Weekly Assignment #96: Be your worst nightmare!

Nikolai

OK, I must admit: this one gonna hurt :deal So I would understand if there are not too many takers...:wink

An important, and maybe the hardest, part of every photographic process is self-assessment. We are getting emotionally attached to the pictures by whatever reason we know about them. It could have been your son's birthday, Or maybe just a very good lunch :-) But it has absolutely no such effect of your viewers. So we need to learn to distantiate from the context and consider the capture as it is, objectively.

For this class you are supposed to present a single picture you took approximately a year ago. OK, maybe two years if you were on a photographic sabbatical :-). No hard margins, simply something not too old, but not too recent either.
But not just "a" picture. It should be one of those you honestly consider your top shelf from that year. Something you'd put (or already have;-) in that rotating dgrin banner. Something that you proudly display as a your "Best of 200x" collection.

And now you have to tear it apart. :huh
Be ruthless. Be merciless. Critique as if your life depends on it. And rest assured: if *you* miss something out - others won't. This time there will be no white balls, black only. No "oh well at least it's in focus" comments. "Pros" are not allowed, "cons" only. :deal
So, if you don't want to hear it from others - you'll have a chance to say it first, in which case we'd check it off our list and skip to the next one.

Do you think you can be your own editor? Bring it on!

anonymouscuban

Question
The shot you post, should it be before or after PP?

I would think it should be before any PP since it is about being critical of your "shooting".

I will submit mine right after your answer.

BTW, I think this is an awesome learning experience for a noob like me.

Nikolai

anonymouscuban wrote:

The shot you post, should it be before or after PP?

I would think it should be before any PP since it is about being critical of your "shooting".

I will submit mine right after your answer.

BTW, I think this is an awesome learning experience for a noob like me.

No, after. The whole idea is to submit some of your last year's finest finished work, so no excuses can be made. And THEN have at it.

anonymouscuban

Someone's gotta go first.
So I guess I will be the first on the chopping block!:D

First, I like to start off by saying that this is a great learning experience for me. I have only been shooting for a bit over a year, and only seriously for the last 6 months. So your criticism will be very helpful so don't hold back.

I took this picture a little over a year ago, shortly after I got my first DLSR, which was an Olympus E500. I basically knew very little about photography when I took this photo. The picture was taken at Disney's California Adventure amusement park.

Critique:

The composition could be better... the shot is a bit too cropped. It would be much better if more of the building were showing and also the stream that runs along side. The exposure is off - details missing on the underside of the wheel and under the eves of the building on the left.

I'm sure there is more... :uhoh

Nikolai

anonymouscuban wrote:

So I guess I will be the first on the chopping block!:D

First, I like to start off by saying that this is a great learning experience for me. I have only been shooting for a bit over a year, and only seriously for the last 6 months. So your criticism will be very helpful so don't hold back.

I took this picture a little over a year ago, shortly after I got my first DLSR, which was an Olympus E500. I basically knew very little about photography when I took this photo. The picture was taken at Disney's California Adventure amusement park.

Critique:

The composition could be better... the shot is a bit too cropped. It would be much better if more of the building were showing and also the stream that runs along side. The exposure is off - details missing on the underside of the wheel and under the eves of the building on the left.

I'm sure there is more... :uhoh

Thank you, you're a very brave person!
Now, back to business:-)

• Image has no focal point, too many things are trying to attract viewer's attention. Apparently high aperture value (everthything is in focus) only adds to this.
• Not a single major part of the image is complete, everything is only "half-there"
• The happy patch of blue sky and a peice of green forest conflict with the rustinesss of the old equipment, thus diminishing the possible impact
• In general this image is not something I would even consider to be someone's best. It's a snapshot with no major idea and no thoughts behind it, there is not much to critique.

anonymouscuban

Nikolai wrote:

Thank you, you're a very brave person!
Now, back to business:-)

• Image has no focal point, too many things are trying to attract viewer's attention. Apparently high aperture value (everthything is in focus) only adds to this.
• Not a single major part of the image is complete, everything is only "half-there"
• The happy patch of blue sky and a peice of green forest conflict with the rustinesss of the old equipment, thus diminishing the possible impact
• In general this image is not something I would even consider to be someone's best. It's a snapshot with no major idea and no thoughts behind it, there is not much to critique.

OUCHIE WOUCHIE... :cry

J/K... I know it's a horrible example but you asked for an image taken a year ago so that's what I posted. As I mentioned, I was brand new to photography so this assignment is especially interesting to me.

Great feedback btw... I don't disagree with any part of it. I've learned a lot since then and hope to learn a lot more, thanks to assignments like this one.

Thanks again Nikolai.

Nikolai

anonymouscuban wrote:

OUCHIE WOUCHIE... :cry

J/K... I know it's a horrible example but you asked for an image taken a year ago so that's what I posted. As I mentioned, I was brand new to photography so this assignment is especially interesting to me.

Great feedback btw... I don't disagree with any part of it. I've learned a lot since then and hope to learn a lot more, thanks to assignments like this one.

Thanks again Nikolai.

You're welcome! We'll do it again next year:-)

Nikolai

douglas wrote:

Heres a side of my photography that nobody see's because I never shoot people, except occasionally a innocent bystandard, or me running into the shot with timer set.
Lets see I really dont know anything about this stuff, I dont like her outer shirt or the fact that her hands are crossed tho.
Lets hear some feed back.

Douglas, it's not a whipping post, you must try harder...
Sorry, you gotta be your worst judge first (and over what you consider your best shot at that:-). If you don't bother to spend time tearing it ip, why somebody else would...

douglas

OOPs sorry deleted, will try something else

eL eSs Vee

Now this is a challenge!

I'm not sure how to approach this one, image-availabliltiy-wise, as I got my first DSLR in late February of this year. Therefore, unless I go with a snapshot - which is not where one finds their best images, I haven't any photographs that are even nine months old. I could go back twenty-some years to my film days and choose one from then, but I'd rather not. (I wasted way too much time without a camera, between then and now. Such a regret.)

catspaw

Oh, what a horribly good assignment.

So I went to my Oct 07 folder, and found this favorite:



mind you, this is pre-PP, since erm... I'm still learning THAT. Photography comes naturally, finding time for Lightroom or CS3 does not.

* The colors have NO 'pop' to them. A polarizer might have been useful, yes? I knew what those were back then ...
* The dark shadows, especially the largest one in the middle are horrible detractors. Late afternoon is NOT a good hour for decent lighting. I should have made a few return trips to the aspens .... but I never did. I could do better even then.
* The furthest mountain is very 'bleah'. As is the sky. While the tri-colors of the trees in the foreground are a nice touch, the eye is not drawn anywhere.
* In that vein, there is no 'rule of 3' here. The entire scene just floats away, again with no 'pop' between the distances. Playing with where I was focusing and going more manual there would have helped, but I wasn't there yet in my photography.
* A wider angle and seeing what's off to the left (where the eye IS drawn) would have likely been a better composition (I think there might have been a dead tree in the way, but still. I can climb out on rocks without death easily enough for the sake of a better photo. I was standing 3 feet off the road here. unadventurous).
* This lens sucks. good thing I replaced it.

globaltraveller

catspaw wrote:

...

This shot is overexposed. Late afternoon is a fine time for lighting (depending on how late, and what season -- looks like fall, so that should have been okay). Instead, the shadow here is too light, not giving adequate contrast to the leaves (which are somewhat washed) and snow. And there's the blue/magenta haze. I'd also like to see a horizontal orientation of this scene, aka landscape.

globaltraveller

anonymouscuban wrote:

...

Brave man for going first, Alex.

In addition to what's been covered, I will add that the fact it was taken at a Disney park becomes a detracting point for me. If it were an old, historic building and captured the essence of where you were visiting, and this is the only angle you were afforded due to obstacles/topography etc, then I'd have said you did an adequate job. Since it's none of those, and for reasons you and Nikolai have cited, this shot is 'just sort of there'.

catspaw

globaltraveller wrote:

This shot is overexposed. Late afternoon is a fine time for lighting (depending on how late, and what season -- looks like fall, so that should have been okay). Instead, the shadow here is too light, not giving adequate contrast to the leaves (which are somewhat washed) and snow. And there's the blue/magenta haze. I'd also like to see a horizontal orientation of this scene, aka landscape.

heh. 'overexposed' was the first word to come to mind, however when I started writing it out, I sorta skipped over... oh, the totally obvious. I wish I had been playing with manual settings more back then like I do now.

heh, it least it means I've learned something!

globaltraveller

And now that I've taken a couple of shots at critique, I'll put up one of my own works:



Cloisters at the Hieronymites Monastery in Lisbon.

• The crop should have been tighter, with less of the pillars/bases in the foreground;
• I should have either removed or photoshopped out the turnbuckle and wooden plank;
• An off-center angle could have worked better;
• Biggest problem? Even though I'd been shooting with a dSLR for a few months at that time, I had not yet moved from auto to manual! :cry

Nikolai

catspaw wrote:

Oh, what a horribly good assignment.

So I went to my Oct 07 folder, and found this favorite:

mind you, this is pre-PP, since erm... I'm still learning THAT. Photography comes naturally, finding time for Lightroom or CS3 does not.

* The colors have NO 'pop' to them. A polarizer might have been useful, yes? I knew what those were back then ...
* The dark shadows, especially the largest one in the middle are horrible detractors. Late afternoon is NOT a good hour for decent lighting. I should have made a few return trips to the aspens .... but I never did. I could do better even then.
* The furthest mountain is very 'bleah'. As is the sky. While the tri-colors of the trees in the foreground are a nice touch, the eye is not drawn anywhere.
* In that vein, there is no 'rule of 3' here. The entire scene just floats away, again with no 'pop' between the distances. Playing with where I was focusing and going more manual there would have helped, but I wasn't there yet in my photography.
* A wider angle and seeing what's off to the left (where the eye IS drawn) would have likely been a better composition (I think there might have been a dead tree in the way, but still. I can climb out on rocks without death easily enough for the sake of a better photo. I was standing 3 feet off the road here. unadventurous).
* This lens sucks. good thing I replaced it.

Leah,
thank you for entering this - by all means very challenging - class!
Good job on self-critique! All the points are spot on!
But let me through in a couple more just to help you out with it ;-)

• Image has no focal point and as such has a snapshotty feeling of "mum, look at them trees over yonder"
• I may be wrong but I have a feeling that the image is skewed CCW just a tad (judging by the majority of trees)

It would be interesting to see what you will do in a year with your best Moab shot

Nikolai

globaltraveller wrote:

And now that I've taken a couple of shots at critique, I'll put up one of my own works:

Cloisters at the Hieronymites Monastery in Lisbon.

• The crop should have been tighter, with less of the pillars/bases in the foreground;
• I should have either removed or photoshopped out the turnbuckle and wooden plank;
• An off-center angle could have worked better;
• Biggest problem? Even though I'd been shooting with a dSLR for a few months at that time, I had not yet moved from auto to manual! :cry

Oh, so your were on Antonio's turf, huh?
Thank you for entering! Now let's see if there is something else...

• This is actually one of the scenarios where a dead center composition would be appropriate. Or, as you suggested, way more off center, preferably looking along the pillars or along the wall.
• Almost always with this type of frame shooting really low (pretty much from the floor level) would improve the shot.
• Architecture is all about vertical lines. Shooting with non-TS WA lens is very hard to keep them all vertical, hence you image shows the keystone effect, if even so slight. Solution: use dual axis level (and possible a tripod), or tilt the camera a lot and thus make them boldly non-vertical.
• In addition to cloning out that thingie on the right I would suggest to play with the curves/levels and see if you get more from the light/shadow contrast by increasing it
• This is a long shot, but a I though it in just in case: a little bit earlier that day (one hour?) those shadows would be totally perpendicular to the wall and one of them would be hitting precisely that door on the right, thus making is a potential key feature. As my firend Shutter would say, "photography is all about the patience", and as Marc Muench would say, "follow the light":-)

HTH

catspaw

Nikolai wrote:

Leah,

[*]I may be wrong but I have a feeling that the image is skewed CCW just a tad (judging by the majority of trees)[/LIST]It would be interesting to see what you will do in a year with your best Moab shot

newbie to dslr (still making slr transition).... CCW = ?

And even my Moab shots from day1 to the last day are a HUGE improvement. My biggest issue now is I want to shoot manual 100%, 90% of the time (not just shutter priority, etc). Gotta get faster at that

thanks!!!!
first photo I've posted anywhere in dgrin ..... talk about tossing self into sharks, but somehow safer when I'm one of the sharks too

Nikolai

catspaw wrote:

newbie to dslr (still making slr transition).... CCW = ?

Leah, it's not dlsr-specific. Simply "Counter-clock-wise", direction of the rotation.

And even my Moab shots from day1 to the last day are a HUGE improvement. My biggest issue now is I want to shoot manual 100%, 90% of the time (not just shutter priority, etc). Gotta get faster at that

I understand that you probably hung out with "100% manual" crowd, but let me assure you that Aperture and Shutter priority are extremely valuable tools. No need to be a digital luddite just for the sake of it.

thanks!!!!
first photo I've posted anywhere in dgrin ..... talk about tossing self into sharks, but somehow safer when I'm one of the sharks too

Realy? Oh, my, and right in this class? You got some big cajones, girl!

anwmn1

I have taken a sabbatical from these lessons but this is something I do all the time on my own.

So from my Best of 2007 Folder is this shot which was a candidate for dgrin Photo of the Year 2007 and is can be found in the header at times.




THE LIGHT - Upper Antelope Canyon Arizona July 2007

* Crop is too tight- more foreground especially in the lower left would help balance the photo and lead the eyes throughout the entire photo (something I try to achieve now). Currently the lower left is a natural stop point for the viewer (subconscious)

* Overexposed areas on the canyon floor and near the top. This could have been easily fixed by taking additional exposures and blending/merging them together. The issue is a big one because the rock on the left and the rays of light lead you to the overexposed area on the canyon floor. The canyon walls on both sides and the rays of light lead you to the overexposed areas in the top.

* Lack of sharpness in the upper left. This is an area of focus as the eye is naturally lead there by the rays of light and the edge of the canyon wall. Sharper detail in that area would cause the viewer to briefly pause there before circling through the photo. Additional frames with selective focus and then merging would have solved this issue.

Nikolai

anwmn1 wrote:

I have taken a sabbatical from these lessons but this is something I do all the time on my own.

So from my Best of 2007 Folder is this shot which was a candidate for dgrin Photo of the Year 2007 and is can be found in the header at times.

THE LIGHT - Upper Antelope Canyon Arizona July 2007

* Crop is too tight- more foreground especially in the lower left would help balance the photo and lead the eyes throughout the entire photo (something I try to achieve now). Currently the lower left is a natural stop point for the viewer (subconscious)

* Overexposed areas on the canyon floor and near the top. This could have been easily fixed by taking additional exposures and blending/merging them together. The issue is a big one because the rock on the left and the rays of light lead you to the overexposed area on the canyon floor. The canyon walls on both sides and the rays of light lead you to the overexposed areas in the top.

* Lack of sharpness in the upper left. This is an area of focus as the eye is naturally lead there by the rays of light and the edge of the canyon wall. Sharper detail in that area would cause the viewer to briefly pause there before circling through the photo. Additional frames with selective focus and then merging would have solved this issue.

Ouch.
[hardened breathing on]You choose your subject well, young master Iso![hardened breathing off].
Hard to add, but I try...

• Getting even lower would increase the whole feeling of greatness
• Two little holes on the lower left wall create "fly on the wall" effect and can be easily cloned out, since they are not instrumental to the image
• As a purely speculative idea, I wonder what if you had the camera tilted in a way that the light source on top and the light target on the bottom would be diagonaly-placed.

Good to have you back in the Class, even if infrequently!

anwmn1

Nikolai wrote:

Ouch.
[hardened breathing on]You choose your subject well, young master Iso![hardened breathing off].
Hard to add, but I try...

• Getting even lower would increase the whole feeling of greatness
• Two little holes on the lower left wall create "fly on the wall" effect and can be easily cloned out, since they are not instrumental to the image
• As a purely speculative idea, I wonder what if you had the camera tilted in a way that the light source on top and the light target on the bottom would be diagonaly-placed.

Good to have you back in the Class, even if infrequently!

I shot this as best I could in the manner I believe you are thinking.

This shot was taken with the tripod splayed out to where the camera was only about 8-10 inches off the canyon floor (I was lying on the ground while shooting)- slightly angled up to capture the rays while still trying to get some of the floor in frame.

The real problem was that this was shot at 14mm as it was the widest I had at the time. The lens was just not wide enough to capture the scene in its glory.

As far as cloning.... Come on Nik.. you know better than to suggest that to me...


Thanks though.

Trevlan

I have less than 6 months with my first camera. I'm far from mastery, but better than I was when I started. Here is one of my 'best' from my first set ever.



Not enough DOF to separate the subject from the background.

This picture would have been better in the shade. If it had to be in direct sunlight, I should have put a diffuser between the subject and the sun, or used a reflector to bounce some light back into the shadows which are a 2 to 3 stop difference.

Shoulders are in a masculine pose, I should have had her rest on one leg and bend the other knee to lower one shoulder.

Highlights on her left shoulder are very distracting due to incorrect exposure and too much difference in light from the highlights to the midtones and shadows. This could have been corrected with proper lighting. Maybe a strobe at camera left 45 degree raised a foot above at 1/2 power to aliviate the sun's brightness and expose the picture correctly at f5.6 at 1/250.

Please feel free to add to my laundry list. And also, please include how you would correct the issues you see.

Thanks,

Nikolai

Trevlan wrote:

I have less than 6 months with my first camera. I'm far from mastery, but better than I was when I started. Here is one of my 'best' from my first set ever.

Not enough DOF to separate the subject from the background.

This picture would have been better in the shade. If it had to be in direct sunlight, I should have put a diffuser between the subject and the sun, or used a reflector to bounce some light back into the shadows which are a 2 to 3 stop difference.

Shoulders are in a masculine pose, I should have had her rest on one leg and bend the other knee to lower one shoulder.

Highlights on her left shoulder are very distracting due to incorrect exposure and too much difference in light from the highlights to the midtones and shadows. This could have been corrected with proper lighting. Maybe a strobe at camera left 45 degree raised a foot above at 1/2 power to aliviate the sun's brightness and expose the picture correctly at f5.6 at 1/250.

Please feel free to add to my laundry list. And also, please include how you would correct the issues you see.

Thanks,

Frank,
thank you for playing! Good self-whipping! Let's see if I can add some salt to your fresh wounds:-)

• in addition to a more blurred bg, I'd clone out some distacting bg details, e.g. that dark spot almost in the middle of the picture
• in this kind of environment you can actually put the sun to a good use by using it as a hair light, thus creating a nice separation between her dark hair and relatively dark bg. Naturally, you'd ahve to use a fill flash or a white reflector (silver or gold would deliver too much power and she would squint). Remember, even a t-shirt or a pizza box can serve as one.
• while I agree with the "bend knee" and "dropped shoulder" comment, I must note that this is usually related to the adult female models. In fact, I would say the whole pose in this case is "too adult". She is a kid, she's not supposed to be branding "1000 yard stare".
• which bring me to the most important part: the whole image looks "dead posed". And while I do pose my models all the time, I'm usually trying to find some pose related to some activity relevant to what my model can be doing. For a kid this must be somethingless serious and more playful, methinks.

HTH

Trevlan

'1000 yard stare.' Hahahaha! Classic. You can see in her eyes was she was looking at. About the only thing good with this picture.

Thanks for the salt! all I need is a little fire, and we have ourselves a Frankfuter!

The cloning would have worked, but I was too noobish to do any affective PP.

Nikolai

Trevlan wrote:

Fire away!

Sorry mate, one entry only!

[Deleted User]

This was the first picture I ever posted on Smug mug.



The date was 20-01-07 Westward Ho! beach Devon. I was standing on the start finish line of a Parakart race (3 wheeled buggies pulled along by a large kite). I noticed when I looked down the course to pick up the buggies so I could pan the camera on them to get a picture as they crossed the line, I got this silhouette effect, I took one picture of the silhouette and then thought nothing of it. It was only when I uploaded from the camera did I see I had a great shot.

So whats wrong with it, where do I start, maybe the big empty space at the front of the picture, maybe the overexposed sun reflection in the water, then there the details.............what detail?? There no colour only the drab brownie beige colour and don't get my started on the noise in the picture. The picture was taken on a Fuji S9600, set to auto and saved as a jpeg. This picture has nothing going for it.

And do you know something.............I love this picture, I am a Parakart rider as well and this picture encapuslate what I love about parakart flying, a big empty beach, the sun shining and an on shore wind, I also love Westward Ho! beach. In fact I love this picture so much I had it printed and mounted and it is currently hanging on my living room wall now.


Tim

Nikolai

draggin wrote:

This was the first picture I ever posted on Smug mug.

Tim, the idea was to post (and critique) an otherwise strong image. This is a snapshot. Sorry.

[Deleted User]

Nikolai, that's my point, everybody will look at the picture and think as you have its a snap shot, but to me it is a strong image, it captures so much that I enjoy, it has a lot of meaning despite all it faults, which I guess only I see. I have seen images on dgrin that other users have praised and I have viewed it and thought "I can't see what the fuss is about".

I thought the idea was to post what I felt was my best, strongest picture which you photographed 12+ months ago and then critique it, well I did. Would I have been right to post a photograph that other felt was more suitable yet to me was not what I believed was my best

Tim

anwmn1

draggin wrote:

Nikolai, that's my point, everybody will look at the picture and think as you have its a snap shot, but to me it is a strong image, it captures so much that I enjoy, it has a lot of meaning despite all it faults, which I guess only I see. I have seen images on dgrin that other users have praised and I have viewed it and thought "I can't see what the fuss is about".

I thought the idea was to post what I felt was my best, strongest picture which you photographed 12+ months ago and then critique it, well I did. Would I have been right to post a photograph that other felt was more suitable yet to me was not what I believed was my best

Tim

Tim-



I understand your feelings both about this shot and others often praised on dgrin (believe me). I can see your emotional attachment to this shot as it captures the sport and the location for you. I think everyone has shots that are not very good technically but they still capture something beyond that.

The real challenge though is to look at it now from a different stand point. To look at it without the emotional attachment that you describe and judge it solely on its artistic and more importantly the technical merits of photography. As you grow in photography you need to be able to be your own worst critique to continue to improve (it helps to prevent getting upset at others comments too ).

Try and look at it from the mind set that you are now about to revisit that very place- what are you going to do different to capture an even stronger image.

I'll critique this shot for you if you want and if Nikolai does not mind

Nikolai

draggin wrote:

Nikolai, that's my point, everybody will look at the picture and think as you have its a snap shot, but to me it is a strong image, it captures so much that I enjoy, it has a lot of meaning despite all it faults, which I guess only I see. I have seen images on dgrin that other users have praised and I have viewed it and thought "I can't see what the fuss is about".

I thought the idea was to post what I felt was my best, strongest picture which you photographed 12+ months ago and then critique it, well I did. Would I have been right to post a photograph that other felt was more suitable yet to me was not what I believed was my best

Tim

Tim, it was the idea, indeed, but I was really hoping for something stronger. Emotional attachement is highly individual and by its nature is not "critiqueable". We still need to have some common ground to be able to disect the image objectively.
I hope Aaron (and others) can give more details on it.