Discussion in 'Critique Forum Archives' started by Lackoffunding, May 7, 2007.
This picture seems a little boring, but I am not sure how I should change it. Any ideas?
this is a serious critique forum. please go to your user control panel and select whether or not one can edit your photos.
You cut it's legs off at the joint, that's a big no-no. Not only that, but it's flat, it needs contrast.
The legs have been discussed, but I assume this was a rapid catch. To minimize the legs, crop the overall image.
Also, the image is flat. No worries, as it can be fixed with a little dodging and burning or adding your own light.
For easy comparison:
Thats what I was going to say... Pic needs to pop... --
I agree with the crop, but it doesn't grow the legs back and it's still flat, everything is grey, there's no true black and there is no white whatsoever.
I dont like that crop, The original one was great if the hooves were there.
As it is, I would try to reshoot or let this one go!
Yeah, it's gray. Wattahyawant? It's a bw image. LOL
i was once talking a stroll around princeton with a friend of mine who is an architect. we happened across a building and she said to me, 'that is one of my all time favorite buildings'...it was a blend of modern and greek revival architecture...
...and i, in my ignorance, said, 'but some of the columns don't extend all the way up..'
her response, 'so why do they have to extend all the way to the top?'
i didn't answer. i knew the answer. ('because i'm familiar with seeing them that way..')
i'm not sure from where this rule of 'don't crop body parts' hails (perhaps a wal-mart or sears portrait studio), but if the cropped body parts aren't absolutely necessary to the composition, who cares? personally speaking, the exclusion of the legs brings more attention to beautiful posture, elegance, and stature of the subject.
as for the cropping, i agree that it does need it.....but i believe it needs to be taken in even more.
side by side:
overall contrast +25
gamma correction .88
all of which i do in the darkroom, so i haven't an issue doing it here.
Good black and white images have contrast, something with almost white and almost black, that way you have a broader range of tones on your histogram (if you're doing this digitally), the original image posted is probably a giant clump in the center of the histogram, there's nothing interesting, nothing catches the eye.
Is that a Willdeebest? I have seen a photo of them before. Nice work, needs color I feel.
Separate names with a comma.