>> challenge 15 - comment and critiques thread <<

1246710

Comments

  • wxwaxwxwax Registered Users Posts: 15,471 Major grins
    edited June 22, 2004
    DavidTO wrote:
    Happy Feet

    5350448-S.jpg

    .

    Cuuute!
    Sid.
    Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
    http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
  • spocklingspockling Registered Users Posts: 369 Major grins
    edited June 22, 2004
    wxwax wrote:
    It's a nice pic, you caught the right moment. Lots of color artifacts in the shot. Not sure if you mean for them to be there or not. Did you have to "push" the exposure a lot, or zoom into the image?
    Sid, Thanks. The color artifacts are from me not sizing my pic correctly. Would prefer they're not there. Due to equipment shortcomings (Canon A75) I had to zoom right in to get this.
  • damonffdamonff Registered Users Posts: 1,894 Major grins
    edited June 22, 2004
    With an A75 you shouldn't have that much grain. Zoom out, move closer, and make sure your settings are correct as far as picture quality...my friend was taking pictures with his new Sony P10 and wondered why his quality was bad; turns out his camera was set on 640x480.
    spockling wrote:
    Sid, Thanks. The color artifacts are from me not sizing my pic correctly. Would prefer they're not there. Due to equipment shortcomings (Canon A75) I had to zoom right in to get this.
  • WolfWolf Registered Users Posts: 154 Major grins
    edited June 22, 2004
    Love the Happy Feet shot.
  • SeeMoonSeeMoon Banned Posts: 355 Major grins
    edited June 22, 2004
    AltPro wrote:
    Simone, c'est typique. Two people look at something, hear a conversation about it, and still visualize completely different things! I never even thought of the "black chair" as an obstruction. It was just a part of the composition that felt right.
    Very etherial photo. I do like it very much.
    ginette

    Merci Ginette!

    In this case it was a very good thing..and nice photoshopping indeed!
  • wxwaxwxwax Registered Users Posts: 15,471 Major grins
    edited June 22, 2004
    DavidTO wrote:
    Happy Feet


    David, I hope you don't mind, I took the liberty of doing a crop to this wonderful photo. If you object, I'll take it down immediately.

    5388508-M.jpg
    Sid.
    Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
    http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
  • DavidTODavidTO Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 19,160 Major grins
    edited June 22, 2004
    wxwax wrote:
    David, I hope you don't mind, I took the liberty of doing a crop to this wonderful photo. If you object, I'll take it down immediately.

    5388508-M.jpg

    I don't mind at all. If I submit it to the challenge, it may very well end up looking something like that!

    Edit: The more I look at it, the more I like it. Like I said in the original post, I've been so busy with the house, I can't concentrate on this as much as I would like. Tired and sore. But one of us is thinking!--a definite improvement.

    Oh, and it's my daughter--all I see when I look at it is cute. Makes it harder to see a better crop, and judge it on photographic merits.
    Moderator Emeritus
    Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
  • AltProAltPro Registered Users Posts: 478 Major grins
    edited June 22, 2004
    wxwax wrote:
    David, I hope you don't mind, I took the liberty of doing a crop to this wonderful photo. If you object, I'll take it down immediately.
    Sid:

    I think you are right... The Crop really works well here. Now she fills the frame, and the cut off hands don't seem out of place.
    Great shot made even better.
    My 2cents.
    ginette
    "In the End, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends."
  • AltProAltPro Registered Users Posts: 478 Major grins
    edited June 22, 2004
    DavidTO wrote:
    Oh, and it's my daughter--all I see when I look at it is cute. Makes it harder to see a better crop, and judge it on photographic merits.

    And boy is she cute, David! I absolutely love the freckles! The wispy strands of hair...
    But I think what captures me the most, are the eyes. Those beautiful blue eys looking right into the camera, and therefore right at the viewer. That's enhanced by the fact that you were down at ther level... She looks to be about 10, so the lip gloss through me at first, but then I remembered it was Father's Day, and you had been "going out." Makes is endearing that she would "dress" to go out with her Dad.

    Really nice.
    ginette
    "In the End, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends."
  • DavidTODavidTO Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 19,160 Major grins
    edited June 22, 2004
    AltPro wrote:

    And boy is she cute, David! I absolutely love the freckles! The wispy strands of hair...
    But I think what captures me the most, are the eyes. Those beautiful blue eys looking right into the camera, and therefore right at the viewer. That's enhanced by the fact that you were down at ther level... She looks to be about 10, so the lip gloss through me at first, but then I remembered it was Father's Day, and you had been "going out." Makes is endearing that she would "dress" to go out with her Dad.

    Really nice.
    ginette


    hmmm...no lip gloss, but I did use a fill flash. That's something to fix before submitting, perhaps. I can take down the sheen on the lips. The flash had a bluish cast next to the setting sun--so I processed twice in RAW. Once "as shot" for the background and the leg-end of her, and once at "Flash" WB, for her face, shirt, etc. I then blended the two with a mask.

    Sad thing is--she hates her freckles. But she truly is the most kind-hearted and loving person I know.

    The rest of the shoot, the non-movement part, is here.
    Moderator Emeritus
    Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
  • gubbsgubbs Registered Users Posts: 3,166 Major grins
    edited June 22, 2004
  • gubbsgubbs Registered Users Posts: 3,166 Major grins
    edited June 22, 2004
  • gubbsgubbs Registered Users Posts: 3,166 Major grins
    edited June 22, 2004
  • DavidTODavidTO Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 19,160 Major grins
    edited June 22, 2004
    gubbs wrote:
    5400209-M.jpg

    I like the colors
    Moderator Emeritus
    Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
  • damonffdamonff Registered Users Posts: 1,894 Major grins
    edited June 22, 2004
    Love this one Gubbs...

    5400209-M.jpg
  • bhambham Registered Users Posts: 1,303 Major grins
    edited June 22, 2004
    Here are a few pics that I would like you feedback on. I like them all for different reasons, but want to get from everybody else.

    #1
    5394069-L.jpg

    #2
    5399285-M.jpg

    #3
    5399286-M.jpg

    #4
    5399287-M.jpg

    #5
    5399288-M.jpg
    "A photo is like a hamburger. You can get one from McDonalds for $1, one from Chili's for $5, or one from Ruth's Chris for $15. You usually get what you pay for, but don't expect a Ruth's Chris burger at a McDonalds price, if you want that, go cook it yourself." - me
  • DavidTODavidTO Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 19,160 Major grins
    edited June 22, 2004
    bham wrote:
    Here are a few pics that I would like you feedback on. I like them all for different reasons, but want to get from everybody else.



    #3
    5399286-M.jpg

    This one is very cool.
    Moderator Emeritus
    Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
  • WolfWolf Registered Users Posts: 154 Major grins
    edited June 22, 2004
    DavidTO wrote:
    This one is very cool.
    I have to agree, I think this is the best one of the lot!! Excellent job!
  • WolfWolf Registered Users Posts: 154 Major grins
    edited June 22, 2004
    Oh, and Gubbs, that last one of your series, was the BOMB!! I really liked that one.
  • bhambham Registered Users Posts: 1,303 Major grins
    edited June 22, 2004
    Thanks Wolf and DavidTO. I wasn't sure if it was too much motion.
    "A photo is like a hamburger. You can get one from McDonalds for $1, one from Chili's for $5, or one from Ruth's Chris for $15. You usually get what you pay for, but don't expect a Ruth's Chris burger at a McDonalds price, if you want that, go cook it yourself." - me
  • ginger_55ginger_55 Registered Users Posts: 8,416 Major grins
    edited June 22, 2004
    feedback on the roller blader......... I think it is
    DavidTO wrote:
    This one is very cool.
    I, too, like the one with the blurred background, the shirtless man, etc.

    I will tell you that Andy critcized my photos saying that he could accept the extreme blur in the subject if the background weren't blurred.

    My take on the subject is that if you are panning with a subject the background is going to be blurred and that is accepted in the photography world. I just want to tell you that. I think that is on page 2 or 3, after I submitted a photo for the Challenge. I mean Andy's feedback is on page 2 o3r 3. So you can go read what he had to say. As I said, I do challenge that thinking.

    Also, his critique in the last challenged, he mentioned a centered woman, that the centering of the woman bothered him, or something, so now I am afraid to center.

    I am pretty sure that I am entering a blurred foreground, where the camera was panned, so the background will also be blurred. I am avoiding entering a centered object of interest. I think it is appropriate in some cases. In your case, it is very possible that some cropping could take your blurred shirtless man off center a bit. The rule of thirds is always good, but it does need something in the other 1/3, at least. I like to play with that kind of thing, placement. I do it, until it is just right, in my mind a lightbulb goes off, then I move the subject a bit more, if the lightbulb dims, I move it back to where the lightbulb comes on again. That may or may not be of help.

    I have noticed sports pictures with ghosts in them. Everything is in focus except a person/object that is so blurred, I can only see it as a ghost, but can't ID the ghost. I will say, too, my own critique, only my own opinion, that I don't like those pictures. I have a picture in the Challenge that could be described that way. I like it because my "people" are so colorful they still maintain a definite feeling of solidity in my mind. It is totally abstract. I doubt that it is my final entry, though I thoroughly like it.

    I don't know how you all feel about your ghosts, it is a very fine line, IMO.

    I just had a moment, so I probably gave you more of a critique than you wanted. ginger
    After all is said and done, it is the sweet tea.
  • ginger_55ginger_55 Registered Users Posts: 8,416 Major grins
    edited June 22, 2004
    Andy does sports?
    I can't find a picture of Andy doing conventional sports. Do you do that subject Andy, if so, do you have any examples. Sports often are typical subjects thought of to show movement.
    ginger
    After all is said and done, it is the sweet tea.
  • DavidTODavidTO Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 19,160 Major grins
    edited June 22, 2004
    ginger_55 wrote:
    Also, his critique in the last challenged, he mentioned a centered woman, that the centering of the woman bothered him, or something, so now I am afraid to center.
    ginger

    Ginger, just like the rules of grammar, the rules of photographic composition should be broken, that's what creates the unexpected and exciting. Not that you should always speak in broken grammar, but the old "To Boldly Go" or "To Go Boldly" argument stands.

    Anyway, what I'm really trying to say is follow your heart, your gut, your muse. Maybe you'll make a boring picture that would be better served by not being centered, maybe you'll make a great shot that is centered. The important thing is to find your voice.
    Moderator Emeritus
    Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
  • DavidTODavidTO Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 19,160 Major grins
    edited June 22, 2004
    Cropped and de-glossed
    Here's the shot of my daughter cropped and with the phantom lip-gloss removed. How'd I do with that? Does it look natural? I've been staring at it so long, I can't tell anymore.

    I also tweaked the color slightly, and removed one thing on her foot that was distracting me.

    Happy Feet, take two:

    5410601-M.jpg

    Thanks to all for your input.
    Moderator Emeritus
    Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
  • dkappdkapp Registered Users Posts: 985 Major grins
    edited June 22, 2004
    ginger_55 wrote:
    I can't find a picture of Andy doing conventional sports. Do you do that subject Andy, if so, do you have any examples. Sports often are typical subjects thought of to show movement.
    ginger

    You like to challenge everything that Andy says or does. Sometimes an opinion is just an opinion...no need to go crazy with it.

    I hope this helps and doesn't add any confusion.

    Dave
  • ginger_55ginger_55 Registered Users Posts: 8,416 Major grins
    edited June 22, 2004
    Probably the picture for the challenge will be one
    Well, if nothing else I will go boldly, but from now on, I am going to be able to say, self critique, as it were, why I am going boldly. This challenge I did not plan to enter, now I have 10 to 15 shots I would be proud to enter, boldly.
    I don't think I plan to enter one that follows the "rules", if there are rules, in the sense that one has to do something. I don't plan on entering a centered photograph, this time, unless I were to enter the dog, and to be honest I don't really plan to do that. Even my dog lists loves that dog picture, they are tickled that my perfect dog is getting soaked.

    There is the one in the challeng now, that is one I would put on my wall. It is the extreme abstract one on the top. I am not sure why I will probably not use it. I think one reason is that I cannot, at this point, argue strongly, where this shows movement, though it does to me. I can't say why. It is a bit over the top, not as safe, so to speak. And it was not my first choice.




    5258880-M.jpg

    The one above this writing was my first choice. I have not changed my mind about the picture, I am clear on why I like it, I definitely think it shows motion, and at the same time retains the integrity of the recognition factor, in other words, most people can tell what this is a picture of.
    The background is blurred because I was panning with the child. (and I like the colors of the background, not really important here) That accounts for the blurred background. The child is recognizeable, I think, as a child, but is heavily blurred with motion. (Her tennis form is great here, not important either) But because of the form, she has one foot forward, one foot back, she is positioned a bit to the right, but is stepping towards the center of the picture, where the yellow ball is rolling on the court towards her (she is going to miss it, she has), but all together there is a perfect triangle of movement. Oh, and the lines on the ground are pretty clear indicating, if there was a question, that this is a tennis court.
    To me this photo completes the assignment, shows movement, makes me happy, and I can say why......... and go on, but I won't. It has a failure, IMO, it lacks something, that is emotion, or obvious emotion. That is not in the assignment, but I like to see emotion, I have mentioned that, and I think others do, too. But this is the world of tennis, she is a child concentrating hard to do what the others are doing. I can feel the emotion. The excitement.

    And that is what I have to say.
    Except why does everyone like the darn dog? She is sleeping next to me.
    I would never take my camera outside if it were raining that hard. But it was raining, a bit.

    g
    After all is said and done, it is the sweet tea.
  • AndyAndy Registered Users Posts: 50,016 Major grins
    edited June 22, 2004
    ginger rulez
    i'm diggin' your self-critique ginger, and thank you for writing about it! i also dig that tennis girl, after looking at it for a few times it has grown on me mwink.gif
  • AndyAndy Registered Users Posts: 50,016 Major grins
    edited June 22, 2004
    rules schmulez
    ginger_55 wrote:
    I, too, like the one with the blurred background, the shirtless man, etc.

    I will tell you that Andy critcized my photos saying that he could accept the extreme blur in the subject if the background weren't blurred.

    My take on the subject is that if you are panning with a subject the background is going to be blurred and that is accepted in the photography world. I just want to tell you that. I think that is on page 2 or 3, after I submitted a photo for the Challenge. I mean Andy's feedback is on page 2 o3r 3. So you can go read what he had to say. As I said, I do challenge that thinking.

    Also, his critique in the last challenged, he mentioned a centered woman, that the centering of the woman bothered him, or something, so now I am afraid to center.

    I am pretty sure that I am entering a blurred foreground, where the camera was panned, so the background will also be blurred. I am avoiding entering a centered object of interest. I think it is appropriate in some cases. In your case, it is very possible that some cropping could take your blurred shirtless man off center a bit. The rule of thirds is always good, but it does need something in the other 1/3, at least. I like to play with that kind of thing, placement. I do it, until it is just right, in my mind a lightbulb goes off, then I move the subject a bit more, if the lightbulb dims, I move it back to where the lightbulb comes on again. That may or may not be of help.

    I have noticed sports pictures with ghosts in them. Everything is in focus except a person/object that is so blurred, I can only see it as a ghost, but can't ID the ghost. I will say, too, my own critique, only my own opinion, that I don't like those pictures. I have a picture in the Challenge that could be described that way. I like it because my "people" are so colorful they still maintain a definite feeling of solidity in my mind. It is totally abstract. I doubt that it is my final entry, though I thoroughly like it.

    I don't know how you all feel about your ghosts, it is a very fine line, IMO.

    I just had a moment, so I probably gave you more of a critique than you wanted. ginger

    there's nothing wrong with central composition - in and of itself - but the primary reason behind the rule of thirds is that our eyes gravitate to the center of an image first, so having the subject on one of the thirds lines keeps the viewer engaged with the photo longer. (like your tennis girl, ginger) i'll used central compo when the scene & subject dictate... rules schmulez!

    re: blurring - that's just a preference for me - but after plenty of thougthful consideration, i can see why it works in certain shots - again, like the tennis girl, or a car race, or a horse on the racetrack, etc etc... thanks for getting me to expand my views and perceptions on this!
  • wxwaxwxwax Registered Users Posts: 15,471 Major grins
    edited June 23, 2004
    Hey Seamaiden, I didn't want to offer a suggestion in the official submissions thread... but your bee shot is really cool. What if you used a slightly slower shutter speed, so that the moving bees were a bit blurred and the resting ones were crisp? I wonder how that would look? Are the leaves in the water still enough to remain sharp even with a longer exposure time?
    Sid.
    Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
    http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
  • gubbsgubbs Registered Users Posts: 3,166 Major grins
    edited June 23, 2004
    5399286-S.jpg

    Cool shot, great blend of blurs and focus. The converging lines give it depth & make you think he' s travelling to our left, but he must be going right?? (I think)
Sign In or Register to comment.