black mambaRegistered UsersPosts: 8,327Major grins
edited November 14, 2009
Well.....I have to say you lost me with set. I find the background to be very distracting. And I think you should have gone with either the watch or the planes as a subject, but not the pair of them. I know you're trying to tie together the fact that the watch is an aviation model but, to me, the combo just doesn't work in this case. Perhaps with a different approach, the same thought process would yield a more successful result.
Tom
I always wanted to lie naked on a bearskin rug in front of a fireplace. Cracker Barrel didn't take kindly to it.
Well, the Blue Angel was just for grins. The Gray play is a B-1B - The Watch Model is Breitling B-1, sorry you dont like it. Maybe move this to the refinery so I learn what would have made for a good shot in your eyes.
0
black mambaRegistered UsersPosts: 8,327Major grins
edited November 15, 2009
I'll make a few more comments as long as you recognize that they are just my own personal opinions.....worth whatever value you care to place upon them.
As I said, the background is not right for this shot. It's too busy, too contrasty with the blue and white " fighting " for attention. The multitude of stars are also distracting from the primary subjects. When you have a highly reflective subject....as in the watch.... it's best to keep it against a darker surrounding. Here you have it in touch with a stark white star that does nothing to compliment the subject, and ,in fact, detracts from it.
If the watch is to be the main subject, it should be presented as such....shown much closer. A watch as a subject is great as long as its defining details are obvious. A watch at a distance is just a watch. A watch shown with its individual details clearly evident, and emphasized, now begins to speak for itself.
Very few folks would recognize the grey plane as a B-1 bomber. The same for the watch, most people have no clue it's a B-1. The association you looked to establish between the plane and the watch is just not evident.
Again, these are just my personal opinions. I'm sure others can see things entirely differently.
I always wanted to lie naked on a bearskin rug in front of a fireplace. Cracker Barrel didn't take kindly to it.
I'll make a few more comments as long as you recognize that they are just my own personal opinions.....worth whatever value you care to place upon them.
As I said, the background is not right for this shot. It's too busy, too contrasty with the blue and white " fighting " for attention. The multitude of stars are also distracting from the primary subjects. When you have a highly reflective subject....as in the watch.... it's best to keep it against a darker surrounding. Here you have it in touch with a stark white star that does nothing to compliment the subject, and ,in fact, detracts from it.
If the watch is to be the main subject, it should be presented as such....shown much closer. A watch as a subject is great as long as its defining details are obvious. A watch at a distance is just a watch. A watch shown with its individual details clearly evident, and emphasized, now begins to speak for itself.
Very few folks would recognize the grey plane as a B-1 bomber. The same for the watch, most people have no clue it's a B-1. The association you looked to establish between the plane and the watch is just not evident.
Again, these are just my personal opinions. I'm sure others can see things entirely differently.
Comments
Tom
As I said, the background is not right for this shot. It's too busy, too contrasty with the blue and white " fighting " for attention. The multitude of stars are also distracting from the primary subjects. When you have a highly reflective subject....as in the watch.... it's best to keep it against a darker surrounding. Here you have it in touch with a stark white star that does nothing to compliment the subject, and ,in fact, detracts from it.
If the watch is to be the main subject, it should be presented as such....shown much closer. A watch as a subject is great as long as its defining details are obvious. A watch at a distance is just a watch. A watch shown with its individual details clearly evident, and emphasized, now begins to speak for itself.
Very few folks would recognize the grey plane as a B-1 bomber. The same for the watch, most people have no clue it's a B-1. The association you looked to establish between the plane and the watch is just not evident.
Again, these are just my personal opinions. I'm sure others can see things entirely differently.
:cry :cry I dont have that watch:cry :cry
Put the watch on a star
and the planes on a stripe
It's not what you look at that matters: Its what you see!
Nikon
http://www.time2smile.smugmug.com
Understood - I appreciate the feedback
thank you
Go get a watch!!! B-1's are more and more rare every day. The new Airwolf just does not compare in my eyes.