Good Fences Make Good Neighbors
by Luci11e

Comment:
Hi Lorie, welcome to the other side of the Critique Fence! i have a tendency to speak my mind, so I just hope there is something useful in here for you.

My initial take on this is that it is small, slightly red in hue, and a little blown out. Given that the average voter spends about five seconds looking at each shot, it needs to have a more positive initial impact.

Technically: It's nice and sharp, and you have a fine depth of field without going overboard with a really small aperture, so that's all fine. The problem you have (incidentally the same problem I had in 'bridges') is light, and basic editing. There are some very bright, almost blown areas, and some very dark areas. The eye is drawn to the light and your (theme) subjects are in the dark. The result is the kind of comment you have below.

Artistically: This is completely subjective, so take what you will! I am not a fan of the crop - it squeezes my vision vertically and feels slightly uncomfortable. In addition to that, your subjects are both right at the edges, so you can't get a feel for them at the same time. There is also no real 'story' here - the horses don't look close as if they are meeting or some such, it's all very geometric. The slight red hue to everything also makes your subjects blend in to the reddish fence. When there isn't a lot of colour contrast, I am often tempted to try converting to BW, and making it about contrast rather than colour.

PP: This could be sharper - I always do a little sharpening after the re-size (radius 0.5px, 70-80% max) to bring back the edge. You definitely need to fix the colours, either in RAW conversion or hue/sat (have you played with the hue bit in individual colour spaces? It is an eye-opener) - or go B&W. As for sorting the bright/dark problem, I haven't tried it yet but I suspect that Topaz Adjust will help - they do a free 30 day trial...

Happy hunting!

the missing rainbow
by haven

Comment:
Hi Jack, Welcome to the Critique Zone!

My initial take on this is that it is a very interesting and unusual idea, but I struggle to see how it it relevant to the challenge. Given that I have the advantage of your comments, that does not bode well for your score since the voters are mostly pretty unforgiving. I think that this would have done much better in a Free Study.

Technically: I'm not sure what you did, or how you did it but I would suggest that a sharp CD image would have been useful. That would probably be easier to achieve with a shutter speed of 1/250 or better. Your 50D will push ISO 800 or more before noise becomes a real problem. Perhaps you could also have used your 50mm 1.8 for this shot, and selected an aperture of around f4. That would give you a much crisper image.

Artistically: It's a very interesting shot. Well structured and composed with nice light and balance. The cross over of the disc and rainbow is very appealing to me. If being picky, I would probably have cropped off the top inch or so and put a very basic black border around it to give it a 'finished' look.

In summary, I think this really tanked because of the challenge theme. In a more suitable challenge, or a Free Study this could easily have scored five or more. I would therefore give some serious thought to how well your images fit the theme before sticking them up. After all, you got a 'favourite' so that is pretty special! Happy hunting.

Frank.

This is my last pose for you buddy.. so hop off ok?
by docjonny

Comment:
Hi Doc, welcome to the Critique Zone!

My initial take on this shot is that it is pleasant (sharp, clear etc) but lacks the 'wow factor' that tends to grab the voters' attention. Still, I am surprised that you had no comments.

Technically: Your point of focus is spot on - he has a lovely sharp head and eyes. The Depth of Field is interesting - given the nature of the subject, I suspect that you were hand holding this one - hence the smallish aperture. If the opportunity was there I would have take an insurance shot at these settings, then tried pushing the aperture to get a better DOF - perhaps to try and get the whole of the front four legs in focus? The lighting is good directionally, but a little overpowering on a white wall.

Artistically: This is very subjective, but maybe of interest. The centred crop can be a real passion killer when it comes to giving a shot 'wow factor' - especially on a plain white background. For a non-macro challenge, I would have suggested off-setting him to the right and showing perhaps an expanse of empty wall to his left to give a sense of space. Since this is a macro challenge, I think this needs to be tighter. A lot tighter. Perhaps just the bottom right hand corner, as far left as the end of the left foreleg and as far back as just above the thorax joint.

PP: You don't mention sharpening, but this does look a trifle over-sharpened. It could probably also take a little more contrast. I mentioned the power of the light, a tweak on the shadow/highlight tool would take the edge off that, and let more detail show.

In summary, this is a nice shot of a grasshopper, but just doesn't stand out from the crowd enough to get the voters' attention. With a little more playing around though, I think it could. Happy hunting!

A Spot of Milk
by michelaudette

Comment:
Hi Michel, since you didn't find my last critique useful enough to tick the box, I'll keep this one brief.

This is a rather nice shot - technically nice and crisp with good DOF and I think that you did a very good job with the lighting.

Artistically, I am not sure why you decided to cut the cup handle off half way down? Perhaps it was practical based on the amount of milk on your work surface... Either way I find the crop a little awkward - either tighter on the surface with the handle out of the way, or further back showing the whole curve of the handle would have worked better for me.

There are plenty of droplet shots on DPC, but this is sufficiently different, and well executed, to stand out.

Fall
by Photomom1981

Comment:
Hi Monica, welcome to the Critique Zone! Naturally everything I might say is subjective, so take anything you might find useful...

My initial impression of this is that it is very bright, and very yellow. There is a hugh contrast between most of the photo and the eyes, which is (to me) a little unsettling and some areas of interest (around the hands and apple) are lost off the bottom. I have to be honest, I struggle to find it appealing. Why?

Technically: You have a really sharp camera / lens combo there, I know, I have it too. With such a small aperture you should have a seriously sharp picture throughout, but it's not quite there. The ISO setting is also introducing some unnecessary noise. I would drop that to 100 and use maybe f6.3 at most on this. The shutter should still be plenty fast enough - I would still set it at 1/160 which should make it a little darker than you have it, bringing some of that lovely detail back. The lighting is also rather harsh on such delicate skin.

Artistically: This really needs to be razor sharp - and there is no reason it couldn't be, even if you have to manually focus (focus on the eyes!). In composition terms, as I said I feel it is 'cut off' a little high - maybe more apple could be in there for contrast? Also, it is worth trying to compose so that the eyes are on a 'thirds' intersection.

Post: You say that you adjusted everything, normally I stick to sharpness (before and after resizing), curves for contrast and a very light touch on the hue/sat. For advanced editing I will normally play with dodge and burn but that's about it. Remember, the more you process, the more you lose what was there in the first place!

In summary, this is a fairly pretty shot of your child (?) - but I reckon you can produce something better with the gear and eye for a cute moment that you clearly have.

Night Pumpkins
by ccarter

Comment:
Hi Chuck, welcome to the critique zone!

My inital take on this image is that while this was taken at night, it doesn't really show apart from being a little dark. You don't have a real 'night' feel to the shot, so what to do?

Technically: This is a pretty noisy image - not only have you got ISO 640 in play, but also 'long exposure' noise. Your use of f8 has also given you a pretty big depth of field which I'm not sure you need. I would drop the ISO and the aperture (maybe f6.3 and 200?) and take the hit on the shutter time - it should be cleaner. You can then run it through noise reduction in PP. I also suspect that there is a long exposure noise reduction setting in your D90, don't know if it was on? The natural lighting is interesting on the foreground, less so in the background although nice in the sky on the right.

Artistically: This is of course completely subjective, but... I would have taken this shot from slightly to the left, focusing on the big pumpkin left of centre, moved a lot closer and put that probably slightly right of centre and a little low. That would give the photo a real sense of focusing on the pumpkins. It would also block out a little of the background. If you want the field look in for Charlie Brown, you could start a little above and have two thirds ground in the shot. If possible, I would have definitely done a 'recon' during the day, composed the shot, and then come back to take it at night.

PP: You don't say what you did do, but I suspect that a little Noise Reduction, sharpening and popping the contrast with curves or even levels would have boosted the look of this a little.

Random thought, this could be a great location for 'painting with light'? ie. Sticking the camera on 'Bulb' and then using a big flashlight to 'paint' in the bits you want? Worth a play if you have the time. Hope some of this was useful!

Where the Sidewalk Ends
by zencow

Comment:
Hi again Chris, and welcome back to the Critique Zone!

I really like this shot, but then I am really in a 'BW' place myself at the moment. The contrasts of light and dark sides to the grass heads, and the curves are very appealing.

Technically: I am interested by your use of such a tight aperture - most lenses peak in sharpness at about f8-f11 and by f25 I would expect to see some refraction creeping in on any but the most expensive, which may account for some of the blur. I'm sure that camer shake or movement accounts for some too, at only 1/25. The DOF is nice, but I would have probably tried to get a little more of the foreground grass heads sharp - I guess that might well just be taste. The lighting, as I have said, is excellent. Natural, but excellent.

Artistically: I really don't think that there is anything I would change if it was my photo. The lateral length of the grass means that this simply has to be a landscape shot. The balance of foreground and background is really well done and there is enough going on everywhere without it looking busy. Also, a really top BW conversion!

In summary, this is the sort of shot that I would expect to see for sale in an art gallery. Unfortunately DPC is clearly back in a sunset mood for this challenge, but that shouldn't decrease your pleasure in this shot - it doesn't lessen mine. Incidentally, the structure really reminds me of this one from posthumous

"These Boots Will Walk All Over You"
by Dr.Confuser

Comment:
Hi Doc, welcome to the critique zone!

Overall, I find this a very pleasing image. Clearly you know the rules of composition and when they can usefully be broken, ad I disagree with the 'missing foot' comment - this photo is all about shock effect to me, bright, bold and fractionally unconventional.

Technically: There really isn't anything to say - Focus and DOF are both spot on, as is the lighting (although you point out that this was professionally arranged).

Artistically: You have managed to arrange about every key focal point to be on a 'thirds' intersection, which I find very visually pleasing. The strong colours are a choice and I think that they work well here, contrasting with the skin and striped top. Yes, you have chopped off a foot, but as I said, that's not a problem for me.

In summary, I don't think that there is anything in this photo that I would change if I were lucky enough to have been in the position to take it, so congratulations on a really nice job!

Rusty Shack
by orvaratli

Comment:
Hi Orvar, you asked for a critique, so here it is! Completely subjective of course, but you knew that. It's also going to be quite short since I don't know what I can say that you don't already know so I'm going to stick with what I got out of looking at it.

The composition of the shot bothers me a little. Obviously you have no control over the shape of the aurora, but that does work well with the angle of entry into the shot and the lovely curves. The clouds give it some good structure - layers of interest if you like, but the house / shack doesn't seem quite right. Why?

Firstly it is in the middle, so it grabs my attention, but it isn't very interesting. It is competing with the aurora for my interest, and loses but won't go away. It also looks a little over sharpened. Finally, the house (and clouds) are very red - possibly light pollution combined with a long exposure and the resulting white balance issues? I don't know if you could have toned this down to a more natural colour but I suspect that it would look more pleasing.

Of course this is all nit picking in what is a very good capture of a beautiful scene, so congratulations on that!

Leo Carrillo
by Tabby

Comment:
Hi Tabitha! Welcome to the Critique Zone...

Wow - the voters just didn't go for this did they?! I'm not surprised, but not for the reasons you may think. My first impression was 'what a great photo'. It avoids many of the established rules of capture and composition, and it definitely ignores the 'DPC Friendly' badge, but for me, the way you have done that strengthens it, rather than weakens it.

Technically: Its not that sharp (even in the background). That surprises me since at 1/25 with VR it probably should be, but that adds to the feel of the shot - of which more below. The Depth of Field is excellent, unsurprising at f22! The flat lighting is not appealing in the traditional sense, but again adds to the feel.

Artistically: The DPC voter spends about 5 seconds per photo while voting. You don't have a sunset, cute animal, strong colours or a baby, so most will say 'it looks flat' and move on. You do have flat colours, and a blown out sky, but that gives a real feel of a cold, wintery beach, on which people are still having fun. The group running out of, rather than into the shot also contradicts received wisdom, but (without reading your description) it made me see them running off to have more fun, or hot chocolate, somewhere else. This shot tells a story, and it's a good one.

In summary, if you keep taking shots like this, then you will likely never have a really high score here, but you will gain plenty of fans amongst the more artistic and thoughtful crowd, and I would suggest that that might be more important. Happy hunting!