| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/21/2005 10:04:40 PM · #1 |
I was curious why this scored so low? Any comments, critiques, etc, please just help me to understand!
|
|
|
|
09/21/2005 10:12:51 PM · #2 |
I would say the shadows are kind of distracting. dont get me wrong the composition is good, I would have added a couple of stops just to bring out the subjects left arm. the green is not such a good thing, I am a student of photography and just suddle color changes are distracting as well. I think that you should reshoot woth black and white in thought or lessen the light ratio.
that is my take always make it simple |
|
|
|
09/21/2005 10:14:43 PM · #3 |
| I think it is a beautiful image. I don't know whay it scored low. It is dark, green, brooding - not a typical portrait. The only thing that I can think of is that you went too far out of the box. I guess to a majority of viewers, it just wasn't "pleasing" enough. I am not a member, but if I was, you would have gotten an 8! |
|
|
|
09/21/2005 10:16:05 PM · #4 |
Hmmm, I see why you are asking, there seems to be a disconnect between the comments and the score.
Judging by the comments, lots of folks really appreciated the mood you struck with this shot, which IMO makes it a success.
Looking at the scores, the vast majority scored it in the mid-ground; no indication that it was a "controversial" image (would be indicatd by a wideer, flatter score distribution, or bimodal).
If I had to guess, I'd say that few took the time to appreciate the photo; it does seem to need some viewing time to generate an impact, but doesn't immediately grab the viewer's attention. Its more subtle.
Bottom line, I'd take the comments (and critique!) you got and assess the shot's success based on those, not on the score. It did deserve better, but "speed voting" doesn't lend itself to appreciation of subtlety.
|
|
|
|
09/21/2005 10:17:48 PM · #5 |
I think it would have done better in black and white.
But, I really do like the shot. |
|
|
|
09/21/2005 10:41:10 PM · #6 |
| Maybe if the area to her left were graded out to black, it would have helped. This would have also solved the distracting shadow problem. |
|
|
|
09/21/2005 11:14:05 PM · #7 |
Hi. I'm hardly one who can speak with authority on the subject, but I will say what I saw and you can get the "unskilled" version :) I feel this picture is really excellent, but you are asking for what people saw that wasn't good.
I noticed that her legs seemed a tiny bit brighter than maybe they ought to have been. This seems to have placed emphasis on the light source, rather than her face. I felt the light should have tried to emphasize her face. I think it did, because her face is very well lit, but I still feel the legs and knees are a little too strong.
I liked the relaxed placement of the feet, it made the picture not about the nudity, but about her emotion. On the other hand, I noticed that there was a fairly bright highlight between her feet. I felt this was a distracting element. I think it is possible to get rid of this by moving one foot slightly back, rather than crossing might have helped this and retained the feeling of the picture without adding that note of modesty which would have made the picture more about nudity.
I really liked the colouring. I think this complements the grain very well in a way that would have been lost in B&W. In B&W, this picture would have all the same technical elements and would lose a lot of it's flavour.
I agree with the other comments about strong shadows. I wonder how using different levels of diffusion on the light sources can help this...
I hope you understand what I said and I hope it is helpful. Great job by those on both sides of the camera. |
|
|
|
09/22/2005 12:38:55 AM · #8 |
|
|
|
09/22/2005 01:08:42 AM · #9 |
| I like the green background and the wall's texture, but I wish your model contrasted with it more. Her skin looks a bit "dirty" from noise(?), where I think it would have been good to show more of the whiteness, and softness, and tenderness, of her skin to help bring out her vulnerability. I read your comments to the pic and think just one flash wasn't enough light to accomoplish your vision. Hope this helped. |
|
|
|
09/22/2005 01:22:57 AM · #10 |
Perhaps you were just too cool for this challenge :)?
(before anyone gets offended, this is just in reference to one of Jeremy's posts recently...totally kidding here, just couldn't help myself)
I think that voters were probably looking for my vivid colors, as evident by the top finishers. I actually like the shot.
|
|
|
|
09/22/2005 05:42:08 AM · #11 |
The challenge was "Color Portrait" and you entered an image that takes close examination to discern it's actually color, not B/W. This is definitely an example of swimming upstream. Add to that the fact that this is a moody, dark-feeling image (not something that tends to score well in here historically) and the score is no suprise.
Nice shot though :-)
R.
|
|
|
|
09/22/2005 05:56:29 AM · #12 |
Scoring so low has nothing to do with the photo.. its just fine..
its not a WOW photo for me.. but it is good and i can see you thought about a lot of stuff for the COMPOSE - the subject+shdow for the background..
LIGHTING - just great.. making the background so dark and your main subject light... maybe the background was too darkk.. it might be interesting to see all the texturs on the wall.. like the wood thing... it might add some interest...
The place of shooting was intersting too.. its kind of a mystery..
now for the bad stuff:
Grain - no reason for so much.. i know its low light.. but you had to put less ISO no matter what...
Shadow- iv said ou pick the right angle for the shadow.. but watch carfully for the shadow on the face... moving her head just a bit left with make it much more clear.. there is nothing to achive with the shadow on the face.. right where the eyes and below..
watch it carfully.. when you shoot.. its hard to spot..
other than that.. probebly people score low coz they ment "COLOR PORTRAIT" as be colorfull as hell..
im not sure i agree..
i strongly beleive in critics.. so go ahead and kill mine
everybody!!
Jellyman Portraits
|
|
|
|
09/22/2005 06:02:15 AM · #13 |
I think ppl don't like if flash is used as it makes shadows. I have been told.
|
|
|
|
09/22/2005 08:17:51 AM · #14 |
Thank you again. I take all these comments and will be doing a similar style shoot in the upcoming weeks, so I will apply all that I have learned from the comments.
|
|
|
|
09/22/2005 01:04:38 PM · #15 |
A friend of mine who used to shoot professionally using film said this about flashes. The comment was not related to this picture:
"If you use a flash, you don't really know what you are getting until you see a picture. This is helped a lot with digital, but if you are looking for expressions in the face, this can really limit you if you are also playing with the lighting and shadows at the same time.
I prefer using natural light with reflectors and shades. When indoors, I still prefer using constant light sources. They give me the ability to see what I am going to shoot in real time. I can then make all of my lighting and shadow adjustments, fix light placement, watch catchlights and see how everything fits together. Then, I merely take the camera and snap away at whatever the model gives me."
The comment is naturally heavily paraphrased. We talked cameras for around an hour that evening. Because I have only just started to understand this kind of shooting and I don't even have an environment where I can shoot like this, I could hardly make any further comment. Take what you can from it. Discard the rest :) |
|
|
|
09/23/2005 02:42:40 AM · #16 |
|
