Floating

Khaos · April 12, 2005

Comments please. Like it, hate it, tell me what's right or wrong with it.

Khaos · April 14, 2005

Curious. I know I have certain people on here that I like their styles more than others, but I still look at all the shots, which is possible here, unlike at FM, where you would need 8 hours a day to do so. I have had less than 20 views of this pic. Many other posts are the same way. It's not like this is getting bumped from page one quickly either. Are there just a handful of people from the 2000+ members that ever frequent this board, or are my pictures so boring they just skip over them? Are people only going by how a thread is titled? Again, I'm thick skinned, I believe in hearing the truth and moving forward with it to improve myself. If my stuff is truly boring, say so. Thanks.

dragon300zx · April 14, 2005

I wonder the same thing sometimes. I mean I don't think my photos are that horrible. Around where I live everyone likes em. My teachers and fellow students think they are great. Oh well.

GREAPER · April 14, 2005

Guys,

I dont know what to tell ya about threads that go by un-noticed. It happens a lot to all of us (except Harry :crazy ). But then we cant all have an eagle and an Osprey that fight over the chance to be photographed.

I have a lot of threads I start only get one or two responses (or 0) and then once in a while I have one get lots of attention. I dont know why it happens, but it does. No biggie.

GREAPER · April 14, 2005

Khaos wrote:

Comments please. Like it, hate it, tell me what's right or wrong with it.

As far as the pic goes....

Hmmm.... what is it?

The texture on the ball at the top is cool. Your shot shows the texture well.

The background is nice and smooth. No distraction there.

The bottom portion looks like the top of a bottle with a cork in it? Well exposed and again nice texture.

You did a great job controling the depth of feild.

The title of the thread is "floating". If the idea is that the ball on top is floating above the bottle, I guess that is not hitting me. maybe a slightly lower angle would increase the illusion.

I am thinking a tighter crop to make it more abstract, or a wider one so that you can recognize the objects.

I also think it is a bit centered and a different composition might add the the positive aspects of the image.

Not trying to pic on yer pic, and after all wadda I know.

Thanks for sharring.

Mitchell · April 14, 2005

Khaos wrote:

Curious. I know I have certain people on here that I like their styles more than others, but I still look at all the shots, which is possible here, unlike at FM, where you would need 8 hours a day to do so. I have had less than 20 views of this pic. Many other posts are the same way. It's not like this is getting bumped from page one quickly either. Are there just a handful of people from the 2000+ members that ever frequent this board, or are my pictures so boring they just skip over them? Are people only going by how a thread is titled? Again, I'm thick skinned, I believe in hearing the truth and moving forward with it to improve myself. If my stuff is truly boring, say so. Thanks.

I have often wrestled with the same questions and have written a very similar post. I think we all would like comments on our photos posted here. The problem is that not everyone has a constructive comment to post on every photo. This site also has a lot of lurkers who for some unknown reason do not get involved in discussions. I also think that some of us just post too much and want everyone to comment on everything. This just is not going to happen. I generally take a no comment thread as a tacit indication that my photo was boring and not very provocative.

Now on to this photo. Overall, I find this shot kind of drab. It needs more contrast to help highlight the objects which just seem to blend into the similar background. There is also no great focal point, and I think it would help if the object was not smack in the middle.

mitch

jeff lapoint · April 14, 2005

i hear ya barking man. i posted a shot of my dog in the "show me yur pup thread" and got zero love. another thread i started got a buch. it's hit and miss sometimes.

about the photo... i would really like to see it lit from below with some softer lighting. i think that might bring out the texture with some cool tones to boot.

-j

bfjr · April 14, 2005

Yeah I hear ya, but as others have said no comments usually is a comment that your image missed the mark

I had a couple at least with 40+ views & no replies I knew what they meant, and that was cool, cause like you I am always trying for better/learn

. And after looking again at those images, I would not of replied either

On the other hand lots of comments of course means you hit the mark, and maybe on several levels, very cool when that happens

. But you didn't expect that on every shot did ya ??

:lol4

And one more thing I'm not much on people, still lifes, buildings etc. You know me from my posts I'm an amimal kinda guy, so I really have no expertise on the other aspects of photog. So unless a shot of the non animal really grabs me in some way, I usually don't comment, is that wrong ??

By the way did you reply on my last couple posts, I'll have to go chk :lol4 :lol4 :hide

Khaos · April 14, 2005

Thank you all.

My point was not really about comments. It was more I'll post something at the same time as someone else, neither of us have any replies, but they will have 30+ views and I'll have maybe 15. That's my question.

Thanks again for the comments.

Eric&Susan · April 14, 2005

Khaos wrote:

Thank you all.

My point was not really about comments. It was more I'll post something at the same time as someone else, neither of us have any replies, but they will have 30+ views and I'll have maybe 15. That's my question.

Thanks again for the comments.

I think your asking if the title of a thread makes a person more likely to look at that one versus another thread? I often wonder this myself, especially when I'm trying to think of a title for my threads. As for my personal viewing style I look at all of the new threads not just the ones with catchy titles. Then if I think I can comment in a way that will benefit then I will, whether it be with a suggestion/critique or a

. In your pic in this thread it just doesn't do anthing for me and I have no suggestions to make it better so usually I wold not comment on a thread like this.

Eric

pathfinder · April 15, 2005

Khaos wrote:

Curious. I know I have certain people on here that I like their styles more than others, but I still look at all the shots, which is possible here, unlike at FM, where you would need 8 hours a day to do so. I have had less than 20 views of this pic. Many other posts are the same way. It's not like this is getting bumped from page one quickly either. Are there just a handful of people from the 2000+ members that ever frequent this board, or are my pictures so boring they just skip over them? Are people only going by how a thread is titled? Again, I'm thick skinned, I believe in hearing the truth and moving forward with it to improve myself. If my stuff is truly boring, say so. Thanks.

Khaos - I know the feeling, I post an image that I shot and found appealing and processed to bring out its glory and duh, no one else seems to notice. Several views, but no responses. I usually take this to mean that they aren't really moved. Sometimes, people are just busy; sometimes they are reluctant to say anything bad. But a kind word about our efforts is always appreciated.

I think dgrin's friendly atmosphere is great, but I think it sometimes inhibits people from being as frank as they might. I'm not looking for snide remarks, but legitimate opinions about how I might do things better as I know you seriously are also.

Your image is kind of flat to me - the contrast is not full range, the colors are muted but the grey background color does not really contrast or add to the globular shape. I can't really see that it is floating either. The central composition does not entrigue my interest.

I think maybe stronger,more dramatic sidelighting would work better for this subject. I like simple geographic forms, they can be great subjects for photos, , but not with flat frontal lighting. Light is what creates great images, not interesting subjects of themselves. I keep having to relearn this lesson myself. Since I find the colors less than complementary, perhaps dramatic sidelighting and a swoop into the B&W world might help out.

Here is an exercise I posted last year to demonstrate a gradient background done in Photoshop for an image I shot with a P&S camera. I did use off the camera flash for lighting.

It didn't get rave reviews either, but I kind of enjoyed it and still do. Sometimes a simple, stark black background can be very effective also.

Sometimes a contrasting background can help, and sometimes a similar color background works ok too

And sometimes a run into B&W can be helpful

Feel free to criticize my images as freely as I have yours - maybe you can help me make mine better also. I hope these comments are considered as a constructive effort, and not a critical one. I know you desire honest responses and this I have tried to offer as I recognize your sincere effort to improve.

Eric&Susan · April 15, 2005

pathfinder wrote:

Light is what creates great images, not interesting subjects of themselves. I keep having to relearn this lesson myself. QUOTE]

That is a really GREAT point that I have never heard of. But thinking about it, it makes alot of sense. Yet one more helpful thing I learned from Dgrin and that is why I always find myself coming to this site. Thank you for this thought.

Eric

pathfinder · April 15, 2005

Eric&Susan wrote:

pathfinder wrote:

Light is what creates great images, not interesting subjects of themselves. I keep having to relearn this lesson myself. QUOTE]

That is a really GREAT point that I have never heard of. But thinking about it, it makes alot of sense. Yet one more helpful thing I learned from Dgrin and that is why I always find myself coming to this site. Thank you for this thought.

Eric

Thank you Eric. Light and lighting is what photography is about. Subjects are merely there to display the light. This is counterintuitive for most of us who purchase a camera and then wander around looking for subjects to shoot.
But studio photographers quickly learn to get the light right, and then place the subject, model, etc. Landscape photographers sleep between 10 am and 3pm to avoid the overhead lighting at noon, and get active for the sidelighting of sunrise and sunset for the same reasons.

This is a simple stalk of grass seed, but in the late afternoon sidelighting I kind of liked its appearance, because the light brought out its texture and detail.

bfjr · April 15, 2005

Khaos wrote:

Thank you all.

My point was not really about comments. It was more I'll post something at the same time as someone else, neither of us have any replies, but they will have 30+ views and I'll have maybe 15. That's my question.

Thanks again for the comments.

OH OK, Well of course I'm drawn to posts from people where I've liked there style in the past, honestly I'll look at posts from people that have commented on my posts, I think that's fair and I owe them that. I always look at someone who posts who is also new, figure I need to help promote good communication. At lastly I look at posts with catchy titles, to see what it's about!!

Hope I helped?

Angelo · April 15, 2005

Khaos: This question has been posed by many before, including yours truly. I am finding it more difficult to keep up with the number of posts so I've begun limiting my comments only because I refuse to become a "smilie mill" (know what I mean?) And I want to be able to offer meaningful comments if and when I can.

So... about this shot. Umm, umm,... see, I don't know what to offer here. It doesn't really do anything for me. It's a sphere. Apparently a cork top? I'm interested in its construction material. I can't really determine what it is. It kinda blends into the background. A bit more interesting background or lighting/shadow effect might help that.

There isn't enough of the green bottle neck to make it interesting so it becomes a distraction.
Anyway, hope you don't mind me commenting. Cheers!

Angelo · April 15, 2005

Wow, I wish I had read pathfinder's post before opening my fat trap. He nailed it on the head.

pathfinder wrote:

Khaos - I know the feeling, I post an image that I shot and found appealing and processed to bring out its glory and duh, no one else seems to notice. Several views, but no responses. I usually take this to mean that they aren't really moved. Sometimes, people are just busy; sometimes they are reluctant to say anything bad. But a kind word about our efforts is always appreciated.

I think dgrin's friendly atmosphere is great, but I think it sometimes inhibits people from being as frank as they might. I'm not looking for snide remarks, but legitimate opinions about how I might do things better as I know you seriously are also.

Your image is kind of flat to me - the contrast is not full range, the colors are muted but the grey background color does not really contrast or add to the globular shape. I can't really see that it is floating either. The central composition does not entrigue my interest.

I think maybe stronger,more dramatic sidelighting would work better for this subject. I like simple geographic forms, they can be great subjects for photos, , but not with flat frontal lighting. Light is what creates great images, not interesting subjects of themselves. I keep having to relearn this lesson myself. Since I find the colors less than complementary, perhaps dramatic sidelighting and a swoop into the B&W world might help out.