Challenge #61 - a few ideas

Jenn

I went looking for ideas and found something I thought might work. I wanted to go with something like "Invention Graveyard" ... old inventions found in a secondhand store. I tried to find some things that might tell a story like was mentioned to me in another discussion. Do any of these have potential?

1.


2.


3.


4.


5.

MarkR

I think #4 or #5 both have potential. Maybe try some different angles or crops?

angevin1

Jenn, any and all have potential, but not in the state that you shot them. Have a look here and see if any of this helps. Right now I'd say composition is a good place to start.

Jenn

angevin1 wrote: »

Jenn, any and all have potential, but not in the state that you shot them. Have a look here and see if any of this helps. Right now I'd say composition is a good place to start.

I don't understand what you mean by 'not in the state that I shot them'? Do you mean I should go back and take the photos again, or crop them different? The originals have alot of other stuff in the images that I've cropped out.

I looked at some of the info at that link.... starting with composition. I took the pictures at a secondhand store and sells old everything... shelves of secondhand junk, more or less. Old computers, keyboards, clocks, lamps, and so on.

angevin1

Jenn wrote: »

I don't understand what you mean by 'not in the state that I shot them'?

Do you mean I should go back and take the photos again, or crop them different?.

I left the link thinking you might want to compare notes on your compositions. The Link I gave has a wealth of information on helping us all take better shots. Composition is a key component of designing a photograph.

I read with great interest all that you wrote the other day in the Challenges thread. You want direction. The link I provided gives good direction to start with.

Summarizing: you need to work on your compositions.

Jenn

angevin1 wrote: »

I left the link thinking you might want to compare notes on your compositions. The Link I gave has a wealth of information on helping us all take better shots. Composition is a key component of designing a photograph.

I read with great interest all that you wrote the other day in the Challenges thread. You want direction. The link I provided gives good direction to start with.

Summarizing: you need to work on your compositions.

I read about the compositions at that link and used a tool called a Composition adjuster to see if that would help me. Is this any better?

angevin1

No. not at all. If I were going to choose an item such as this one, I'd take probably fifteen photos of it, in various lighting conditions and see what made me happy. But, if say, I couldn't take it home and play with it, then I'd just do it right there, in the store. But I might try up close and personal with the thing on several different aspects too.

Did you make it all the way to this link?

What I would suggest is to look at this link as an intro-tutorial, and think about what makes a good photograph. You are taking photographs, but they will not do well in the challenges until you take the time to really assess yourself and skill-set.

Anyone else ( you included) want to chime in and tell me how wrong I am, it is quite okay. Won't be breaching new ground there.

I do think I am right on this Jenn.

Best,

Jenn

angevin1 wrote: »

No. not at all. If I were going to choose an item such as this one, I'd take probably fifteen photos of it, in various lighting conditions and see what made me happy. But, if say, I couldn't take it home and play with it, then I'd just do it right there, in the store. But I might try up close and personal with the thing on several different aspects too.

Did you make it all the way to this link?

What I would suggest is to look at this link as an intro-tutorial, and think about what makes a good photograph. You are taking photographs, but they will not do well in the challenges until you take the time to really assess yourself and skill-set.

Anyone else ( you included) want to chime in and tell me how wrong I am, it is quite okay. Won't be breaching new ground there.

I do think I am right on this Jenn.

Best,

Yes ... that's the link I went through ... the intro-tutorial and all the images. I found the Composition adjuster through a link somewhere in all the info I read through. I adjusted the composition of the video box on that table using that tool cropping it differently. What is wrong with the image? Is it just a sucky item? It seemed interesting as far as being some sort of 'invention' from the past goes. I don't have many choices on taking the photo itself because it was in a store and I couldn't move it.

I kind of like the image with all the clocks on it, too, which I can crop it lots of different ways.

(a different crop - no other editing)

WhatSheSaw

What I find interesting about the clock one is the one that has no hands. You might try getting closer and using a shallow depth of field to drop out a lot of the background distractions. You might also try a narrower angle - closer to the shelf and looking down it (more from the side as opposed to more from the front). Whether or not that works out will depend on what you pick up in the background.

Try it also from the other side. The lighting will change and you might find less distraction in the BG.

Why would anyone buy a clock with no hands? (Maybe use it as a picture frame?)

travelways

WhatSheSaw wrote: »

What I find interesting about the clock one is the one that has no hands. You might try getting closer and using a shallow depth of field to drop out a lot of the background distractions. You might also try a narrower angle - closer to the shelf and looking down it (more from the side as opposed to more from the front). Whether or not that works out will depend on what you pick up in the background.

Try it also from the other side. The lighting will change and you might find less distraction in the BG.

Why would anyone buy a clock with no hands? (Maybe use it as a picture frame?)

Jenn

WhatSheSaw wrote: »

What I find interesting about the clock one is the one that has no hands. You might try getting closer and using a shallow depth of field to drop out a lot of the background distractions.

I might be able to crop it to look like that.. the image below is just another crop and it's downsized quite a bit, so I have alot of options to play with the finished image. I was thinking if I used that image I'd title it something like 'Graveyard of Time' or something along the lines of showing as many different inventions that shows the time that I can get in the image, but I don't know if it'd be too cluttered and get my msg across or not...kind of like the original image #5 I posted. I'm trying to tell that story...

WhatSheSaw wrote: »

You might also try a narrower angle - closer to the shelf and looking down it (more from the side as opposed to more from the front). Whether or not that works out will depend on what you pick up in the background.
Try it also from the other side. The lighting will change and you might find less distraction in the BG.

I could try, but that particulat clock may not even still be there if I go back to try and take another shot. I got some weird looks from shoppers when I was taking my original photos.. ... first time I've tried to take photos like that in a store.

WhatSheSaw wrote: »

Why would anyone buy a clock with no hands? (Maybe use it as a picture frame?)

You can buy brand new clock movements and new clock hands and repair it and it'll be like new. It is a pretty clock... isn't it?

travelways

Jenn wrote: »

I could try, but that particulat clock may not even still be there if I go back to try and take another shot. I got some weird looks from shoppers when I was taking my original photos.. ... first time I've tried to take photos like that in a store.

Who cares about the "weird looks from shoppers".
- I would go and ask permission to the owner to take some photos of it, and try to move it to a place more convenient for your shot...

PS: and I strongly suggest following Tom's advise!

JR303

Jenn, after some interesting dialog the last couple of weeks, the good thing is that you're trying.

I'll just mention the first thing that jumped out at me, and that is that all of the pics, regardless of rule of thirds, etc.. look as though they were shot from eye level. (ie - standing) Now I realize that you got some looks in the store, and trust me, I'm somewhat meek and don't like the attention I get sometimes when I'm shooting, but just try changing your perspective. You'd be surprised at how different a subject can look from just a couple of feet in any direction (don't forget up and down). Try to consider how much more interesting that smoker/stove thingy (the blue one) would have been from a lower angle.

I'm not a professional, and clearly not an expert, but there is something constructive that you can apply. I don't always like the way you respond to people trying to help, but with the link provided and my advice, that's 2 ways to get a good but static subject to become more interesting. I hope you can start there and get somewhere you've never been before.

Now, since I'm commenting here, I gotta tell you, I don't have but one idea for this one so far, so at this point, you're ahead of me.

John

Jenn

JR303 wrote: »

Jenn, after some interesting dialog the last couple of weeks, the good thing is that you're trying.

Maybe I'm just an eternal optimist thinking that eventually I'm going to get a great photo?

JR303 wrote: »

I'll just mention the first thing that jumped out at me, and that is that all of the pics, regardless of rule of thirds, etc.. look as though they were shot from eye level. (ie - standing) Now I realize that you got some looks in the store, and trust me, I'm somewhat meek and don't like the attention I get sometimes when I'm shooting, but just try changing your perspective. You'd be surprised at how different a subject can look from just a couple of feet in any direction (don't forget up and down). Try to consider how much more interesting that smoker/stove thingy (the blue one) would have been from a lower angle.

I actually took quite a few shots of that stove thing... I put it up on some things that were stacked and took a shot of it looking up at it.. then moved it in front and on top of this interesting looking wooden slate trunk and took shots of it looking down at it and straight at it and at a couple of angles. I just haven't edited any of those because they just didn't look great to me. I guess I could edit one where I put it up high and see how that looks.

JR303 wrote: »

I'm not a professional, and clearly not an expert, but there is something constructive that you can apply. I don't always like the way you respond to people trying to help, but with the link provided and my advice, that's 2 ways to get a good but static subject to become more interesting. I hope you can start there and get somewhere you've never been before.

Well ... I don't mean to offend anyone when I respond ... I'm just looking for answers so I can understand what I need to change. Like the lace topic... I put a face with one of my edits trying to make it more interesting. I liked it... but Tom said a face didn't work... but he had a face with his image, so I asked him... what did a face have to do with lace with his image? It wasn't that I didn't like it... I didn't understand why a face with his image was ok, but it wasn't with mine. Another one is shadows... I've been told they are taboo.. more or less... but I see shadows in lots of the other images submitted.... I can't tell why it's ok for some images to have shadows but it's not ok in my images. So I'm thinking.. 'what the heck?' I'm now paranoid about shadows and either think it's a failed image if it has a shadow or clone out the shadow so there won't be one. I kind of need to know why something doesn't work when people comment instead of just telling me it doesn't work. I learn by doing - fixing - editing - and doing again.... That composition adjust tool was cool... so I think I'll use that off and on to help me get a feel for that aspect.

JR303 wrote: »

Now, since I'm commenting here, I gotta tell you, I don't have but one idea for this one so far, so at this point, you're ahead of me.
John

I don't feel like I'm ahead of you!

JR303

Well, I honestly didn't see the lace face posts. I have been ridiculously busy and haven't gotten to peruse much over here. But the only thing I can come up with is if the face is the most prominent article, then I can see where it would be a problem. I can't say other than that, because I didn't see the posts.

Shadows: These are tough. You have to remember that shadows are not a black and white subject (pun intended). There are soft shadows, harsh shadows and a ton of other descriptions in between. Shadows are necessary in photography. A photo without shadows has no depth, very little texture and can be completely uninteresting. Shadows (small, though they may be) are what give skin it's texture, or show depth in the folds of a flag or shirt. The problem is, when you think "shadows are bad" you're making a blanket statement that is a terrible way to think. What the comments probably meant to say was "these shadows are bad". You have to learn how to control the shadows, where they fall and their strength. I have a problem with this all the time. It's a very, very difficult thing for me, so you're not alone in that aspect. What needs to be done is to learn how to use light to achieve the shadows that enhance your shot instead of taking away from it. The lace shot you entered has a pretty strong shadow in it, I can see where someone would say that it's distracting, it was too strong for me. I imagine that it came from on-camera flash, because of it's strength and placement. It seems as though people are drawn to softer shadows than harsh ones because it looks more like what the naked eye can distinguish. The camera has far less latitude than the eye, so a shadow can have too much punch and make the shot less pleasing overall. So, in the end, learn to control the shadows. It's not easy, but it is imperative. Trust me, I've ruined great shots with crappy shadows more than you can imagine.

Oh, and for the record, a great photo is perceptive. I realize that you said that tongue-in-cheek, but in reality, if you're happy with the photo, that's all that really matters. If you're doing the challenges for acclamation, it's probably the wrong way to go about it. If what you see on the screen is exactly what you saw in your head, then it's just a matter of taste. If what is on the screen is sorta kinda what you were going for, then the process is what needs attention. I am constantly surprised at some of the voting on the shots that gets done. So, take the challenges with a grain of salt, and go read some forums. Not just look at the pics, read the c&c that gets posted, like in the refinery thread, that's a great place for information.

Jenn

Here is a newer perspective of the clocks. More taken from above, slightly.. On that page with all the examples that Tom posted it had some examples with lines in them. Is this on the right track?

tinamarie52

I like this one better. I'd crop out the thing that looks like a toaster on the far left. Because of the perspective, it looks like the round clocks could be rolling downhill...time rolls on!

This image is more crisp and the colors are better.

I'm still a bit distracted by the bottom shelf and the side view, but that's me.

What things do you like about this photo?

Chris

Jenn

tinamarie52 wrote: »

I like this one better. I'd crop out the thing that looks like a toaster on the far left. Because of the perspective, it looks like the round clocks could be rolling downhill...time rolls on!

I can crop the toaster thing out, but I could also just clone it out and replace it with the rest of the clock... I guess it does kind of look like the clocks are rolling downhill!

tinamarie52 wrote: »

This image is more crisp and the colors are better.
I'm still a bit distracted by the bottom shelf and the side view, but that's me.

hmmm I could blurr the bottom shelf a bit....

tinamarie52 wrote: »

What things do you like about this photo?
Chris

I like the slightly different 'tilt' ... perspective? of the shelves... and it's sharper, too.

Jenn

Edit #2 of this photo. I couldn't clone the entire left side of the clock, but I got some of it cloned and had to opt to crop it a bit differently, plus I minimized the shelf below the clocks.

Am I getting close to a better image? Each time I do this it looks better to me, but does it look better, composition-wise to ya'll?

SeascapeS

Jenn - when I'm talking about shadows, I mean the harsh ones that outlined the subject in your photo. The lace one that you submitted had such an outline around the legs. It's just a flash problem that can either be fixed with more natural light or using the flash correctly (hard to do if you don't have an external flash).

Jenn

SeascapeS wrote: »

Jenn - when I'm talking about shadows, I mean the harsh ones that outlined the subject in your photo. The lace one that you submitted had such an outline around the legs. It's just a flash problem that can either be fixed with more natural light or using the flash correctly (hard to do if you don't have an external flash).

ok ... right .. I don't have an external flash... but I'm fairly good at cloning OUT a harsh shadow!

Jenn

I was messing around taking photos all over the house and took this one that turned out interesting to me. I cropped it and did some basic edits to it. Any potential?

Jenn

question to anyone who might know...am I getting close to doing any of these?
http://photoinf.com/Golden_Mean/Eugene_Ilchenko/GoldenSection.html
Rule of Thirds or Golden Ratio
Golden Triangles
Golden Spiral or Golden Rectangle

Jenn

Here is the image with a color correction edit:

red_zone

I like the "Perfection" smokeless oil heater as a prop, it in itself is a neat looking and probably quite useful (once upon a time) invention. I'd play with setting it up in different ways, because the pictures don't show it very well. I'd get it out of the store and somewhere you can control things a bit better. The lineoleum is distracting, the color clashes with that awful green trunk, the fluorescent lights in combination with the on-camera flash give your pictures a washed out look, and the downward angle of the picture is, well, not great. The way I envision this is as a still life: in a darkened room, with an overstuffed wing-back chair in the background, the chair having a blanket and a book arranged like someone just got up. Light comes from a candle near the chair and soft low light from one side, with some surrounding room. Or, if like me you don't have a room and such a chair to work with, a view level with the nameplate with the same blanket/book arrangement out of focus in the background, with a soft light coming from the side the nameplate is facing, maybe at an angle to highlight the lettering.

I hope you can get a sense from my descriptions what sort of a scene I would try to convey about the feeling of an invention and its context. There are obviously many other interpretations - there are some very far-out artistic ones using more photoshop skills than I can hope to posess, so it really comes down to finding something that you're happy with.

SeascapeS

Jenn:

I like the camera shots better because they are more eye-pleasing and warmer than the others you've posted. The first ones were not very appealing because of the shelves and other backgrounds that came across as (for lack of a better word), junkie.

However, the camera shot needs a title to tie in the bathroom somehow, either that or a different setting altogether. You're on the right track, just need to tweak it a bit.

tinamarie52

I see that with the camera shot, you are trying to pay attention to composition. If I'm looking correctly, youtried to place the camera lens in ta rule of thirds intersection. The mirror arm, which leads to the vertical tile is your golden spiral.

Based on that, I'd say that you are getting closer to the ROT intersection. I wouldn't crop so itght above the camera.

The mirror arm and the background don't seem to help you build your photo. My eye seems to follow the arm to the vertical tile and out the frame of the image. Think about your mirror/camera as part of a larger composition (not sure myself what that would be) or more stand-alone.

If you are keeping track of images that you see as examples of good composition or the golden spiral, then think about your own shot from that perspective.

I like this one better than the junk shop photos. They looked a bit smapshot-ish.

One more thought.... have you looked at this one in B&W?

Chris

travelways

I'm actually not sure about coloring... for a technical equipment like a camera, normally cooler shades are used,
and for a bathroom environment, it's good to go with soft shades of warm/skin like colors...

In terms of technical composition, I would go with Chris explanations and suggestions.

However, in terms of overall image, I'm wondering what is the idea behind the shot, and why
the image of the camera is shown in a bathroom environment - what is the relation between
the image in the mirror and the background?

Jenn

photo-bug wrote: »

I'm actually not sure about coloring... for a technical equipment like a camera, normally cooler shades are used,
and for a bathroom environment, it's good to go with soft shades of warm/skin like colors...In terms of technical composition, I would go with Chris explanations and suggestions. However, in terms of overall image, I'm wondering what is the idea behind the shot, and why the image of the camera is shown in a bathroom environment - what is the relation between the image in the mirror and the background?

The bathroom has pink tile in it and the mirror is chrome. The idea is "Reflections of Creativity"...at least the title is that...

tinamarie52 wrote: »

I see that with the camera shot, you are trying to pay attention to composition. If I'm looking correctly, youtried to place the camera lens in ta rule of thirds intersection. The mirror arm, which leads to the vertical tile is your golden spiral.
One more thought.... have you looked at this one in B&W?
Chris

Yes, I'm trying to catch on to the 'composition' thing and hoping I'm getting close.... haven't saved a B&W of this one yet, tho. I've saved some others to see if any of these work.

Here are some new edits:(1 & 2 are similar-shading is a little lighter in one .. 3 & 4 are similar with different effects on the mirror.

#1edit:



#2 edit:


#3 edit:


#4 Edit:

WhatSheSaw

I like the closer crops in the last 2. I'm not sure about the effects. The last one is the most subtle and I like it best of the effects ones.

travelways

I like the last one best