|
ZippySLC posted:I generally like this, I think mostly because it's along the genre that I try to shoot. My only complaint is the basin in the foreground. Maybe it's me, but I just find it kind of distracting. Take a few steps back to get the whole tree in.
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2013 20:28
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 12, 2024 07:28 |
|
|
Dr. Garbanzo posted:
Please read the OP. First is really boring, there's no real subject. Second is also boring, and the horizon feels crooked. Third, I see what you were going for with the perspective along the rail, but perspective alone isn't really a good enough subject in this case. If it was leading to something, maybe. The out-of-focus background also doesn't work because there is no subject to isolate, this would have worked better a larger depth-of-field. Fourth, you've used a shallow depth-of-field for no good reason again. Fair enough, getting the background visible through the holes in the rust out of focus looks good, but you've got bits of the rail itself on the right of the frame out of focus and it's not helping. A more dead-on angle would have helped with this. Also, if the idea is to show the texture of the rust, compose only on that, leave out the bit of background at the top.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2013 14:25
|
|
|
XTimmy posted:Trying more post work than usual, this is a snapshot taken while walking that I tried to turn into something a bit more. Wanted a vibe of a shrine or sacred place. Mission accomplished, that looks awesome.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2013 17:18
|
|
|
FistLips posted:I took some pictures of a co-worker. Does anyone have any suggestions about this? In particular regarding processing, as I'm not 100% happy with it. The link is broken. Did you edit/reupload the photo?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2013 20:33
|
|
|
VelociBacon posted:the gradiated exposure filter in the sky might be too bold It is. I see this effect overdone everywhere, particularly on the BBC, and it looks dreadful. At least you've kept yours away from the ground, though.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2013 12:29
|
|
|
Magic Hate Ball posted:
This is great you should post it in the food thread
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2014 11:40
|
|
|
These both suffer from the lack of an obvious or interesting subject. The first one is just some twigs and a blurry building. There is very little figure/ground separation - the twigs are the same colour and luminosity as the background, so they just sort of blend in. Also, post a bigger picture next time, 500x300 isn't enough. The second one is better compositionally, but the out of focus twigs in the foreground are distracting. The colours seem a bit oversaturated - did you mess with this in post? Textural shots are often quite nice in black and white.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2014 12:34
|
|
|
Shampoo posted:
Excellent symmetry, nice colours, good range of tones. A+++ would look at again.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2014 01:01
|
|
|
Some nice lines leading up to some nice framing with the wall then... an out of focus subject. The wall is not your subject, the wall is a framing device, the shallow depth of field is inappropriate.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2014 11:24
|
|
|
murp posted:
Some nice examples of good figure-to-ground separation in this article http://erickimphotography.com/blog/2013/10/07/street-photography-composition-lesson-2-figure-to-ground/
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2014 15:52
|
|
|
quote:
The shadow makes this one.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2014 12:47
|
|
|
This is one of those subjects that looks awesome in real life, but hasn't translated well in the photograph. You need to consider what's happening to the scene when you photograph it:
If there was a squirrel or something poking its head out of that hole it would have been great. In the absence of a subject like that I would maybe have gone for a purely abstract close crop. To use your original as source (hope you don't mind): 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2014 18:11
|
|
|
But... the sky is cyan 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2014 18:22
|
|
|
SteiniDJ posted:This is a series of shots which I've merged together. It was taken on an island south of Iceland during Easter when it was extremely windy. It is always windy in Iceland.  Apart from this morning. This morning was fine.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2014 10:42
|
|
|
Straighten that horizon.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2014 16:41
|
|
|
iammeandsoareyou posted:
I think this one needs some people in it. It's got near- and far-distance, but nothing interesting in the middle.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2014 12:19
|
|
|
This is pretty boring. A reflective curved surface can be interesting as part of a bigger composition but I don't think it's enough on its own (unless it's that loving bean statue everyone photographs). This is the best of the three. Nice texture. Interestingly contradicts the critique you yourself gave in the same post. There's way too much going on here. Lots of lines going in different directions with no flow to it. The most obvious flaw is the imperfect framing of the boat by the poles - you should probably have walked forward until it was contained within them, or gotten them out of the way altogether.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2014 12:55
|
|
|
Johnny Reb - you might want to read the OP, you know, like it says in the title of the thread.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2014 16:49
|
|
|
Yep, this is the critique thread, after all 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2014 16:59
|
|
|
Boring. Boring. Also has dreadful HDR-haloing around the trees. Awesome. More of the third, less of the first two. If you must watermark make it subtle like the third, not obnoxious like the second.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2014 17:27
|
|
|
Johnny Reb posted:
Why are you proud of it? It's a boring centred composition, there's a line bisecting the subject's head, the frame is so tight to the subject there's no room for it to breathe, and it's square but should be landscape orientation.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2014 14:34
|
|
|
MindSet posted:I've also got a 50mm prime lens that I haven't even tried, since I'm still getting the hang of it and want to stick with an 18-55 until I get that worked out. You should. I learned more about perspective in the first few weeks sticking to a 35mm than I did in years using a zoom.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2014 14:42
|
|
|
whsa posted:
Foreground is underexposed. In Lightroom raise the "shadows", in an editor capable of editing curves, raise the left-hand part of the curve. Doing it this way rather than raising exposure will keep the detail you've got in the clouds.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2014 12:43
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 12, 2024 07:28 |
|
|
The first one is nice. Looks like a still from The Vanishing of Ethan Carter. The flare and dust is a little off-putting though. The composition in the second one isn't working. Most of the frame is out of focus, and the subject isn't prominent enough to balance that. Also: people in this thread stop posting tiny drat thumbnails, here is what you do: 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2014 17:50
|
|