my first Teen Shoot c&c

[Petraio Prime]

1. She looks really uncomfortable and like everyone else my attention went to the train first.

2. I think this could have been a good shot had so much cleavage not been showing and you left her legs on ( and I have this SAME problem).

3. I actually like this one okay but it would have been better had you not zoomed in so close.

I do hope the nasty people on here do not stop you from seeking advice and C&C. The only way to improve is to take pictures and figure out what you can do better next time. While there may be some people who can pick up a camera and just naturally shoot fantastic photos, that is not most. Most have to shoot and learn along the way so keep it up! Oh and next time just don't post pictures like number 2 for C&C (or anywhere)

In offering criticism, one must look for signs that there is some sensitivity on the part of the photographer to certain basics of composition, lighting, etc. You also look for signs the criticism would be understood. I see no reason to expect the author of these to develop a great deal further. I just cannot imagine it. There are sometimes weaknesses mixed in with strengths in anyone's work. I see no strengths here at all, no comprehension of how a two-dimensional image works. There is no sense of space, no sense of proportion, of lighting, at all.

There is no understanding of 'order', no organization. Everything is just jumbled together.

 

[lyonsroar]

EDIT:

Apparently you are not allowed to post a well-know funny pic so I'll just say this:

EPIC THRAD!
I'm posting in one!

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

In offering criticism, one must look for signs that there is some sensitivity on the part of the photographer to certain basics of composition, lighting, etc. You also look for signs the criticism would be understood. I see no reason to expect the author of these to develop a great deal further. I just cannot imagine it. There are sometimes weaknesses mixed in with strengths in anyone's work. I see no strengths here at all, no comprehension of how a two-dimensional image works. There is no sense of space, no sense of proportion, of lighting, at all.

There is no understanding of 'order', no organization. Everything is just jumbled together.

I am still puzzled as to why you are even here.:meh:

 

[Aye-non Oh-non Imus]

In offering criticism, one must look for signs that there is some sensitivity on the part of the photographer to certain basics of composition, lighting, etc. You also look for signs the criticism would be understood. I see no reason to expect the author of these to develop a great deal further. I just cannot imagine it. There are sometimes weaknesses mixed in with strengths in anyone's work. I see no strengths here at all, no comprehension of how a two-dimensional image works. There is no sense of space, no sense of proportion, of lighting, at all.

There is no understanding of 'order', no organization. Everything is just jumbled together.

All that sounds good, pompous, but good. Yet you have inserted the image below in a few threads as an example. I'm still trying to understand why and what can actually be gleaned from this image to further enhance one's understanding of proper photographic techniques, either in-camera or in post processing. The exact comments you've asserted above could be attributed to the image below. It is merely a snapshot. Nothing more, nothing less, nothing good, nothing bad (apart from the blown out highlights, framing, inattention to distracting background, sub-par exposure control, lack of expression from the subject, poor use of cropping on main and secondary subjects, etc)

Consider dentistry, please. These are not very good and show little aptitude in posing, composition, lighting, or expression.

It would take all day to explain.

So I'm not gonna do it. But I will show you something of mine to give you a hint (this is a candid of a girl at a festival).

Vertical!

I suggest searching your archives for a more suitable image if you insist on further tutelage to the Beginners forum.

 

[vtf]

Dreadful

I have seen some pictures from people that are just so bad and they post so many that I just can't pick wich ones to talk about. And they will be so bad that all I have is bad to say so I just keep my mouth shut.

:roll:

Why don't you give tips or pointers to help the person out?
I mean really. Why do you even bother?

Not everyone should be encouraged. It really does a disservice to them. Not everyone who wants to play football is Bret Favre.

:roll::roll::roll:Ok, ok, see that? You made me roll my eyes. Now you've done it.
Everyone deserves encouragement, until they prove otherwise.
You, sir, now meet the latter!

 

[Petraio Prime]

In offering criticism, one must look for signs that there is some sensitivity on the part of the photographer to certain basics of composition, lighting, etc. You also look for signs the criticism would be understood. I see no reason to expect the author of these to develop a great deal further. I just cannot imagine it. There are sometimes weaknesses mixed in with strengths in anyone's work. I see no strengths here at all, no comprehension of how a two-dimensional image works. There is no sense of space, no sense of proportion, of lighting, at all.

There is no understanding of 'order', no organization. Everything is just jumbled together.

All that sounds good, pompous, but good. Yet you have inserted the image below in a few threads as an example. I'm still trying to understand why and what can actually be gleaned from this image to further enhance one's understanding of proper photographic techniques, either in-camera or in post processing. The exact comments you've asserted above could be attributed to the image below. It is merely a snapshot. Nothing more, nothing less, nothing good, nothing bad (apart from the blown out highlights, framing, inattention to distracting background, sub-par exposure control, lack of expression from the subject, poor use of cropping on main and secondary subjects, etc)

Consider dentistry, please. These are not very good and show little aptitude in posing, composition, lighting, or expression.

It would take all day to explain.

So I'm not gonna do it. But I will show you something of mine to give you a hint (this is a candid of a girl at a festival).

Vertical!

I suggest searching your archives for a more suitable image if you insist on further tutelage to the Beginners forum.

It is a candid, taken vertically, of a teenage girl at a public festival, that shows with basic good composition. I know there are people in the background but they are blurred. This was not a set-up shot, and I had only a second or so to work before she noticed the camera and reacted. It was taken on film and scanned.

Here is a sample of a posed shot taken in similar environment as the OP:

http://www.photographyboard.net/helen-4343.html

 

[Travis F]

In offering criticism, one must look for signs that there is some sensitivity on the part of the photographer to certain basics of composition, lighting, etc. You also look for signs the criticism would be understood. I see no reason to expect the author of these to develop a great deal further. I just cannot imagine it. There are sometimes weaknesses mixed in with strengths in anyone's work. I see no strengths here at all, no comprehension of how a two-dimensional image works. There is no sense of space, no sense of proportion, of lighting, at all.

There is no understanding of 'order', no organization. Everything is just jumbled together.

All that sounds good, pompous, but good. Yet you have inserted the image below in a few threads as an example. I'm still trying to understand why and what can actually be gleaned from this image to further enhance one's understanding of proper photographic techniques, either in-camera or in post processing. The exact comments you've asserted above could be attributed to the image below. It is merely a snapshot. Nothing more, nothing less, nothing good, nothing bad (apart from the blown out highlights, framing, inattention to distracting background, sub-par exposure control, lack of expression from the subject, poor use of cropping on main and secondary subjects, etc)

I suggest searching your archives for a more suitable image if you insist on further tutelage to the Beginners forum.

+1

I'm new here but not exactly new to photography and this is exactly what I was thinking. Not bold enough to be the first to say it, but I was thinking it.

Too bad the OP doesn't lock the thread already...:er:

To the OP -

I think you have good concepts and ideas in your photos, you just need a little practice with the execution of the concept. I won't go in to the details because they have been beaten to death already. Just keep hanging around and practicing and posting examples for critique, nevermind the ones that have no respect in how they dish out criticism.

Good luck,
Travis

 

[ababysean]

1. it looks like she is about to get run over by the train

2. if this was my daughter, I'd be beyond pissed to see that sexy of a pose, boobs is the first thing I see.

3. I like this one.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

2. if this was my daughter, I'd be beyond pissed to see that sexy of a pose, boobs is the first thing I see.

...because nobody ever sees her boobs otherwise. It's this shot that really makes them apparent. :er:

You people crack me up to no end. :lmao:

 

[tnvol]

1. She looks really uncomfortable and like everyone else my attention went to the train first.

2. I think this could have been a good shot had so much cleavage not been showing and you left her legs on ( and I have this SAME problem).

3. I actually like this one okay but it would have been better had you not zoomed in so close.

I do hope the nasty people on here do not stop you from seeking advice and C&C. The only way to improve is to take pictures and figure out what you can do better next time. While there may be some people who can pick up a camera and just naturally shoot fantastic photos, that is not most. Most have to shoot and learn along the way so keep it up! Oh and next time just don't post pictures like number 2 for C&C (or anywhere)

In offering criticism, one must look for signs that there is some sensitivity on the part of the photographer to certain basics of composition, lighting, etc. You also look for signs the criticism would be understood. I see no reason to expect the author of these to develop a great deal further. I just cannot imagine it. There are sometimes weaknesses mixed in with strengths in anyone's work. I see no strengths here at all, no comprehension of how a two-dimensional image works. There is no sense of space, no sense of proportion, of lighting, at all.

There is no understanding of 'order', no organization. Everything is just jumbled together.

Wow. I understand you are kinda going overboard to make your point but are you serious? Do you really feel like the OP cannot progress any further as a photographer? Was I reading your post wrong?

 

[graecyn]

I'm pretty sure the point everyone is making about the boobs being too apparent in the 2nd picture is not that the boobs are not seen otherwise or that they're "evil" - it's that the picture is supposed to be of the girl. Not her tits. If the OP was going for a cleavage shot, then bravo, well done. If not, then she missed the mark, and should be told so that she can avoid the problem in the future. You learn by being corrected. That's all.

 

[ababysean]

If she was not a teenager I would not even say anything about the boobs, I'm assuming these are pictures for her family.

If you are going to take teens pictures you have to look for these things, boobs are not evil, but there is a time and a place and in a pic of a 13/14 yo girl is NOT that place! and they are taking up about 50% of the picture.

In face, I'd have OP pull it down because it is inappropriate and I'm sure the girls parents would not appreciate it.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

they are taking up about 50% of the picture.

yuo has trubbles with da maths?

50% really? You are gonna stand by that?

Methinks this is touching on some inner demons in some people.

 

[ababysean]

I would say they are taking up 100% of the picture because it is the first thing my eyes go to. The picture would have been way better and maybe the OP can remember this in the future, if she had angled the girl a bit more instead of shooting straight on. With the cut of the girls shirt, at that angle, dont mix!

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

I would say they are taking up 100% of the picture because it is the first thing my eyes go to.

So I was right. Inner demons.

Do you feel naughty?