Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
TheLastManStanding
Jan 14, 2008
Mash Buttons!
Welcome to the Dorkroom Photo-a-Day thread.

[ Mod Edit: Nearly entire post re-written so the rules are actually clear and concise. ]

Hi, this is SoundMonkey, not LastManStanding, although thanks LMS for the awesome OP.

This is a place to get constructive feedback on your work no matter what your skill level and to exercise your critique skills. Feel free to post images that are not your "best work" in order to get comments and suggestions. This is not a showcase thread, it's to improve your work.

Some Form Of Critique Is Mandatory
- If you are uncomfortable critiquing other peoples photos, then provide one on your own photo; state your intentions, say what you like/dislike, what worked and what didn't. This will give people a starting point when talking over photos and will help lead to discussions on how/why certain decisions are made.
- Try to make all posts relevant to the discussion of someone's images - gear talk and general chattiness should be constructive or redirected to a more appropriate thread.
- Avoid low-effort critiques. If you're not sure if your critique is low-effort, write a bit more and dodge a probation

General Rules:
* Please limit yourself to 3 photos per day.
* Critique is mandatory. Please be constructive and provide reasoning for your observations.
* Don't post pictures of your pets (unless they are awesome).
* Maximum width or height of any image should not exceed 1024 pixels.

The Following Things Will Get You Probated Instantly:
- Zero critique. As in, you post images and critique neither yourself nor anyone else. Quoting another poster and only saying "I like this" is considered zero. [ See 'Buy Now, Pay Later' below ]
- Breaking the above mentioned rules.
- Telling anyone to either get out or go back to SAD.
- Lamenting the demise of SAD.
- Abusing someone who genuinely doesn't know better and is trying to improve.
- Personal attacks / ripping on someone's entire body of work. "This is crap, just like everything else you post" will not end well.
- Claiming someone "doesn't get it". Feel free to clarify your motivations to someone who doesn't understand them, but "you really just don't understand art" ain't gonna fly.
- Angry responses to (valid) negative critique that goes beyond "I disagree because (x)". Take the crit and move on. If you think the person's an idiot, don't listen to their advice. If I think your reply is sarcastic/negative/ad-hominem/whatever, and is the sort of reply that discourages people from giving critique, I'll probate you. It's that simple.

The Following Things Will Make Me Not Like You And Possibly Eventually End In Probation:
- Consistently, over the course of weeks, critiquing only your own photographs. Help some other people out.
- Excessive rolling with the punches and/or "that's how I wanted it to look" in response to valid negative critique.
- Consistently being unable to accept negative criticism. Sometimes negative crit is needed, and if people can't deal with the fact that their work isn't perfect, they're not going to improve much.
- Low-effort photo posting. I understand some people are new, we have varying skill levels, etc, but if you consistently post images with obvious and easily fixable glaring technical errors or something, I might decide eventually press buttons.
- Posting the same photo over and over (with changes). It's great to act on suggestions and post a new version of something you posted before, but let's not repost the same photo more than five times.

"Buy Now, Pay Later"
Sometimes you want to crit someone else's photos, but you haven't finished processing yours yet, or you haven't picked which ones you want to post or something. It's fine to post crit-but-no-photos, then later that day post photos-without-crit. If your crit and photos are separated by like a day and a half, it's going to count as zero-crit posting again, so it might not hurt to give a few quick notes on another photo before you post your pictures. To be extra clear, you're quite welcome at any time to post crit with no photos, crit is always good, this only applies if you then later post photos without critique.

The rules are, in fact, rules, and if you break them I'll do the stuff you'd expect me to do when a person breaks a rule. The last list of things is just things you probably shouldn't do because I think those things detract from the thread, and make me more likely to press buttons at you for what might otherwise be a minor infraction.

I try to keep a pretty close eye on this thread, but please, if you see something that even MIGHT be against the rules, report it. It takes me about fifteen seconds to deal with a report, so it's not like you're bothering me or something.

If ANY part of this is unclear, confusing, or if you'd like clarification on anything, or even if you just want to ask if your photos are suitable for PAD. I'm always happy to chat via AIM (sasoundmonkey) ideally, or PM otherwise. If you think any rule is total bullshit, please head on over to the rules thread to voice your opinion, as opposed to posting it here.

Thanks!

UPDATE
This thread should be recommended reading for anyone posting here. Learn how to say what you want to say, and learn how to work out WHY you do or don't like something.

Somebody fucked around with this message at 00:01 on Jan 25, 2013

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

TheLastManStanding
Jan 14, 2008
Mash Buttons!
Feel free to post any helpful links and I'll put them here. Preferably they should focus on color, composition, or general photo taking rather than post processing.
Click for Dorkroom flickr group

Linking to Flickr:
Link images back to their Flickr page. Flickr has made this pretty easy for everyone and now includes BB code to link your images, use it. If you are a Firefox user with Greasemonkey there is a script to make linking easy. If you don't have firefox, you can follow this simple format:
code:
code:
[url="the link to the photo page here"][timg]http://the link to the jpg of the image itself[/timg][/url]
Color Management
Site for checking if your browser is color managed

Other stuff
If you're on a page where the same two or three photos have gotten all the critique, and there are a bunch that have not been commented on, give those without critique some. This does not mean give useless critique as previously mentioned, and you don't have to neglect photos that have already been commented on.

Critiquing

quote:

How do I give another photographer a critique?

Whether written (formal) or verbal (informal) I recommend using a system so that you’ll look at and critique photographs similarly each time you do. The system I use includes the following specific steps:

Take It In

Examine the photo as a whole. Take in the details of the photograph. If something stands out (either good or bad) take note of it, but don’t say anything at this point.

Interpret

This is your first ‘broad brush’ opportunity to respond to the picture. It’s a chance to talk in general terms about what the photograph makes you feel, what it says to you, what the photo is about (in your opinion), themes, symbolism, etc. Remember, it’s art, not something with a ‘right or wrong’ answer, so even if you see things that the artist didn’t intend, or feel things about the work that are unexpected (to the artist) that’s OK! (and can be extremely helpful for the artist to hear as well)

Technical

Here you’ll want to address the technical side of the photograph. Is it in focus? Do you see dust spots (more relevant to film)? How’s the contrast? Would the picture worked better with a smaller or larger aperture? Etc. Essentially if it has to do with the technical side of the photograph, this is the place to address it.

Artistic

And the other side to the ‘technical’ coin is to address the artistic. How’s the crop? Is the picture composed well? If it is in color would it have worked better as a B&W (or vice-versa)? Etc.
Good Points It’s important to find some good in the photograph… This is easy when you like it, and harder when you don’t. The truth is that no photograph is irredeemable, and even if it’s a challenge to see it, there is good in there and you need to find it! The more specific the better. “I like the clouds” isn’t helpful. “I like the way the clouds draw the eye across the frame diagonally and pull me more into the frame” is much better. Put some thought into this section, but especially put some thought into this section if you have a lot of things you want to say in the next section…

Areas for Improvement

It’s important to remember that for the most part it’s difficult or impossible to ‘go back and do it again’ when it comes to photography. This means that it often isn’t very helpful (and can be quite frustrating) to provide criticism that can’t be acted upon (“I sure wish the tree was on the right side of the frame instead of the left”) I generally try to provide a couple of things that the photographer can act upon (crop the frame differently, and B&W would be better than color) and try to couch things that can’t actually be implemented as ‘things you may want to take into consideration for other pictures in the future.’

TheLastManStanding fucked around with this message at 19:57 on May 11, 2012

TheLastManStanding
Jan 14, 2008
Mash Buttons!

Trambopaline posted:


Alone by trambopaline, on Flickr

Maybe it's flickrs sharpening or compression, but the transition from ground to sky is a bit over sharpened (a common problem), there is banding in the sky, and the shadows (particularly the bottom right) are muddy. All are symptoms of bad compression though other things could cause them. If you are doing your own sharpening make sure you mask out the horizon. For cropping I think the left could be brought in a bit (to the small jagged part of the large rock) and the bottom could be lifted above the bright large rock on the bottom center left. It would get rid of some of the distracting elements while putting a bit more stress into the image.

wins32767 posted:

I kind of think you should have gone the other way and put more of the trees in. The tree line should be leveled (since it's the horizon) and leaving it would have produced a bit of a framing effect. I'm also not sure how I feel about the path being in the picture. Had there been a vanishing point for it and if it had perfectly split the image diagonally I think it would have been nice, but as it is it seems a bit to dominating without being interesting in any way. Stepping forward to get it out of frame would have put more emphasis on the crosses

Turd Nelson posted:


The lake by Jenseales, on Flickr
Careful with the saturation. You're running into gamut issues in the sky at the top and in the water. Either back off the the blue channel sat or just selectively add some desat in photoshop. It needs to be backed off until the red channel stops clipping. Since it was mentioned, I for one don't mind the grass in the foreground. It does cause some oddities, but since the focus is the mirror image the fact that your horizon is centered doesn't really matter. Cropping out the grass would get rid of the neat mirror effect and then you'd just have some pretty clouds and a town that can't really be seen. I also think your other nature photos are pretty awesome.

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

Went out shooting for the first time in close to a month. First shot was somewhat planned. I never shoot black and white but for the subject matter I shot with it in mind. More than anything it was an experiment in post processing but I like the result. There are a ton of things I still want to nitpick over, but I'm more curious as to what stands out for other people.


This second one wasn't really planned, but I'd been there before. Since it was sunset and I was already downtown from taking the above shot I figured I'd make the most of my time.

wins32767
Mar 16, 2007

TheLastManStanding posted:

This is now an ongoing rather than monthly thread.

This is a great change.

wins32767
Mar 16, 2007

TheLastManStanding posted:

I kind of think you should have gone the other way and put more of the trees in. The tree line should be leveled (since it's the horizon) and leaving it would have produced a bit of a framing effect. I'm also not sure how I feel about the path being in the picture. Had there been a vanishing point for it and if it had perfectly split the image diagonally I think it would have been nice, but as it is it seems a bit to dominating without being interesting in any way. Stepping forward to get it out of frame would have put more emphasis on the crosses

I take your point about the sidewalk and the vanishing point and I agree that I probably should have removed it or repositioned it to cut fully across the frame.

For some background, the shot is from the cemetery at Verdun, a WWI battlefield where 300,000 men died. About 130,00 of them have graves, the rest were unidentifiable and are buried together in a massive ossuary. It was a profoundly moving experience to realize that effectively as far as I could see there were graves, nearly all of them from men younger than me, and I was trying to capture that sensation by having the entire frame occupied by crosses, hence my source of frustration with the trees.

wins32767
Mar 16, 2007

TheLastManStanding posted:

This second one wasn't really planned, but I'd been there before. Since it was sunset and I was already downtown from taking the above shot I figured I'd make the most of my time.


I really love your colors, especially the buildings in the background and the sky. The red/orange and blue/purple are awesome hues and they make the background really interesting where it would otherwise be somewhat dull. My main objection to this shot is that the lights on the ramp or roof or dock in the lower center of the frame coupled with the building in the background make a distracting mash in the center. My eyes keep getting drawn to the brightest spot which isn't really that interesting.

Pickman
Apr 27, 2008

TheLastManStanding posted:


I think this is a great subject for a black and white shot - can't really comment on the post-processing since I'm still not really an expert in that area, but it looks good to me. Personally, I would have shot it from a different angle. There doesn't seem to be much going on at the street level, besides the solitary bike. I think the architecture should take up more of the image. I would have taken the shot from in front of the archway, or at least with the camera angled up towards the upper half of the building, away from the largely uninteresting street below.

Enough of my amateurish critique. I'm still trying to narrow down my selection of images for my course portfolio, and I need to decide between these two:


cemeterypic2(sharp) by Tom.Plk, on Flickr


cemeterypic1(sharp) by Tom.Plk, on Flickr

I welcome criticism of either picture, but if anyone could let me know which of the two images they prefer that would be great.

AlienApeBoy
Jul 11, 2005
Ape

Pickman posted:

Enough of my amateurish critique. I'm still trying to narrow down my selection of images for my course portfolio, and I need to decide between these two:



I welcome criticism of either picture, but if anyone could let me know which of the two images they prefer that would be great.

I prefer the 1st photo, because my eyes take a more interesting path from the flowers, to the foreground gravestones, to the background gravestones. The 2nd one it's pretty much a straightforward line from left-to-right. However, I get the sense I might've preferred both with a landscape orientation. The 1st one, if you were to print it, I'd recommend a non-standard square crop of the bottom 2/3s of the photo to get rid of the bright white sky in the top-left.

Here's a B&W edit I liked from a week ago:


I kinda like the color version too-- to retain the green patina on the bronze: http://i.imgur.com/NGyBDh.jpg

Pickman
Apr 27, 2008

AlienApeBoy posted:

I prefer the 1st photo, because my eyes take a more interesting path from the flowers, to the foreground gravestones, to the background gravestones. The 2nd one it's pretty much a straightforward line from left-to-right. However, I get the sense I might've preferred both with a landscape orientation. The 1st one, if you were to print it, I'd recommend a non-standard square crop of the bottom 2/3s of the photo to get rid of the bright white sky in the top-left.

I preferred the first one as well, I thought the composition in the second pic was all over the place, especially with the background. I think I will crop the first one, I wasn't sure about the sky either.

jodys
May 30, 2006

Pickman posted:

Enough of my amateurish critique. I'm still trying to narrow down my selection of images for my course portfolio, and I need to decide between these two:


cemeterypic2(sharp) by Tom.Plk, on Flickr


cemeterypic1(sharp) by Tom.Plk, on Flickr

I welcome criticism of either picture, but if anyone could let me know which of the two images they prefer that would be great.

I prefer the second one. However, in both the "line" my eye follows is pretty confused and doesn't ever really stop on anything like a focus. In the first one, my eye hops from the lower right flowers, to the left flower, then to the line of gravestones, then it gets lost in the trees. The line my eye follows is much stronger in second one, but, again, the line does lead me anywhere in particular. I think that the second could benefit from cropping.

rcman50166
Mar 23, 2010

by XyloJW

AlienApeBoy posted:

I prefer the 1st photo, because my eyes take a more interesting path from the flowers, to the foreground gravestones, to the background gravestones. The 2nd one it's pretty much a straightforward line from left-to-right. However, I get the sense I might've preferred both with a landscape orientation. The 1st one, if you were to print it, I'd recommend a non-standard square crop of the bottom 2/3s of the photo to get rid of the bright white sky in the top-left.

Here's a B&W edit I liked from a week ago:


I kinda like the color version too-- to retain the green patina on the bronze: http://i.imgur.com/NGyBDh.jpg

I will try my best to critique. It doesn't come naturally for me.

I find this photo be very pleasing. No detail is lost by using B&W. In fact, I think it removes the balcony as a distraction and focuses on the true subject. I enjoy the perspective of the photo as it helps focus on that bizarre pedestal carving which is interesting to look at. The lighting is a split light setup, which is a bold, yet appropriate angle for the subject. However I feel a bit uneasy when I see the cut off hand on the right side of the frame (there is a term for that I think). I feel like the entire hand should be present in the photo, or at least include the whole length of the fingers up to where they meet the palm. But I'm just knit picking, overall this is a very good photo.

I went to the Bronx Zoo last Saturday with my university photography club. It's nice to go places with other people who won't rush you around while you try to take photos.


Untitled by rcman50166, on Flickr


Untitled by rcman50166, on Flickr


Untitled by rcman50166, on Flickr

David Pratt
Apr 21, 2001

rcman50166 posted:


Untitled by rcman50166, on Flickr
I like the colours in this, although the blue tinge to the left is slightly distracting. Have you tried cropping it so the little dude hits the bottom-right third? Saying that though, the bit of moss in the bottom right does lend the image some depth.

quote:


Untitled by rcman50166, on Flickr
This is nice, the depth of field works really well, and the spiral-shaped composition leads the eye nicely. It's not as sharp as it could be though, not sure if you missed focus or something moved, but the eye - the focal point of the image - is not totally in focus.

quote:


Untitled by rcman50166, on Flickr
Hard to think of a bad thing to say about this one, it's tack-sharp and the subject's nicely isolated from the background. Saying that, the background is competing a bit on brightness, maybe try desaturating or dimming it a little? Another thing might be the branch protruding out of the top of the bird's head, but that might also be helping the composition as it joins the diagonal line the tail is making.


Which of these works better? How can I accentuate the hikers?


P1070090.jpg by fuglsnef, on Flickr


P1070087.jpg by fuglsnef, on Flickr

burzum karaoke
May 30, 2003

David Pratt posted:

Which of these works better? How can I accentuate the hikers?


P1070090.jpg by fuglsnef, on Flickr


P1070087.jpg by fuglsnef, on Flickr

You don't get quite the sense of scale as you do from the first, but the second one is without a doubt way better. There's a really nice sense of flow in from the path in the foreground leading upwards that guides your eyes to the hikers and then further out into the valley. It works really well.

To accentuate the hikers, try duplicating the layer you have and mask the hikers out. Play with the levels or curves to soften the image around them (keep it subtle though). Maybe use a gradient on the layer mask to keep the foreground as is, there's some really nice rich greens and textures there that help make the photo.

Enigma89
Jan 2, 2007

by CVG

aliencowboy posted:

You don't get quite the sense of scale as you do from the first, but the second one is without a doubt way better. There's a really nice sense of flow in from the path in the foreground leading upwards that guides your eyes to the hikers and then further out into the valley. It works really well.

To accentuate the hikers, try duplicating the layer you have and mask the hikers out. Play with the levels or curves to soften the image around them (keep it subtle though). Maybe use a gradient on the layer mask to keep the foreground as is, there's some really nice rich greens and textures there that help make the photo.

I am a total noob, but I am going to go along with this. The 2nd picture really feels like you are diving into the picture while the first one just doesn't make you feel any sort of depth in there. I hope this would suffice as a critique so I can post my first 3 pictures.

I just got a NEX-3 today and these are three pictures that I was at least semi-happy about.








I literally have no idea what I am doing, but some critiques and a point in the right direction would be awesome.

jesus WEP
Oct 17, 2004


Enigma89 posted:



I literally have no idea what I am doing, but some critiques and a point in the right direction would be awesome.
For me, the horizontal line made by the pier is way too close to bisecting the image, it would look nicer around a third of the way up instead of almost halfway. The angle you've taken the photo at also makes the boats look like kind of a mess and you can't really tell one boat from another.

While the sky looks pretty nice, the backlighting from it means that most of your picture is underexposed and all those colourful buildings have been made to look a bit flat.

Enigma89
Jan 2, 2007

by CVG

St Evan Echoes posted:

For me, the horizontal line made by the pier is way too close to bisecting the image, it would look nicer around a third of the way up instead of almost halfway. The angle you've taken the photo at also makes the boats look like kind of a mess and you can't really tell one boat from another.

While the sky looks pretty nice, the backlighting from it means that most of your picture is underexposed and all those colourful buildings have been made to look a bit flat.

Thanks! Can you recommend any sort of books or websites to read that go over this stuff? It all seems so basic but I don't even know what to look at or do when I am taking photos. I am just trying to think of clever ways to manipulate focus when taking shots.

jesus WEP
Oct 17, 2004


Enigma89 posted:

Thanks! Can you recommend any sort of books or websites to read that go over this stuff? It all seems so basic but I don't even know what to look at or do when I am taking photos. I am just trying to think of clever ways to manipulate focus when taking shots.
Like you, I'm a total noob, but I liked Understanding Exposure and Learning to See Creatively, both by Bryan Peterson.

Also you should really get yourself Lightroom/Photoshop or at least GIMP, because literally 30 seconds of dicking around with the curves and vibrance setting brought back some of the colour:

Enigma89
Jan 2, 2007

by CVG

St Evan Echoes posted:

Like you, I'm a total noob, but I liked Understanding Exposure and Learning to See Creatively, both by Bryan Peterson.

Also you should really get yourself Lightroom/Photoshop or at least GIMP, because literally 30 seconds of dicking around with the curves and vibrance setting brought back some of the colour:


Yeah I have lightroom but I suck at it. Will start playing around with it more. I didn't want to edit stuff too much now because I didn't want to make it compensate for my lovely technique with shutter and aperture. Looks really great though!

burzum karaoke
May 30, 2003

You're going to hate everything you're shooting now in a month or two anyway. Dive into Lightroom and start making some mistakes. Get them out of the way sooner than later.

Brewdog
Sep 4, 2011

aliencowboy posted:

You're going to hate everything you're shooting now in a month or two anyway. Dive into Lightroom and start making some mistakes. Get them out of the way sooner than later.

What he said. I should have gotten Lightroom a lot sooner. I've had my camera almost a year and I was trying to combine learning photography theory/how to actually use the camera/how to use GIMP all at the same time. Learning the basics on Lightroom honestly doesn't take too long, and it will spur you to take better photos when you see how you can manipulate the bad ones.

Enigma89, that sky is a prime candiate for experimenting with a grad filter in Lightroom. Depending on what your intentions are, a sky like that is perfectly fine without one, but those clouds are ripe for demonstrating how flexible your processing of skys can be in post.

As for the photo itself, I like the light coming through the lighter section of cloud, and how you have most of the reflection of this in the water. Thw white balance is very cool, I would have warmed it up a a tad, although this is subjective and obviously varies with intention.

Here are a couple of my recent shots. Be harsh please:


Glasgow Uni by Benbrewer85, on Flickr

Does the negative space hurt this picture? I'm still not sure.


Walk on by by Benbrewer85, on Flickr

I know beggars are cliche and generally frowned upon but I wanted other opinions as to whether the woman walking past and ignoring him was interesting enough to make an exception?

the
Jul 18, 2004

by Cowcaster

Brewdog posted:


Walk on by by Benbrewer85, on Flickr

I know beggars are cliche and generally frowned upon but I wanted other opinions as to whether the woman walking past and ignoring him was interesting enough to make an exception?

I can't even tell what's going on. I can barely see the beggar, and it just looks like the woman is a pedestrian walking in the middle of the frame.

Cacator
Aug 6, 2005

You're quite good at turning me on.

I took some pictures while walking (not standing still to take a picture) to a pub last night (after already having consumed a fair amount of alcohol), and although I probably shouldn't have done that, I like how this one turned out. Is the motion blurriness effective or does it just make it look like a mess? Please advise.


PB230155 by Cacator, on Flickr


Brewdog posted:


Here are a couple of my recent shots. Be harsh please:


Glasgow Uni by Benbrewer85, on Flickr

Does the negative space hurt this picture? I'm still not sure.

I don't mind how the tower looks, but the lower half is kind of muddled. Get rid of the sign maybe.

Cacator fucked around with this message at 22:36 on Nov 24, 2011

MAkev
Dec 15, 2003

Killed my sensei in a duel and I'll never say why.

Cacator posted:

I took some pictures while walking (not standing still to take a picture) to a pub last night (after already having consumed a fair amount of alcohol), and although I probably shouldn't have done that, I like how this one turned out. Is the motion blurriness effective or does it just make it look like a mess? Please advise.


PB230155 by Cacator, on Flickr

It's just mild enough to imply motion without obscuring what the subject or setting are, I like it.

Cyberbob
Mar 29, 2006
Prepare for doom. doom. doooooom. doooooom.

Brewdog posted:

Here are a couple of my recent shots. Be harsh please:


Glasgow Uni by Benbrewer85, on Flickr

Does the negative space hurt this picture? I'm still not sure.

Yes, it does.
If you're going for a high contrast yet low key (i.e. dark) shot of a building, get a lot closer, and fill more of the frame. It might have looked good as landscape too.

Brewdog posted:


Walk on by by Benbrewer85, on Flickr

I know beggars are cliche and generally frowned upon but I wanted other opinions as to whether the woman walking past and ignoring him was interesting enough to make an exception?

I like your motive here, but there needs to be more of a focus on what you're trying to achieve. You want it to be about the begger and the woman, yet they're minor elements in the photo. It's a

If you moved to the right a little before taking it, you'd get more separation between the woman and the begger (and you'd see it more as people shot with street in it, rather than a street shot with people in it), you'd see more of the pavement and get some cool lines going on too.

Here's a couple of shots for a local locksmith.
I wanted a backlight but I'm getting some harsh light on the reflective keys.





Ambihelical Hexnut
Aug 5, 2008

Cacator posted:

I took some pictures while walking (not standing still to take a picture) to a pub last night (after already having consumed a fair amount of alcohol), and although I probably shouldn't have done that, I like how this one turned out. Is the motion blurriness effective or does it just make it look like a mess? Please advise.


The blur creates just enough motion without losing the detail, I think it works. If you hadn't dragged the shutter it would just be a boring shot of some people's backs. In some respects it still is, but you took an ordinary situation and applied the technicals to give it interest.


Brewdog posted:



Walk on by by Benbrewer85, on Flickr

I know beggars are cliche and generally frowned upon but I wanted other opinions as to whether the woman walking past and ignoring him was interesting enough to make an exception?

I can't tell what's going on in this photo, it doesn't speak for itself at all and without the context of a title/description nobody might even realize that guy was a beggar (I didn't.)

This type of photo is a very common yet important stage of photographer development where you are seeing the idea materialize before it happens but it just hasn't been executed well enough to give the same emotion you felt to someone viewing it. I know the photo is contrasty and has that nice, silvery B&W appearance, but given your goal in telling the story of the woman and the beggar I think you need to keep trying by maintaining the awareness when shooting in public to identify this situation again, anticipate it, and set yourself up with a composition that conveys the story you are trying to tell.

Also you need to correct the time and date your camera is set to, it ain't 2012 yet!


It was foggy this morning, attached is my favorite of what I shot. I tried to bring out the super faint destination area they're walking to but it was looking like crap so I left it as is. I cropped this a few different ways and I think the overcontrast/tiny people/vertical format is working for me right now, but I'm trying to get back into photo-ing so critiques are appreciated.

Only registered members can see post attachments!

King Hotpants
Apr 11, 2005

Clint.
Fucking.
Eastwood.

Ambihelical Hexnut posted:

It was foggy this morning, attached is my favorite of what I shot. I tried to bring out the super faint destination area they're walking to but it was looking like crap so I left it as is. I cropped this a few different ways and I think the overcontrast/tiny people/vertical format is working for me right now, but I'm trying to get back into photo-ing so critiques are appreciated.



Clean, simple, direct. Your subject is 100% clear and the concept is executed really well. I wish it weren't so noisy, as I feel it takes away from the uniform gray haze of the fog, but that's a minor technical quibble in an otherwise great shot.

the
Jul 18, 2004

by Cowcaster

Ambihelical Hexnut posted:



It looks like the cover of some Italian Criterion film (which is a good thing)

AlienApeBoy
Jul 11, 2005
Ape

Ambihelical Hexnut posted:



Reminds me of my favorite children's book illustrator, Stephen Gammel:

I'd agree at trying to apply some noise reduction on the fog.

Took this yesterday at my in-laws (pity the birds are long gone, but generally happy with the mixture of sharp and blurry elements):

Tigertron
Jan 19, 2007

Tiger, tiger, burning bright

Cyberbob posted:


Here's a couple of shots for a local locksmith.
I wanted a backlight but I'm getting some harsh light on the reflective keys.







These seem to have a journalistic approach that seems well suited for a narrative.

First one is a bit cramped with the elbow cut out.
Second is nice and the highlights on the keys work well for me. They add to a third of the image and add a sense of depth. Framing at the waist shows the room is small without feeling uncomfortable.
Third is a nice portrait and normally difficult to accomplish in landscape.

I am mostly a film shooter and I came accross a cheapo film scanner for making essentially contact prints and Flickr. I only own an iPad for editing, using snapseed, but it does provide me with a ballpark approach for dodging/burning as well as a moderate contrast level for printing. All in all it works to suit my needs unfortunately it makes awful looking digital grain and captures none of the film grain so bear with me.


Fin whale by Sensitometry, on Flickr

Edit: is it helpful to include film type and developer when discussing?

Tigertron fucked around with this message at 23:01 on Nov 26, 2011

robertdx
Mar 15, 2005

Lens slap

Tigertron posted:

I am mostly a film shooter and I came accross a cheapo film scanner for making essentially contact prints and Flickr. I only own an iPad for editing, using snapseed, but it does provide me with a ballpark approach for dodging/burning as well as a moderate contrast level for printing. All in all it works to suit my needs unfortunately it makes awful looking digital grain and captures none of the film grain so bear with me.


Fin whale by Sensitometry, on Flickr

One of my main critiques with this photo doesn't have to deal with any of the editing/noise really, but instead the fact that the main subject in the foreground is out of focus. I like the way the bones have an interesting shadow in the background (lower right), but it's really hard to look at the whole photo when my attention is drawn to the mid-left area which is small and relatively boring.

AlienApeBoy posted:

Took this yesterday at my in-laws (pity the birds are long gone, but generally happy with the mixture of sharp and blurry elements):


Also here, the out of focus details are really distracting from the main subject. At least here the outer branches are almost making a coil inward to the center of the image (which is kind of nice because the main subject is dead-pan in the center), but the fact that the upper right of the image does not have anything to redirect your attention back to the middle doesn't help. The brownish background color in the lower right is also a little distracting.


Ambihelical Hexnut posted:

It was foggy this morning, attached is my favorite of what I shot. I tried to bring out the super faint destination area they're walking to but it was looking like crap so I left it as is. I cropped this a few different ways and I think the overcontrast/tiny people/vertical format is working for me right now, but I'm trying to get back into photo-ing so critiques are appreciated.



I think this photo could really use more contrast actually. Or at least, I think the darkness at the base of the photo is good but I'd like to see the top brightened up a bit more. It just seems a bit too muddled. I know a lot of people have mentioned noise reduction already, but honestly since that whole area is just a big blob of one color you could do a real quick blur in photoshop over the entire area and it'd get rid of all the noise very easily. Add a little sharpening to the 3 silhouettes to make them pop a bit more too.


Cyberbob posted:

Here's a couple of shots for a local locksmith.
I wanted a backlight but I'm getting some harsh light on the reflective keys.







Love the 3rd shot. Only minor things are that the background clutter on the desk (coffee mug mostly) is a little distracting. Maybe bump the shadows on this face a tiny bit, on the left side mostly. Other than those small things though it's great framing and really cool. I wish the sparks flying in the 2nd shot made a bigger impact or filled more of the frame in the shot. Its a cool effect but it gets lost in the image. Darkening the rest of the image (especially the bright keys in the background) might draw more of the attention to the action in the shot, but its probably too much effort to pull it off seamlessly.

--------

This is a set of photos I'm working on for my mom:



For Christmas/birthday my mom had asked me to take a photo of something sewing related (she works for a big regional sewing machine distributor... another ridiculously expensive hobby with machines that sell for 10k+).

My end-goal is to print/mount them on a 9x9 grid with each photo being 5 inches, using this: http://bayphoto.com/mounting-finishing/collagewall-displays.htm

I tried making the background solid white but it seemed way too bright, so I went with a slightly darker off-white/gray. I'm not super pleased with the way they look all stacked next to each other like this, they look fake, but oh well. At a higher resolution you can make out each individual thread which was my main goal here.

The thing that is bothering me the most right now is the shadows (which are fake and just photoshop layer effects), as you can see some of them have odd shapes. I'm going to try and go back, making them more blurred, and probably less intense.

Retemnav
Mar 20, 2007
Then I'd certainly be a damned fool to feel any other way, wouldn't I?

Tigertron posted:


Fin whale by Sensitometry, on Flickr

Besides being a bit muddled and out of focus like robertdx said, the bright white light on the skull makes it look like it has a headlight for an eye, and once I saw it, I couldn't unsee it.

I'm really new to actually learning about photography (versus point-and-shooting), but one thing I find helps me in quick judgements is viewing a small version of the photo. Sometimes, I'll have a large image that I think looks good, but when I view it at a smaller size, it'll look muddled. And generally, if it doesn't look good at both sizes, if I really study it I'll find that it's actually not a good picture. I'm sure there are exceptions to the rule, but I've found it to be a pretty good rule of thumb. I guess the smaller size helps your eye see the entire composition better. Does that make sense?

AlienApeBoy posted:


Just to use yours as an example, the timg really highlights how busy the picture is, and makes the brown background in the bottom right stand out much more. At least to my eye.

So this is my attempt at composing a shot and doing some post-processing, rudimentary as it may be:

Snow Day Beer by Retemnav, on Flickr

This was just a shot I took messing around with macro at my parent's farm which I thought turned out nicely:

Bush Hog by Retemnav, on Flickr

TheLastManStanding
Jan 14, 2008
Mash Buttons!

robertdx posted:



The thing that is bothering me the most right now is the shadows (which are fake and just photoshop layer effects), as you can see some of them have odd shapes. I'm going to try and go back, making them more blurred, and probably less intense.
The problem with the shadows is that they are way to big; which in turn makes the picture as a whole look fake. The shadows as they are would imply you used a tiny led light that was about an inch away from the spool. With such a tiny object even an incandescent would produce a small shadow. Shoot for as small and as subtle a shadow as you can.

robertdx
Mar 15, 2005

Lens slap

TheLastManStanding posted:

The problem with the shadows is that they are way to big; which in turn makes the picture as a whole look fake. The shadows as they are would imply you used a tiny led light that was about an inch away from the spool. With such a tiny object even an incandescent would produce a small shadow. Shoot for as small and as subtle a shadow as you can.

I think your right, here in this version I've lightened the shadow up and moved it closer to spools (less spread). I still don't like it but its closer. Also including a closeup of an individual one in case anyone wanted to get a look at that. Next I'm going to work on getting the edges cleaned up in each, since it seems to be influencing the fake shadow now a lot.





They should be just a tiny bit smaller than this size when printed.

Enigma89
Jan 2, 2007

by CVG

Cacator posted:

I took some pictures while walking (not standing still to take a picture) to a pub last night (after already having consumed a fair amount of alcohol), and although I probably shouldn't have done that, I like how this one turned out. Is the motion blurriness effective or does it just make it look like a mess? Please advise.


PB230155 by Cacator, on Flickr

I don't mind how the tower looks, but the lower half is kind of muddled. Get rid of the sign maybe.

I really dig this. But I can see what you mean about maybe looking a bit too messy. The only thing I wish was that the people had a bit more exposure so I could see a bit more details on them, but I dig it.


Here are three of mine. I used lightroom to make them look a bit better. I think I need to work on using aperature more.







*Just a note I exported using Lightroom to a smaller resolution with a maximum file size of 720kb.

AlienApeBoy
Jul 11, 2005
Ape

robertdx posted:

Also here, the out of focus details are really distracting from the main subject. At least here the outer branches are almost making a coil inward to the center of the image (which is kind of nice because the main subject is dead-pan in the center), but the fact that the upper right of the image does not have anything to redirect your attention back to the middle doesn't help. The brownish background color in the lower right is also a little distracting.

Retemnav posted:

Just to use yours as an example, the timg really highlights how busy the picture is, and makes the brown background in the bottom right stand out much more. At least to my eye.

Tried cropping out more of the problem bits (green and brown voids on the right side), does this help things? (unfortunately I couldn't get rid of all the brown in the lower right without losing more of the bottom the nest than I'd like).

rio
Mar 20, 2008

Enigma89 posted:

I really dig this. But I can see what you mean about maybe looking a bit too messy. The only thing I wish was that the people had a bit more exposure so I could see a bit more details on them, but I dig it.


Here are three of mine. I used lightroom to make them look a bit better. I think I need to work on using aperature more.







*Just a note I exported using Lightroom to a smaller resolution with a maximum file size of 720kb.
Hey fellow new NEX owner : With that said, I am still learning so please take all of this lightly.

Photo 1 - I like this the most of the three. Initially, the crooked shot got to me, but it grew on me as it seems to create a somewhat interesting composition. Speaking of composition, I'm not sure what my eye is expected to focus on here, and it feels like there is not much to the shot. I feel like there is nothing to grab on to here - like, I imagine a more striking version with more highlights and perhaps more contrast with a slight bit of motion blur to help support that crooked composition and give it some character. Again, just a beginner's impressions.

Second picture, I don't "get" so I'll skip it.

Third one - looks to flashy. Might have liked it more without the flash, and perhaps shot from a slightly higher angle.

I was taking a walk yesterday and wanted to start to try to shoot some outdoor shots. I was on break and only had fifteen minutes, so had to shoot hastily. I feel like I missed some really good opportunities.

This picture, there is something not right. The composition does not seem how I had imagined it and I feel like I missed something that could have made it a good shot. Or I may be too self critical and not trusting myself. I would love any advice as to what I missed or what could have been done to make something like this a good picture, either in shooting or in post.


rio fucked around with this message at 14:09 on Nov 29, 2011

Cacator
Aug 6, 2005

You're quite good at turning me on.

Enigma89 posted:

I really dig this. But I can see what you mean about maybe looking a bit too messy. The only thing I wish was that the people had a bit more exposure so I could see a bit more details on them, but I dig it.

I probably could do that, I actually just threw on one of the B&W presets in Lightroom and thought it looked better. I'll see what I can do without losing the contrast with the background.

robertdx
Mar 15, 2005

Lens slap

AlienApeBoy posted:

Tried cropping out more of the problem bits (green and brown voids on the right side), does this help things? (unfortunately I couldn't get rid of all the brown in the lower right without losing more of the bottom the nest than I'd like).


Not really.

Enigma89 posted:

Here are three of mine. I used lightroom to make them look a bit better. I think I need to work on using aperature more.







*Just a note I exported using Lightroom to a smaller resolution with a maximum file size of 720kb.
The small resolution on these images is nothing to worry about.

The first image is pretty bad. Why is everything hazy and out of focus? Why is the image in black and white? Why are the bases of the glasses and wine bottle cut off? Why are none of the labels or names clearly pointed towards the camera? Why is everything off level and not aligned? Why the blurry hand in the background? Sure I get this was some kind of dinner or party, but this just looks haphazard.

Which brings me to your second shot. What do you think is cool about this shot?

The third shot is not really flattering. That woman is going to spill wine all over her nose if that man tips his wine glass any closer to her face. Cutting things off in portraits is almost never a good idea. The tones here are really dull. I like that she is smiling at least, but her hair is in her eyes and you've shot her from slightly below her chin level which makes her look condescending among other things.

Cacator posted:

I took some pictures while walking (not standing still to take a picture) to a pub last night (after already having consumed a fair amount of alcohol), and although I probably shouldn't have done that, I like how this one turned out. Is the motion blurriness effective or does it just make it look like a mess? Please advise.


PB230155 by Cacator, on Flickr

I don't mind how the tower looks, but the lower half is kind of muddled. Get rid of the sign maybe.
I think this looks great. I'd actually like to see a series of them, if it were cleaned up a bit (maybe leveled a bit more or perspective adjusted maybe) it is the type of picture that would draw you into looking at more of something (be it a whole series of photos or just some type of blog post).

Retemnav posted:

So this is my attempt at composing a shot and doing some post-processing, rudimentary as it may be:

Snow Day Beer by Retemnav, on Flickr

This was just a shot I took messing around with macro at my parent's farm which I thought turned out nicely:

Bush Hog by Retemnav, on Flickr

The first shot is too crowded and the white balance looks off. The shadow from your glass is covering up the beer bottle. I generally like the wide angle / close up shots but this just feels too constricting. The nuts look out of focus. You've taken care to place an emphasis on the beer cap, but it takes up so little space visually that it is not really important in the photo.

Second shot is a boring snapshot, sorry. We've all seen rusty farm equipment before.

rio posted:

I was taking a walk yesterday and wanted to start to try to shoot some outdoor shots. I was on break and only had fifteen minutes, so had to shoot hastily. I feel like I missed some really good opportunities.

This picture, there is something not right. The composition does not seem how I had imagined it and I feel like I missed something that could have made it a good shot. Or I may be too self critical and not trusting myself. I would love any advice as to what I missed or what could have been done to make something like this a good picture, either in shooting or in post.



I agree that something feels off, but I can't put my finger on it either. It is balanced, exposed properly, mostly aligned, has a nice amount of sharpening. I don't know. One of the things I like about it is the blue cast on the tiles, normally with fall pictures everything is very warm and red-ish. I liked the change here but that might be what seems off.

Retemnav
Mar 20, 2007
Then I'd certainly be a damned fool to feel any other way, wouldn't I?

rio posted:


One thing I think detracts is that you are ever-so-slightly off center, so that the triangles formed by the grass on either side are different shapes and the path looks slightly askew. It'd be better if they either were more similar OR more dissimilar. The closeness of them now makes it seem like you were going for centered and missed slightly?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Beaver Fever
Apr 10, 2005

Ambihelical Hexnut posted:



It was foggy this morning, attached is my favorite of what I shot. I tried to bring out the super faint destination area they're walking to but it was looking like crap so I left it as is. I cropped this a few different ways and I think the overcontrast/tiny people/vertical format is working for me right now, but I'm trying to get back into photo-ing so critiques are appreciated.



I'm just starting to learn about photography (light, composition, etc), so I don't have much to offer as far as critique. Anyway, I really like this. I kinda feel like I want the figures to be a tiny bit sharper to stand out against the haziness of the rest of the image, but overall a nice photo.


I took several shots of this dog on the porch, this one I ended up liking the best.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply