|
| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/31/2009 11:17:47 AM · #1 |
Hi there!
I am an aspiring great photographer :), but currently I'm still struggling to understand what it takes to make an average photo become a good or great photo, and what makes an average photographer become a great photographer.
I'm asking about 1 minute of your time to take a brief look at these photos (only 15 pieces) and tell me what they are missing.
I know there is photographic material in them, but how could they be more than average photos?
I also appreciate harsh critique, anything what helps :)
Thanks you very much!
~~~~~~~
UPDATE:
~~~~~~~
Due to the Schutterchance website's technical difficulties I gave direct links to the pictures a few posts below.
Thanks for your time!
Message edited by author 2009-01-31 12:11:14. |
|
|
|
01/31/2009 11:20:34 AM · #2 |
| Tried taking a look but your link is very slow to load. I gave up. Sorry. |
|
|
|
01/31/2009 11:24:28 AM · #3 |
| The link doesn't work for me. |
|
|
|
01/31/2009 11:39:13 AM · #4 |
Aaah, you're right.
The schutterchance website is having technical difficulties. I will upload the pictures somewhere else and give direct links.
Thank you so much for your fast response! |
|
|
|
01/31/2009 12:09:10 PM · #5 |
|
|
|
01/31/2009 12:41:42 PM · #6 |
For the most part, the images are pretty banal and utterly lacking in any sense of light or luminosity. Use of light is a major factor that distinguishes fine images from mediocre ones. Of your list, only 3 captured my interest in the slightest: Rise Up, Windows, and Windy Apocalypse.
Windows has excellent light, luminosity-by-reflection, and fairly dramatic compositional dynamics.
Windy Apocalypse sets a distinct *mood*, it is fairly turbulent and powerful.
Rise Up is very engaging, it is my favorite of the group. I like the use of the fill flash here very much. I *love* the way pieces of birds are exiting the frame on all sides.
In general, you need to work on how you're seeing, and on incorporating what I call "defining light" into your images. Most of your images are poorly composed and you have a penchant for using fill flash to obliterate whatever definition the natural light might be bringing to the image. It works in the gull shot, but that's the exception. You need to be asking yourself *why* you are photographing something, and you need to seek an angle or a perspective that communicates something of this *why* to the viewer.
To be honest, you have a long ways to go: but the 3 images I like tell me the goal is not unattainable. Good luck!
R.
|
|
|
|
01/31/2009 01:01:41 PM · #7 |
Thank you, bear_music! This is exactly the kind of evaluation I was looking for on this forum.
Very helpful!
I am welcoming any other feedbacks. Thank you! |
|
|
|
01/31/2009 02:04:42 PM · #8 |
I completely agree with Bear.
The images that are uninteresting are that way because of 1) lack of natural/ambient light and 2) perspective/composition.
The photos look very robotic and do not have much of an organic feel to them. It's almost as though you sent out a robotic scout and it scanned the area, went "oh.. I recall these things being in many photos that I like", close aperture, angle down 30-50 degrees, turn on flash to destroy ambient light, depress shutter.
It's important to remember photography is an art and not a science. There is no "formula" for the perfect picture.
When you are out shooting and see something you feel would make an interesting photo don't just put the camera to your eye and snap it. Get down on the ground and try shooting from below. Get up high and shoot down on it. Get close and zoom out. Get back and zoom in. Try framing it to 1/3rd of the viewing frame. Close down your aperture unless these is something very specific you want to feature by using selective focus. (I know this is a bit hypocritical seeing as how my only photo in my dpchallenge port is using a completely arbitrary DOF. The irony is not lost on me :) )
The more you vary your shooting style, the more likely you are to find different techniques that fit with your style.
And most importantly, test yourself by vowing to keep your flash turned off for an entire week. |
|
|
|
01/31/2009 02:25:09 PM · #9 |
My first impressions are about the same as well (though I'm no master at any of these by any means).
My thoughts were:
1. I noticed the flash killing the depth on most of the shots, I rarely use flash except in certain situations where I can bounce or absolutely need fill (still trying to fine tune this myself)
2. Some of the shots lacked a subject. While it's not 100% hard fast rule because photography is an art, BUT, usually adding some sort of interest point with the water shots helps to keep the eye from wandering and looking for a subject, at least my eye does.
3. Composition of the subject play a huge factor too. Again there's nothing that says you HAVE to follow the rule of 3rds, but its a useful guideline.
Anyways, you're on a good start (much better than mine and I have been doing this for 5 years now!) and don't get frustrated, just keep shooting, experimenting, shooting some more, and then you'll find your niche. I feel like I have just BARELY found mine. Good luck!
|
|
|
|
01/31/2009 06:42:16 PM · #10 |
1. Autumn Fence
This one doesn't work for me. It has nice leading lines ... but they go nowhere and point to nothing. You generally want to put your subject at the beginning, at the end, or at the apex of a leading line. Here, the lines start out blurred at the back, leading you right up to the very front which is in focus and then ... nothing. There's nothing more to see.
Check out these leading lines for better examples.
2. Come With Me
This one is sort of abstract. You don't know what you're looking at ... other than water and suds. Maybe some of the more "artsy" people will like it. It doesn't do anything for me.
3. Craving Freedom
I love the colors! I just wish it felt like I had more of a reason to look at the picture.
4. Enchanted Princess
This is one of my favorites of your series. I like the colors. I like the lines within the image. I like that you used the reflection of the sun as a back light. A little more front lighting on the head/face of the swan would be perfect. In fact, you could do this with a simple edit.
5. Heart
Does nothing for me.
6. Living on a Tree
Cool idea. Crop a little tighter to give the subject more emphasis, maybe put it on the bottom-right "third".
7. Lost
I kinda like this one. Nice colors. Nice use of the fence to "frame" the image, though I think the fence is too close to the top and feels cut off. I think I'd burn the sides a little to make it appear as if the light were more on the leaf.
8. Magic Water
Does nothing at all for me.
9. Rise Up!
LOVE this one! If you ever get a chance to reshoot this one, I'd play with some slower shutter speeds to blur the wings and get a little "artsy" about it.
10. Shell Island
Feels like a documentary vacation snapshot. See mom, these are what the shells looked like.
11. Steps
Too static... nothing to look at.
12. Sunday
Nice idea... has potential. Edit it to look more dreamy like and see what you get.
13. Transiency
Hurts my eyes, leaves me feeling confused. I want to see something in focus...
14. Windows
I like this one a lot. Patterns can be so engaging. Check out these patterns for more examples.
15. Windy Apocalypse
Kinda cool... in the right mood, I think I'd like this one a lot.
|
|
|
|
02/01/2009 09:20:10 PM · #11 |
Dear Bear_Music, Jinxt, goinskiing and dwterry!
Thank you! Thank you so much for your time and useful comments!
For the last couple of days I was reading them over and over, processing your advises and ideas, and now... I can say that I have a much more precise understanding of what photography actually is. I hope this will help me shoot better photos.
Thanks again and I'll see you in the challenges! :) |
|
|
|
02/01/2009 09:56:23 PM · #12 |
As someone else mentioned, get used to changing your point of view. I was out shooting something for a current challenge today, and I ended up laying twisted on my back on a patch of ground with very sharp sticks and grasses. It was extremely uncomfortable, but the shot was worth it. I also laid down flat on the ground, in the snow, in front of about 60 people at the St. Paul Winter Carnival to get the shot I wanted.
for instance, the "come with me" photo looks like it was taken from directly above. It's not suggesting any movement to me. If it was taken at more of an angle, I think it would have given more of a sense of encroaching or receding.
also, the autumn fence could have had possibilities, but I feel the depth of field was way too short. It didn't draw my eye into the distance, because it got too fuzzy too quickly. Perhaps the short depth of field would have been better if the foreground was in better focus. E.g., the top board was in focus in the foreground, but the bottom board never was. That made it look like it was just focused poorly instead of trying to a technique.
craving freedom I don't think had much possibility to begin with, but assuming it did, it looked like it was cropped to short on the bottom. If the green had gone down and around in the photo (kind of like a sweeping L under the red) it would have been better. The little blotch of green on the right is distracting, and looks like you cut off and important part.
I agree with dwferry, living on a tree is a fun idea, but I feel there's way too much on the left. Try bringing it into photoshop, and crop it to the right 1/3 (portrait) and up a little from the bottom. This places the fungus in the lower left 1/3 of the photo--it's a lot stronger (I tried it with your image, and I like it a lot better)
I like the idea of lost. again, I'd be tempting to get down lower in the shot. Also, I might have used a wider angle lens to show even larger field to feel more lost.
I pasted a copy of your magic water into photoshop, and there is so much more you can do with the levels in photoshop. I don't know if I care for it, but you should try it--it's still a lot better. I'm using Photoshop Elements, and I brought it into Elements and pulled up levels. If you look at your histogram, drag the dark triangle to the left edge of the bell curve, drag the white triangle to the right edge of the bell curve, and play with the middle triangle. It makes a vast improvement in the picture, and is probably more what you were going for. It's still not a picture that will send people, but it will give you an idea of what you can do with levels.
I like windows very much--that is a good shot. However, pull up levels in photoshop. Again, the shot can be processed better by playing with the levels. When I played with it, I was able to make the window frames darker and the reflective windows lighter, and it gave it a lot more depth and interest.
transiency -- nope
Sunday - nice. although the rule of 1/3's is a good idea in most cases. centered images really don't work as well. that being said, the centering isn't too bad on this one.
ok, superbowl got interesting again. last 2 minutes--have to go watch
good luck!
|
|
|
|
02/02/2009 09:47:56 AM · #13 |
Thank you, vawendy, for taking an in depth look at the pictures and trying to figure out how they eventually could be saved.
About the PP processing: to be honest with you, I just discovered the power and purpose of "curves" like a week ago. Before that I used to use only "levels", but I just realized that "curves" is a bit more powerful. Once again, thanks for making the effort of transferring the images to your processing table!
It's so nice to have so many nice and helpful people on this forum! :)
Message edited by author 2009-02-02 09:48:14. |
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 04/23/2024 05:14:19 AM  |
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: 04/23/2024 05:14:19 AM EDT.
|
