DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Individual Photograph Discussion >> Tell me why it sucked. :)
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 43, (reverse)
AuthorThread
07/02/2013 01:45:29 AM · #1
Ok, beat on me, I expected this to go 7+, so I'm curious why it just barely broke a 6?

Honest harsh feedback welcome/requested -
07/02/2013 01:53:14 AM · #2
Hmm good question! I didn't get round to voting on this one but looks to me like a super shot - I can't fault it at all to be honest. I was equally as confused how my over processed cows made it into the top 10.
07/02/2013 01:59:53 AM · #3
It does NOT suck. I love the sharp lines, the shadows, and contrast against the night sky. I would have given this a 7 or 8 had I voted.
07/02/2013 02:02:36 AM · #4
centered and cluttered composition, distracting lines at the bottom, the moon or whatever isn't exactly flattering, trees peeking from behind the church aren't exactly helping the focal point. I probably would have given it a 4 or 5.
07/02/2013 06:10:22 AM · #5
Umm..my 2 cents (if it matters at all)

The moon is one big deal breaker. Its more like a bright spot which does not look appealing at all. Its right there distracting us from the main subject in the foreground.

The building is not that much to look at IMO. Normal architecture, flat tones, no textures. None of this is your fault, but it could've been a better building.

I hate trees. Those green colored things with brown branches mixed in them and their haphazard leaves ruin pictures (unless its a landscape / scenic shot) There's one right there in your picture.

Flat sky. I can only imagine what wonders a nice cloud formation would've done to the picture. Maybe even hidden the moon blob :)

I would've given it a 5 too.
07/02/2013 06:11:50 AM · #6
Oh and btw, you said it barely broke a 6! Its a 6.19! We know what a world of a difference it makes if the score is 6.005 and 6.19! 6.19 is good!

Also, did you post the correct original? They look like two different pictures altogether! If you open both on different tabs and switch between them again and again.

Message edited by author 2013-07-02 06:20:16.
07/02/2013 07:35:43 AM · #7
I like the building, good clarity and color. It's probably the composition that hurts it the most. Also, the moon, but I have no idea what to do with it in these kinds of exposures.
07/02/2013 07:41:22 AM · #8
I love the bottom right hand corner with the red roof and the shadow.
07/02/2013 08:04:05 AM · #9
Originally posted by rooum:

I love the bottom right hand corner with the red roof and the shadow.

That's it. Great lines and contrast. I would leave the moon out of the frame and think of a new title :-).
07/02/2013 08:19:42 AM · #10
definitely the moon for me. looks like a blob of crap. much smaller aperture to get the star effect would have improved it, imo
07/02/2013 08:39:28 AM · #11
ok 1st I'll give the good.
I love the detail on the church (I am assuming that it is a church.) I like the red roof.

The bad: As mentiond above the moon is too bright. It is very distracting and takes away from the image.
07/02/2013 09:47:16 AM · #12
Originally posted by romil:


The moon is one big deal breaker. Its more like a bright spot which does not look appealing at all. Its right there distracting us from the main subject in the foreground.

{yadda yadda}

Flat sky. I can only imagine what wonders a nice cloud formation would've done to the picture. Maybe even hidden the moon blob :)


These two.

Loved the PP on the building... maybe put the unprocessed sky back? maybe lose some brightness on the moon? clone in a well exposed, over-sized moon?

but it certainly didn't suck
07/02/2013 11:25:11 AM · #13
It's a pretty building so it scored well IMO. The color tones seem off to me, especially around the moon. My eye bounces around the image but can't find a focal point or something that draws me in. Your presentation leaves nothing to ponder or question.
07/02/2013 11:30:46 AM · #14
It was ok,I gave it 6,which was ok.
07/02/2013 11:36:10 AM · #15
I gave you a 6 because it's a good shot, but the moon just drew me too much. I agree that had it been a little more defined it may have scored higher. Still a 6.1xxx is hardly anything to complain about!! :-)
07/02/2013 11:36:34 AM · #16
I'm even surprised it got a 6+ score.

It's simply 'uninspired'. It's only a photo of a church (not a beautiful one) with a completely blown moon. Without a good technique and a wise editing it would be a snapshot.
07/02/2013 11:52:48 AM · #17
OK, First, I think you did a great job with getting detail on the building itself.

However, I see a couple of problems that keep this from being a winner in my book. I'm not a big fan of the angle/composition of the shot. The most interesting portion of the building is the facade where the door is, but that's blocked by a huge wall and pushed off to the left. If the shot were from the other side of the wall or about 10-20 ft higher to show the front, it would be greatly improved. I also agree with others about the moon, the shot would have much greater appeal if the moon had detail.
07/02/2013 11:57:43 AM · #18
It's a very famous church, actually, the oldest Catholic church in the United States, dating to 1598, although the original bunted down and was replaced by this one almost 200 years ago. It is much-photographed and much-beloved of photographers. It may not look very ornate to our French/Italian members, who are used to the much more elaborate ecclesiastical architecture of their part of the world, but it's a fine and well-balanced example of mission-style architecture.

As for why it didn't score better, I'm in agreement that the moon ruins the shot. I'd have tried to do a wide-range HDRI that included a properly-exposed moon. As it is, it's so bright it looks like a streetlight or something.

With the exception of the moon itself, heck of a nice processing job, Cory.
07/02/2013 12:05:29 PM · #19
I thought everything was fine exept the composition was slightly off, a wonderful building.
07/02/2013 12:06:19 PM · #20
It just didn't feel like night. To me, it's not just the moon -- it's the building -- it's sooooo bright. It feels like a daytime shot at night. Normally, such a wonderfully bright moon (and I like the overexposed), but normally it's what's creating the light. Here, it has nothing to do with the shot, except adding a blob of light that doesn't affect the scene -- no moon shadows, and the lighting is from artificial lights lighting the church making it look like day.

I think even bringing down the lighting on the building and making it moodier and more like a nighttime shot would have helped.


07/02/2013 12:11:25 PM · #21
It's boring.
07/02/2013 01:14:12 PM · #22
I love you guys!!!

:)

Thanks for all the superb advice, I can totally see all of the flaws that were invisible to me previously!!!

And Wendy, I do think I like that edit, definitely looks more like night!

As for the original - it is the .jpeg original, although I processed from the RAW file - which interestingly is quite a bit wider than the jpeg, although horribly distorted.
07/02/2013 01:27:45 PM · #23
it reminded me of de Chirico, and so it didn't bore me at all.
07/02/2013 01:29:42 PM · #24
Originally posted by vawendy:



Excellent edit, wendy!
07/02/2013 04:37:30 PM · #25
Ok Ill take some criticism on this shot. I really thought it would have done better as well considering how difficult it was to maintain the proper exposure at the distance I was at (which was less than 6 feet) I know its nothing special but it is different than whats normally entered.

Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/29/2024 02:14:42 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/29/2024 02:14:42 AM EDT.