First TPF Photo post... looking for C&C please

c_lawrence · Mar 1, 2008

K - here goes... these are some of the images I am considering for a 'portfolio' website. I would really love comments and criticism (Be honest... the only way I learn!

). I am planning on posting as is, so thoughts on the watermark are also welcome.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

whew... that's it for now, let me have it!

c_lawrence · Mar 2, 2008

Guess it's too late for responses (at least here in US)... K I'll check back tomorrow.

Ajay · Mar 2, 2008

You've got some really great shots there. I especially like 4 and 5.

The watermark however is way too big and distracting.

EYEAM4ANARCHY · Mar 2, 2008

You'd probably get more responses if you posted them in the gallery sections.

All in all they are pretty good. However, since you mentioned it, I would try to make the watermark a bit more transparent.

leila · Mar 2, 2008

i hate the watermarks... they cover the entire picture. i couldn't focus on the pic, especially on the detailed macro pictures.

rmh159 · Mar 2, 2008

Yeah I agree with the others on the watermark. Not sure if it's needed if you have your signature on the bottom.

250Gimp · Mar 2, 2008

Nice pics, but the watermark is way overdone!! I find it very distracting.

RKW3 · Mar 2, 2008

People love to bash people for watermarks in the center of the image, just ignore them I guess. I agree that the large watermark isn't necessary, but I respect your will to protect your images. (I don't really protect my images all that much myself tho, 800 pixel wide pics with only a border. I don't care if someone takes my pic if I'm not making money off of it, besides what can they do with an 800 pixel image?)

Anyways, I think you have some really nice pics. Nicely saturated and clear pics, your obviously experienced already with photography. I'm not sure I can pick a favorite out of these pics though.

c_lawrence · Mar 2, 2008

I really appreciate everyone's comments and critque. I actually reposted these images to the general gallery as suggested above (did not how to 'move it' there)... it's interesting to see the diference in reactions from the two galleries.

I mentioned on that site that I actually just began working with photography fall of 2007 and am a TRUE beginner with MUCH to learn! The foilio I plan to make with these will not used to gain paying clients (yet :wink:

) but rather to gain an entry level job or intern/apprenticeship for more experience... so, again, any thoughts would be helpful.

FYI - I have gotten some really negative feedack on the watermarks, so I am strongly reconsidering the use overall and, if so, the size and opacity. Some professionals in the field have told me to be extremely careful when posting online and to use a large watermark with 60% opacity (these are 50%). One guy told me a story of how he posted one the web with a discrete copyright logo at the bottom of a picture that was included in his webfolio but had sold to a greeting card company with exclusivity for one year. A calendar company came through his site, copied the image, cropped the copyright and used it in their calendar. The greeting card company some how found out and filed suit againt the photographer for breech of contract. In the end, the greeting card company retracted the suit and settled after the photographer sued the calendar company for stealing his image... he won, of course and even made a small sum of money from it... but all could have been avoided with a semi-obnoxious watermark. I doubt any of my pics are good enough for someone to want them for a calendar, but other things to consider... for example, someone stealing the image of the child and placing somewhere on the web with some negative connotation attached to it/her and no way of me ever finding out... pro's and con's, I guess.... I'll have to wiegh it out.

Anyway, I digress a little - it's late and exhaustion is setting in - thanks for the helpful outside perspectives.

almaswimmer2010 · Mar 4, 2008

I love #4

#3 expose longer so that you have more movement of the water

schuylercat · Mar 4, 2008

Watermark...well, you know.

Really liked #2 - horse and rider, frozen action, mixed lighting, nice balance, and the crop was perfect at the rider's waist. The kind of shot I would like to take.

Overall, while I might have done things different, I like your interpretations a lot - good stuff.

JIP · Mar 4, 2008

c_lawrence said:
I really appreciate everyone's comments and critque. I actually reposted these images to the general gallery as suggested above (did not how to 'move it' there)... it's interesting to see the diference in reactions from the two galleries.

I mentioned on that site that I actually just began working with photography fall of 2007 and am a TRUE beginner with MUCH to learn! The foilio I plan to make with these will not used to gain paying clients (yet ) but rather to gain an entry level job or intern/apprenticeship for more experience... so, again, any thoughts would be helpful.

FYI - I have gotten some really negative feedack on the watermarks, so I am strongly reconsidering the use overall and, if so, the size and opacity. Some professionals in the field have told me to be extremely careful when posting online and to use a large watermark with 60% opacity (these are 50%). One guy told me a story of how he posted one the web with a discrete copyright logo at the bottom of a picture that was included in his webfolio but had sold to a greeting card company with exclusivity for one year. A calendar company came through his site, copied the image, cropped the copyright and used it in their calendar. The greeting card company some how found out and filed suit againt the photographer for breech of contract. In the end, the greeting card company retracted the suit and settled after the photographer sued the calendar company for stealing his image... he won, of course and even made a small sum of money from it... but all could have been avoided with a semi-obnoxious watermark. I doubt any of my pics are good enough for someone to want them for a calendar, but other things to consider... for example, someone stealing the image of the child and placing somewhere on the web with some negative connotation attached to it/her and no way of me ever finding out... pro's and con's, I guess.... I'll have to wiegh it out.

Anyway, I digress a little - it's late and exhaustion is setting in - thanks for the helpful outside perspectives.

So did you sell anyof these images??

Seriously I do think some people go a little overboard with things like these but to each his own. I do want to say that I really like your images though especially the snake.

hotrocks · Mar 4, 2008

yeah, watermarks are really obnoxious

seems like almost all the shots cause use some sharpening try unsharp mask

B192734 · Mar 7, 2008

I think that the photos of the Snake and the dog are very nice. I liked the others as well, but those 2 kind of stood out to me. I agree that the waterfall could use a longer exposure, but that's just an opinion. If you were looking for that effect then who am I to say there's anything wrong with. Even though you have the watermarks on them you can still see the picture underneath. I don't think it's that big of a deal (unless it completely obscures your ability to see anything underneath). Nice shots though, I dig them.

crystal_lynn · Mar 7, 2008

The pictures are great, I hope you get the job. I personally don't like the effect added to the band guy...

My opinion on the water mark...You do what YOU feel you need to do, they are your images. I did not find it distracting at all.