Grafitti is a form of expression and to me, this was a 10 and I rated it as such. It was more a question of how the image was composed and how you saw the image with the slight offset which attracted me to it.
Having said that, I think you over reached with the title. Some people view titles as part of the image and this was a political statement that some, not all certainly, might object to it for a myriad number of reasons. I wouldn't even begin to suggest what you should have titled it, but that would be my guess - I thought it was clearly head and shoulders, as an image, over 90% of the images in the Language challenge.
Having said that... :>)
If you look at your vote distritution, it's amost even and you might as well have rounded up and got a 5 - which, after viewing a lot of images over the past two weeks, seems to be acceptable as a score.
Yep, me back and will give you some more feedback, both because you asked in the forums, and because your PM thanking for the last lot.
Will not repeat the previous stuff as it still stands......
Ok, No editing done, that probably has negatively hurt your score significantly. The colours are quite flat. They may have been like that, but i often find that cameras do not capture the vibrance of the colours. In Post Processing, you could adjust this to get significantly more from the colours. I did a little play around, and got the pinks to be more red, and really stand out. I was able to make the left hand side lighter using Shaddows/hihglights in Photoshop, which then removed some of the issue I sopoke about earlier. Some extra saturation into the colours could make a difference to this. If you don't have much experience with these programs, play around with them and see what you can achieve. there are also some tutes on the web that can help you. Best way i have found to improve though is to try things out. I cringe at some of my early stuff now, and the mistakes I made in processing them.
The grainyness. I am not sure whether that is from the surface the painting is on or not. I was able to remove at least some of this using Reduce Noise. Most software programs have something that helps you do this.
I see you have entered again this week, so it will be good to see what you have come up with this time. Send me a PM at the end of voting for that one if you want me to provide some feedback on it as well.
Good Luck, Keep Shooting and trying new things, and trust me, you will learn Heaps
aside from the technical issues already spoken of this photo is more of just a documentation of someone else's work and not an image that you really are the "author" of.
here's my opinion on this shot. #1 it totally fits the challenge. #2 its a colorful and interesting picture, but unfortunately i think its the photo quality that got you voted down on this. i would have probably given you a five just because its a little dark, and kind of grainy.
BUT its a great start for your first challenge! keep entering your scores will go up with each challenge as you learn more on this site! good luck!
hmmmmmm, you have taken a photo and turned it into a political statement..............I will now ignore the title
The light is a problem. The gradiant of light means the F is quite dark, and all attention is drawn to the E at the end. Having more space int eh photo may have helped draw attention to the word, rather than to the individial letters. To me it also appears to read backwards. With the E being both larger and brighter, I seem to read right to left, EERF instead. With the light like this, maybe shooting fromt eh other end, having the F larger (but darker) may have then emphasised the word, instead of all attention going to the letter E
Add photograph to your favorites
Add photographer to your favorites
Photographer found comment helpful.
