| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/22/2005 09:35:51 PM · #1 |
Please critique this image. . . and be as brutal as you like.
Simply practicing and trying to improve. Any comments and help will be greatly appreciated.
 |
|
|
|
02/22/2005 09:42:51 PM · #2 |
Its actually really nice Steve. The disortion form the lens cased that lean, I believe. On thing that I thought when I first saw the large version was "I wish that lady walking was in the dark windows". That little detail would have really made this picture from my POV. The tones and exposure loook great. My best, B.
|
|
|
|
02/22/2005 09:47:49 PM · #3 |
I am not expert but i certaintly wouldnt mind putting my 2 cents in if you insist, the image would have seem to fine like it was why did you tilt it? for some strange reason the left seems a little outta focus depending on what the title of this picture is or what you are trying to depict the picture isnt bad at all i really love the red i bet that building is very noticeable, also i realize there was overcast but the doors to building 50 are solid black at the top. to much shadows? to much contrast? i dont know jus my 2 cents lets leave it up to the experts and see what they think....
leon
edit- you know whats intresting is when i look at your photo again by the way i really like it,, is that the numbers and letters are very clear which means most likely the picture is sharp and you used to many megapixels or not enough. i dont know maybe someone can shed light on this for me thanks lol
Message edited by author 2005-02-22 21:56:00.
|
|
|
|
02/22/2005 10:00:10 PM · #4 |
Parrothead; Thanks. Were you refering to the person in the red coat? I know the red coat adds to the scene. I was not even aware of her at the time.
Leon; Your 2 cents is a great value to me. When I went to crop the scene the door and road would have been askew as well as the lamp post. . . therefore, the ccw tilt to correct the level. The intent of the picture was simply to capture this unique old, red building. I even thought of entering it in our County Fair. I was originally there to photograph something totally different. |
|
|
|
02/22/2005 10:02:43 PM · #5 |
will have to talk more about this picture iam really intrested in it now i like it and when i cant figure out something i go crazy lol maybe there will some more post about it in the morning dont forget to bump it up cause i would like to see some crtique on this one
leon
|
|
|
|
02/22/2005 10:16:20 PM · #6 |
Leon; Not sure of your question about the pixels but you are very, very right-on about noticing the lettering! The only editing I did was to the sign at the top of the building "Town Hall and Engine House." I dodged it to bring out more of the lettering. I felt this was needed because it was closer to the sky (and therefore the light) and would not be too out of character for the scene. originally it was darker.
Once again thanks for the 2 cents.
My question here is whether all that I have done to the image is legal as far as advanced editing is concerned? |
|
|
|
02/22/2005 10:16:41 PM · #7 |
Nice picture I like the contrast between the stand out red and drab building to either side.
Personally there is a little too much neatimage or noise reduction applied for me. The bricks on the building left side as we look at seem to be melting into softness as a result. Everything looks very soft and clean, on a cold day like you captured here I think a little noise would be fine might even add to the atmosphere.
Very cool composition though...and for me the person in the red jacket is an asset to the shot.
Andy |
|
|
|
02/22/2005 10:31:32 PM · #8 |
Andy; Thanks. Went back to the original for a comparison. I see what you mean about too much neatimage applied. Agreed. Noticed that the application actually emphasized the trash pile. The lightness of the bricks on the second row: just realized that I accidentally dodged them. As for the rest of the brick: the building has been painted and repainted so many times that the definition of the red brick is actually disappearing. I am wondering if this is what you notice as well. The origianl photo is even flater and softer.
Thanks for making me look closer. |
|
|
|
02/22/2005 11:45:57 PM · #9 |
despite what was used, it feels overly sharpened to me. too much contrast (which is what some older low MP cameras used to output).
try either dropping the saturation to about 60% less than 0 or drop it out altogether (b&w) and see what happens.
|
|
|
|
02/23/2005 10:35:21 AM · #10 |
Originally posted by drydoc:
Leon; Not sure of your question about the pixels but you are very, very right-on about noticing the lettering! The only editing I did was to the sign at the top of the building "Town Hall and Engine House." I dodged it to bring out more of the lettering. I felt this was needed because it was closer to the sky (and therefore the light) and would not be too out of character for the scene. originally it was darker.
Once again thanks for the 2 cents.
My question here is whether all that I have done to the image is legal as far as advanced editing is concerned? |
What i meant about the pixels is iam not really sure how this works it may jus have been the way i was doing it but i have access to a few 12MP cameras and when i shoot 12 and make it 4x6 it really looks digital or like theres to many pixels as opposed to being like pixelated or something thats all but i think someone else anwsered my thought on this
Leon
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/16/2025 07:32:07 AM EDT.
