shadow in the middle. It's a shot that I think really gains a lot from being in black and white, as the color version of this scene probably looks pretty blah - there are some woods like that in my area, and I've given up trying to shoot them in the winter. The second is a neat shot, though the out-of-focus wood in the foreground is a bit distracting. I bet it will make for a really neat lush scene once spring kicks in.

Elendil004 posted:

In this one, I got a really cool sepia effect, and the church which was dark in the first shot is now popping with detail. I don't like the green in the church doorway, I think it takes away overall. The top of the back right building is also really bright and that might grab focus from the church.

This is another take on a sepia. The two things I didn't like about the first one (the bright skyline and the green in the doorway of the church are now gone...but now the image feels kind of weak overall. I still really like the detail on the church in this color, but I'm not sure there's much else to like in this case. I was mainly trying to get rid of the two things I disliked about the earlier version.

Of the five, I prefer these two. With this photo, this composition, I feel the church itself adds more to the shot than a dark outline of a church. Losing detail to shadow is a great effect, but it doesn't really add much here. I'd love to see even greater detail in the church, though that may be difficult depending on the light situation in that area. I feel the sepia tones work well because they help reinforce the artificial light given off by a city at night - it just comes across as the "glow" of a city, and adds to the shot. Finally, the building to the side is a little distracting; is there some distortion in your image, or is it some sort of artsy angled design?

A smug sociopath posted:

Love love love this. I know you worry about shooting wide open, but I think this shot works well - it helps isolate the tire tread, and just enough of the guard rail is in focus for you to understand what it is, extending off into the bokeh. I can't decide if I would like it more as a horizontal crop or a vertical; it's certainly composed well vertically, and vertical versus horizontal composition of this shot is more personal preference than anything else.

And with that, it's time for my medicine:

DSC04725 by Kelly_Davis, on Flickr

Bob Socko fucked around with this message at 04:28 on Mar 27, 2012

# ? Mar 27, 2012 04:25

TheLastManStanding: Jan 14, 2008; Mash Buttons!

Bob Socko posted:

DSC04725 by Kelly_Davis, on Flickr

I like. Could use some perspective and distortion correction. For a second I thought you might have stitched to shots because of the little twins. I wish you had been a foot to the right to avoid that tangent with her head though. It's too bad they weren't sitting in the center. It's also a shame about the sky. A polarizer would have helped with the bricks and possibly the sky.

# ? Mar 27, 2012 05:42

Bob Socko: Feb 20, 2001

You're right about the distortion, I completely missed that while processing last night. As for the sky, well, it's Washington and this is what we call a nice day.

I will give our cloudy skies one thing, though - it makes the lighting nice and even.

# ? Mar 27, 2012 05:49

icke: Sep 3, 2009

MrBlandAverage posted:

Are the muted colors a product of overexposure, or did you do that on purpose? Either way, it really suits the empty feel of the image. I would consider cloning out the bright spot in the middle of the shadow at the bottom of the stairs, I think it's a little distracting.

Thanks for the advice. I suck at cloning, but I tried my best and I think you're right.

IMG_2527.jpg by florian.eilers, on Flickr

The colors are like that on purpose, but there wasn't a lot of color to begin with. That's the original image:

IMG_2527-2.jpg by florian.eilers, on Flickr

# ? Mar 27, 2012 08:03

Elendil004: Mar 22, 2003; The prognosis
is not good.

Bob Socko posted:

Of the five, I prefer these two. With this photo, this composition, I feel the church itself adds more to the shot than a dark outline of a church. Losing detail to shadow is a great effect, but it doesn't really add much here. I'd love to see even greater detail in the church, though that may be difficult depending on the light situation in that area. I feel the sepia tones work well because they help reinforce the artificial light given off by a city at night - it just comes across as the "glow" of a city, and adds to the shot. Finally, the building to the side is a little distracting; is there some distortion in your image, or is it some sort of artsy angled design?

Thanks for the critique!

I took it at 11mm with a wide angle lens, and I perspective shifted the buildings as straight as I could, but it was my first time with a wide angle, and first time loving with perspective. Did I go too far? Or not far enough?

If I had thought about it, I should have taken two shots and composited together a 'normal' sky with a really long exposure of the church proper, to give a lot of pop to it. Oh well. Live and learn!

For your image, the colors seem kind of dull, I'm not sure you could have, but if you could have made those trees along the sides really vibrant that might have been better. I think the girl on the right looking at the couple is distracting. If they're the focus (and their 'view' down the row), the girl on the right takes my eyes away from that.

# ? Mar 27, 2012 14:12

Soulex: Apr 1, 2009; Cacati in mano e pigliati a schiaffi!

MrBlandAverage posted:

Untitled by RHITMrB, on Flickr

I'm a pretty big fan of this one. It takes a lot for a Black and White photo to really speak to me and this does it justice. The mood at first seems kind of like a dead grey forest at me, until you look closer and see the bloom-age on some of the shrubs, and the sunlight peaking in through the top left. I also like how the path keeps the center of the photo clear. Really nice shot.

Well, I just finished my first shoot with a DSLR camera (only had point and shoot iphone apps before that). These are all unedited and processed so please let me know how well I did. I intend on getting lightroom soon, I just have to wait for payday and the wife's permission.

It's a Nikon D80 with the kit lens.

#1:

Chicken with something by Soulex, on Flickr
This turned out a tad darker than I thought. A little more cluttered too.

#2:

Hole in the wall church by Soulex, on Flickr
I was blocked by a gate, so I had to squeeze and contort to get my lens through the grate at that level. I'm in Germany, and this was a hole in the wall church. There are at least 3 more in this city that are enormous.

#3:

Guardian by Soulex, on Flickr
One of the entrances to the city.

# ? Mar 27, 2012 16:43

David Pratt: Apr 21, 2001

Soulex posted:

#1:
Chicken with something by Soulex, on Flickr
This turned out a tad darker than I thought. A little more cluttered too.

It's underexposed as you've said, and it's also in need of some straightening. I'd crop off the wine glass on the left, but that still leaves you with a fairly pedestrian photograph. I think it would have been more interesting if the people were the subject rather than the background.

quote:

#2:
Hole in the wall church by Soulex, on Flickr
I was blocked by a gate, so I had to squeeze and contort to get my lens through the grate at that level. I'm in Germany, and this was a hole in the wall church. There are at least 3 more in this city that are enormous.

This is quite nice. Perhaps a little underexposed though. I'd have been tempted to try either cropping the right-hand row of pews, or trying to get dead in the middle of them (which I understand you might not have been able to do because of the wall). I'd also have tried to get the top of the altar/dais/whatever at the back in fully, it feels cut off.

quote:

#3:
Guardian by Soulex, on Flickr
One of the entrances to the city.

I'd consider making this a square crop, with the tree trunks framing the tower. You might have to take a few steps to the right for this though. The statue seems ancilliary to and distracting from the main subject.

I just bought a speedlite and I have no idea what the gently caress I'm doing. Here's some test shots, tell me what I'm loving up!

If I was going to do this properly, I'd use a plainer background, but is the lighting itself ok?

80/366 - Josie by fuglsnef, on Flickr

Experimental

87/366 - Self Portrait by fuglsnef, on Flickr

# ? Mar 28, 2012 02:02

Soulex: Apr 1, 2009; Cacati in mano e pigliati a schiaffi!

So it seems like cropping is my biggest issue? Thanks. Like I mentioned it is my first time trying to do something with a good camera. With post processing I am sure I could do better. It is gonna take me a little more to get used to settings and the like. I refused to use the auto setting.

Thanks again. Always struggling to get better.

# ? Mar 28, 2012 06:00

Bob Socko: Feb 20, 2001

Soulex posted:

#1:
Chicken with something by Soulex, on Flickr
This turned out a tad darker than I thought. A little more cluttered too.

I don't know that there's anything wrong with clutter, as long as the clutter adds something to the shot. I do like these elements together, and think they complement each other well. They even imply clutter, as you'd expect to see all of those things crowded together on a bar table. It's just unusual to see the wine (cocktail?) glass in the foreground blend into the bokeh, as foreground bokeh is distracting.

David Pratt posted:

If I was going to do this properly, I'd use a plainer background, but is the lighting itself ok?

80/366 - Josie by fuglsnef, on Flickr

A good start, but the area under her nose seems a bit dark. I'm the first to admit that lighting is my weak suit, so I'm not sure what the best solution is. How did you light the scene? I could see either a different angle to both maintain the light from above while better illuminating her face, or perhaps a second low-power light source?

Here's another recent shot of mine. I feel like photos like this are dull and I'm never quite sure what to do with them. They seem to draw a lot more of my Flickr traffic than I would expect, so I guess someone likes them?

DSC04660 by Kelly_Davis, on Flickr

Bob Socko fucked around with this message at 06:45 on Mar 28, 2012

# ? Mar 28, 2012 06:12

getsuga: Dec 31, 2007

Soulex posted:

So it seems like cropping is my biggest issue? Thanks. Like I mentioned it is my first time trying to do something with a good camera. With post processing I am sure I could do better. It is gonna take me a little more to get used to settings and the like. I refused to use the auto setting.

Thanks again. Always struggling to get better.

It's not so much cropping than your pictures lacking a central topic (or having one that is difficult to discern). Post processing can only do so much. You generally don't want to take pictures with intention of cropping later, you have 10.2 megapixels use them!

For example your first image is like you said cluttered. All I see is half a person obscured by glass with text on the side. Ok, the title says chicken with something. I think a more reasonable picture would be the placard with what I presumably guess is a chicken dish actually in frame.

I think Pratt's dead on about the 2nd image. The third image, like Pratt also said is lacking a central focus. The trees and shrubs in general are distracting. I think you could have worked in the statue, if there weren't anything else in the frame. So maybe like a POV from the statue to the tower.

Rule of thirds is always a good place to start. Also try sticking to a set focal length for a day (maybe like 24mm or 35mm) and zooming with your feet. It's one of the best ways of learning picture composition, and is a good way to discover perspectives you wouldn't have normally used with a zoom lens.

# ? Mar 28, 2012 06:25

Soulex: Apr 1, 2009; Cacati in mano e pigliati a schiaffi!

I will try that out thanks. I guess being a little more clear with my focus is the thing I should work on. Chicken with something (hanchen is chicken in German) the focus was the menu. Guardian was the statue and the church shot was the alter. It was just hard to compose a shot due to a gate.

I think having the fixed setting and zooming with feet will help me out a lot. I am having fun with it which is the most important thing I guess.

Thanks again. Like I said I am kinda jumping in both feet first into photography. But I am glad I can get multiple critiques here so I can learn what to work on.

# ? Mar 28, 2012 07:25

MrBlandAverage: Jul 2, 2003; GNNAAAARRRR

David Pratt posted:

I just bought a speedlite and I have no idea what the gently caress I'm doing. Here's some test shots, tell me what I'm loving up!

If I was going to do this properly, I'd use a plainer background, but is the lighting itself ok?

80/366 - Josie by fuglsnef, on Flickr

Make the light source bigger. As it is now the light is harsh and casting some weird shadows, like the nose and the lip stud. Try bouncing the flash, or use the flash to supplement natural light.

# ? Mar 28, 2012 18:52

TsarAleksi: Nov 24, 2004; What?

David Pratt posted:

It's underexposed as you've said, and it's also in need of some straightening. I'd crop off the wine glass on the left, but that still leaves you with a fairly pedestrian photograph. I think it would have been more interesting if the people were the subject rather than the background.

This is quite nice. Perhaps a little underexposed though. I'd have been tempted to try either cropping the right-hand row of pews, or trying to get dead in the middle of them (which I understand you might not have been able to do because of the wall). I'd also have tried to get the top of the altar/dais/whatever at the back in fully, it feels cut off.

I'd consider making this a square crop, with the tree trunks framing the tower. You might have to take a few steps to the right for this though. The statue seems ancilliary to and distracting from the main subject.

I just bought a speedlite and I have no idea what the gently caress I'm doing. Here's some test shots, tell me what I'm loving up!

If I was going to do this properly, I'd use a plainer background, but is the lighting itself ok?

80/366 - Josie by fuglsnef, on Flickr

Experimental

87/366 - Self Portrait by fuglsnef, on Flickr

To expound on MBA, the shot fails because it looks "lit" in a bad way-- there is nothing natural or flattering about that light. To me, the goal of artificial lighting is to recreate light in studio that you'd have to be incredibly fortunate to find in real life. I'm sure someone is going to come along and slap me for this, but you don't want your shot to look like it was artificially lit. I'd suggest that you look at window light and other light sources that you find interesting and try to replicate them with your artificial light.

# ? Mar 28, 2012 21:57

David Pratt: Apr 21, 2001

Thanks for the advice dudes, guess things are going to be a bit artificial until I figure out how it all works.

# ? Mar 28, 2012 22:00

Demon_Corsair: Mar 22, 2004; Goodbye stealing souls, hello stealing booty.

Soulex posted:

These are all unedited and processed so please let me know how well I did. I intend on getting lightroom soon, I just have to wait for payday and the wife's permission.

You can always download the 30 light room trial to get started before you buy it.

Soulex posted:

#1:
Chicken with something by Soulex, on Flickr

The title of this one makes it sound like the board is the subject, but looking at the picture, my eyes are drawn to the wine glass and water pitcher on the left side.

Soulex posted:

#2:
Hole in the wall church by Soulex, on Flickr

This shot seems like the same shot that all tourists in old churches take. My parents came back from Europe with dozens of similar pictures. I'm not sure what the subject seems to be? It seems like the focus is on the altar and the ornateness behind it, but that is cut off at the top. I think I find the story of how you took the picture more interesting the the resulting picture.

Summer In Sask by TheOneTrueDevo, on Flickr

Reposting this here, because it's not really a snap shot. This shot really sums up how I feel about summers in Saskatchewan. Super bright colors in the fields and sky and a sense of vastness from being able to see to forever in every direction, which I feel the barns help convey.

Scan-110707-0002.jpg by TheOneTrueDevo, on Flickr

Not much to say about this one. Saw the alley and knew I had to wait for someone to walk through it. Only took about 5 minutes too.

Calgary Skyline by TheOneTrueDevo, on Flickr

Edit for a couple more older shots.

Demon_Corsair fucked around with this message at 00:31 on Mar 29, 2012

# ? Mar 29, 2012 00:24

AceClown: Sep 11, 2005

Bob Socko posted:

Here's another recent shot of mine. I feel like photos like this are dull and I'm never quite sure what to do with them. They seem to draw a lot more of my Flickr traffic than I would expect, so I guess someone likes them?

DSC04660 by Kelly_Davis, on Flickr

I think my biggest problem with shots like this is that it's just reproducing someone else's art and not really adding anything. It does stand above regular graffiti shots as this is mix-up of years of accumulated styles and does lift it above the usual "look at this graffiti" type photos.

# ? Mar 29, 2012 00:26

8th-snype: Aug 28, 2005; My office is in the front room of a run-down 12 megapixel sensor but the rent suits me and the landlord doesn't ask many questions.

Dorkroom Short Fiction Champion 2012; Young Orc

Demon_Corsair posted:

Summer In Sask by TheOneTrueDevo, on Flickr

Reposting this here, because it's not really a snap shot. This shot really sums up how I feel about summers in Saskatchewan. Super bright colors in the fields and sky and a sense of vastness from being able to see to forever in every direction, which I feel the barns help convey.

I like it. The bright colors look unnatural and give the photo a manufactured feel, like technicolor nature. The plants all sort of blurring into a yellow mass let you feel like this field just goes on forever. The barns in the distance remind you that people were somehow involved in this tableau.

# ? Mar 29, 2012 00:31

AceClown: Sep 11, 2005

Demon_Corsair posted:

Summer In Sask by TheOneTrueDevo, on Flickr

Reposting this here, because it's not really a snap shot. This shot really sums up how I feel about summers in Saskatchewan. Super bright colors in the fields and sky and a sense of vastness from being able to see to forever in every direction, which I feel the barns help convey.

I really like this one, I can see what you're saying with the super bright colours and you certainly get a sense of vastness from that sky. The 3 barns give a great sense of scale, which would be lost without them and the slight roll of the horizon give an idyllic feel that would be lost with a straight line.

Two negatives about this. The first is very small and that's the object in the dead center of the horizon, I don't know what it is and my eyes are drawn to it and spend time trying to work out what it is.

The second is that I don't get the feeling of "being able to see to forever" from the square crop, a little more on either side would really help put across the vastness of the field.

# ? Mar 29, 2012 00:38

it shriveled up: Jun 28, 2004

Took this shot in the capitol building on a trip to Austin, TX.

# ? Mar 29, 2012 19:45

bellows lugosi: Aug 9, 2003

No critique?

I think you need to straighten the horizon, maybe bring up the blacks. If you're going for the silhouette look, there's too much light in the corridor and not enough at the end - something that could be fixed with a bit of curves tweaking.

# ? Mar 29, 2012 19:48

AtomicManiac: Dec 29, 2006; I've never been a one trick pony. I like to have a competency in everything. I've been to business school.

Demon_Corsair posted:

Calgary Skyline by TheOneTrueDevo, on Flickr

I think this one has one of two problems:
1) The image is a bit dark and you lose detail in the city.
Or
2) The image shouldn't be black and white because the sky is probably pretty cool.

When you put them together you lose the colors of the sky that might make an interesting silhouette/sunset skyline shot and you lose any sort of interesting detail of what is going on down in the city. If you adjust one or the other it might look pretty neat or you could blend a couple exposures and get both the detail in the city and the cool sun-set in color and have a really neat image.

The Menzingers

Been trying some new post-production stuff and trying some composition tricks other than the rule of thirds, which seems to make up a majority of my work.

# ? Mar 29, 2012 20:51

Musket: Mar 19, 2008

Demon_Corsair posted:

Summer In Sask by TheOneTrueDevo, on Flickr

I really quite like this one. The colors pop rather well with each other, and i really enjoy how much depth is added by the farm in the distance. Over all a really great photo.

There is one thing i could change though, for some reason the blue feels like it could be a bit deeper to me. Other than that small nitpicky item, its great.

Hawthorn Bridge - Portland Oregon.

# ? Mar 29, 2012 21:44

AceClown: Sep 11, 2005

AtomicManiac posted:

The Menzingers

Been trying some new post-production stuff and trying some composition tricks other than the rule of thirds, which seems to make up a majority of my work.

I'll start by saying that if I were in this band I'd be very happy with this pic, it's nice and sharp, you have some good energy in the photo without an overly goony expression on the singers face and it's well exposed.

That being said, to me it's just a picture of a random band that I don't know and there's nothing about it to separate it from the thousand of other band pics out there. It's appeal is going to be very limited to the band themselves and hardcore fans and not many other people.

I'm also not sure what you mean by "trying some composition tricks other than the rule of thirds" when this image follows the 3rds rule quite well?

I get that it's hard to get access to make a generic band image that stands out from the crowd, have a look at this image.

http://d2f29brjr0xbt3.cloudfront.net/062_bandphotos/10.jpg

If I were shooting a band, this is the type of direction I would go in, just something a bit different to stand out from the thousands of B&W stage shots we see every day.

# ? Mar 29, 2012 21:45

SoundMonkey: Apr 22, 2006; I just push buttons.

Musket posted:

Hawthorn Bridge - Portland Oregon.

Great Capture! Join the Hawthorn Bridge Shooters Gold Medal Pool!

In all seriousness though this is pretty great, although I'd like to see the results of using a CPL to kill the reflection off the water entirely. It's also a shot where pretty much any detail shot of any portion of it would probably also stand on its own - especially that little guardhouse thing or one of the towers.

# ? Mar 29, 2012 21:55

ohrwurm: Jun 25, 2003

Bob Socko posted:

Here's another recent shot of mine. I feel like photos like this are dull and I'm never quite sure what to do with them. They seem to draw a lot more of my Flickr traffic than I would expect, so I guess someone likes them?

DSC04660 by Kelly_Davis, on Flickr

AceClown said pretty much what I was planning to say about this. I feel this would be stronger as part of a larger composition, maybe including some of the surrounding street.

Demon_Corsair posted:

Summer In Sask by TheOneTrueDevo, on Flickr

Reposting this here, because it's not really a snap shot. This shot really sums up how I feel about summers in Saskatchewan. Super bright colors in the fields and sky and a sense of vastness from being able to see to forever in every direction, which I feel the barns help convey.

All that yellow...
While the colors are great, I feel that without the barns breaking up the horizon the shot would be a lot less interesting.

IMG_8490.jpg by Christopher.Wimbrow, on Flickr

This one was a first for me, as it's my first attempt at cloning. I removed some reflectors from the guardrail that I thought were distracting. Also, I wasn't trying to get the runner (he's a lot more noticeable in the full-size version), but I like that it happened.
Things I would change: The side of left "pillar" shouldn't be directly behind the guardrail post. It looks like it just ends.

# ? Mar 29, 2012 21:59

AceClown: Sep 11, 2005

ohrwurm posted:

IMG_8490.jpg by Christopher.Wimbrow, on Flickr

This one was a first for me, as it's my first attempt at cloning. I removed some reflectors from the guardrail that I thought were distracting. Also, I wasn't trying to get the runner (he's a lot more noticeable in the full-size version), but I like that it happened.
Things I would change: The side of left "pillar" shouldn't be directly behind the guardrail post. It looks like it just ends.

I really like the Escher feel of this one, the top half is great and makes me feel uneasy in a good way if that makes any kind of sense. Technically good too, great exposure and good choice with a long DoF.

I don't like the road and the rail at the bottom, I feel like it dosn't belong and takes away from the surrealism that you have going off in the top half of the image.

# ? Mar 29, 2012 22:30

AtomicManiac: Dec 29, 2006; I've never been a one trick pony. I like to have a competency in everything. I've been to business school.

AceClown posted:

I'm also not sure what you mean by "trying some composition tricks other than the rule of thirds" when this image follows the 3rds rule quite well?

This one is composed on the "Golden Spiral" which I guess is just an augmented form of the rule of thirds + it has symmetry? I don't know I'm not good at this stuff. I guess it is kind of generic though, here's two others from the night that are a bit more exciting.

The Menzingers

ohrwurm posted:

IMG_8490.jpg by Christopher.Wimbrow, on Flickr

This one was a first for me, as it's my first attempt at cloning. I removed some reflectors from the guardrail that I thought were distracting. Also, I wasn't trying to get the runner (he's a lot more noticeable in the full-size version), but I like that it happened.
Things I would change: The side of left "pillar" shouldn't be directly behind the guardrail post. It looks like it just ends.

The blue tone in the road is really throwing this one off for me, It just kind of pops a lot more than the rest of the image and I'm guessing you weren't really going for that.

# ? Mar 29, 2012 22:52

bellows lugosi: Aug 9, 2003

AtomicManiac posted:

This one is composed on the "Golden Spiral" which I guess is just an augmented form of the rule of thirds + it has symmetry? I don't know I'm not good at this stuff. I guess it is kind of generic though, here's two others from the night that are a bit more exciting.

Don't just use LR's crop guides to tell you how to compose.

# ? Mar 29, 2012 23:31

The Clit Avoider: Aug 11, 2002; El Profesional

MrBlandAverage posted:

I went on a walk and took pictures of trees. I wanted to get some more practice with the 4x5.

Untitled by RHITMrB, on Flickr

Untitled by RHITMrB, on Flickr

Really nice tones in both. In the first, I like the way the trees form a natural gradient in the light: from being darker at the front to fading into an almost imperceptible wall of grey that obstructs any further view of the path as it proceeds into the undergrowth. And yet at that point you can still discern individual trunks. Composition is good and the shadows across the immediate foreground present a point of interest after the eye moves away from the centre of the image.

Second image, as said, again nice tones. Good texture on the "main" tree branch, and the camera is well positioned - giving the impression that the woods stretch out for miles in all directions.
I think you've done well with both to capture a lot without making the final picture too busy.

----------

Rites of Spring by falamhachd, on Flickr

Here comes the sun. by falamhachd, on Flickr

# ? Mar 30, 2012 00:02

alkanphel: Mar 24, 2004

The Clit Avoider posted:

Rites of Spring by falamhachd, on Flickr

Here comes the sun. by falamhachd, on Flickr

While I like the general composition of the 2 photos, with the repeating pattern of the flower groups, I just feel it's lacking something to push beyond an ordinary image. I feel that the background is quite boring as it's dark and not very vibrant. I shoot a lot of flower macros so I could be biased for saying this but I think these flowers would work well for a macro shot that cuts out the background entirely.

--------------

On my side, I've posted these photos in SAD before but I'd like to get more opinions on them.

I really liked the gradual change in the color tone from dark green to light green, contrasting against the much darker green background. The background is messy and possibly distracting but it is all the same plant so I was hoping it would be like a repeating pattern.

RVP50 R01-05 by alkanphel, on Flickr

This was meant to be a photo of two halves, the left side being more empty and the right side being more busy. I have received some feedback that I could possibly darken the tones of the background, and perhaps experiment with some cropping. A 4x5 vertical crop of mainly the right side seems to work but a square still seems the most balanced.

RVP50 R01-06 by alkanphel, on Flickr

# ? Mar 30, 2012 02:20

Haggins: Jul 1, 2004

Bob Socko posted:

Here's another recent shot of mine. I feel like photos like this are dull and I'm never quite sure what to do with them. They seem to draw a lot more of my Flickr traffic than I would expect, so I guess someone likes them?

DSC04660 by Kelly_Davis, on Flickr

AceClown posted:

I think my biggest problem with shots like this is that it's just reproducing someone else's art and not really adding anything. It does stand above regular graffiti shots as this is mix-up of years of accumulated styles and does lift it above the usual "look at this graffiti" type photos.

You know I was just thinking about this the other day. I've heard the "you're just stealing other people's art" bit before and thought about how I didn't agree with it. I figured that we do that all the time with other stuff so what's the difference with graffiti? If I shoot a really cool looking building, aren't I stealing someone else's art? They sure put a lot more thought and effort into creating that building than I am shooting it. However, I think the key to what your saying the whole "adding something to it" bit.

If i did a straight shot of a building it'd probably be kinda boring and just riding off the work of the architect. If I added to it by showing a child staring up at it or a hobo sleeping next to it, I'd make way more interesting photo. Sorry if I'm rambling, I'm just kind of thinking out loud here. I agree with what your'e saying.

So my critique for this photo is try to add something to it, but if you can't, don't stop shooting stuff like this either. If you do add something you'll make an awesome photo people won't forget. If you fail at that, you're still preserving a fleeting form of artwork for future generations. I think in 20-50 years a photo like this is going to be a lot very interesting. You're not really creating new art but you are preserving someone else's. Aside from that, I think a shot like this would work very well in a photo essay.

____

So... while we're on the subject of blighted, graffiti covered towns, I just got back from training for work in Detroit. I thought I'd be going to either Orlando, Vegas, or New Orleans, but the soonest sessions was in Detroit so that's where I went. I figured I'd make the best of it.

Fisher Body 21 by Ryan-Tamm, on Flickr

Michigan Central Station by Ryan-Tamm, on Flickr

Michigan Central Station by Ryan-Tamm, on Flickr

I'm trying to get back into the swing of things, I haven't been shooting at all since last year.

# ? Mar 30, 2012 02:35

The Clit Avoider: Aug 11, 2002; El Profesional

alkanphel posted:

While I like the general composition of the 2 photos, with the repeating pattern of the flower groups, I just feel it's lacking something to push beyond an ordinary image. I feel that the background is quite boring as it's dark and not very vibrant. I shoot a lot of flower macros so I could be biased for saying this but I think these flowers would work well for a macro shot that cuts out the background entirely.

No disagreement here, I prefer macro b/w of plants myself, but didn't have the appropriate lens with me at the time. I did attempt a handheld lens reversal, but none of the shots from that had the requisite focus.

Of your shots I prefer the b/w and think it might benefit from, as suggested, slightly darker tones in the background. I see what you mean about left/right, but the slight edge of leaf in focus in the periphery on the left somewhat detracts from that and is a little distracting.

# ? Mar 30, 2012 02:38

xenilk: Apr 17, 2004; ERRYDAY I BE SPLIT-TONING! Honestly, its the only skill I got other than shooting the back of women and calling it "Editorial".

Today I was invited to an association banquet. Interesting challenge.... I treated it as if I was attending a wedding, since the organizers hired me because they wanted something different!

IMG_3100 by avoyer, on Flickr

IMG_3090 by avoyer, on Flickr

IMG_3093 by avoyer, on Flickr

IMG_3096 by avoyer, on Flickr

# ? Mar 30, 2012 03:46

whereismyshoe: Oct 21, 2008; that's not gone well...

Haggins posted:

I'm trying to get back into the swing of things, I haven't been shooting at all since last year.

I love these, but my only critique for them is that i think you could tighten the composition a little bit - might be personal taste of mine, but i like things like this to be more zoomed in to add to the abstraction of it - if that's what you were going for. still thoroughly enjoy them.

# ? Mar 30, 2012 04:10

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 11, 2024 21:32

rcman50166: Mar 23, 2010; by XyloJW

whereismyshoe posted:

I love these, but my only critique for them is that i think you could tighten the composition a little bit - might be personal taste of mine, but i like things like this to be more zoomed in to add to the abstraction of it - if that's what you were going for. still thoroughly enjoy them.

Good verticals and good exposure. But I can't help but ask myself here, what am I supposed to be looking at? I generally try to find the good things about a photo and attempt to imagine the photographers intent.

In the first one I can see that symmetry was a goal here. You certainly achieved that. But there is so much dead space at the top of the photo I was surprised the photo kept going. Aspect ratios aren't shackles that should tie you down. Clouds might have also fixed that.

The second photo I can clearly see you were trying to capture the zig zag pattern of the pathway and garage. You got it but it's not really attracting me to the photo. I think this is a photo where you need a clearly defined subject. A person on the right of that walkway would have done well for example.

The third one is alright. You made sure the lines from the railing exited the photo at the same height, producing a symmetry in an otherwise random photo. You paid attention to verticals again and the sharp geometries make the photo appealing. It's not something I would necessarily frame but it sure doesn't feel like a snapshot as much as the other two. The motive was clear on this one.

I feel as though B&W was appropriate in all three as well.

"Stewie" by rcman50166, on Flickr

"Barred Window" by rcman50166, on Flickr

"The Grid" by rcman50166, on Flickr

# ? Mar 30, 2012 06:49

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > Creative Convention > The Dorkroom > Photo a Day: Wherein You Read The OP, Like A Smart Person

«‹›140 »