Discussion in 'Critique Forum Archives' started by Onyx, Sep 25, 2005.
taken with sony 5 mp cibershot no flash.
what could be done to make this image better?
perhaps a woman
you have A LOT, why an immense quantity of noise. why didn't you use the NR function on the dsc? it reduces it. somewhat... also a bit more light would be nice...
digital editing won't do much of a miracle, reshooting would be kinda the only way to fix it. but besides the obvious problems it looks acceptable. i dunno i can't see past that noise very well
What were you trying to achieve?
its not a womans back it was mine. for some reason my camera gets a lot of noise in dark areas. i was trying to show the different contours of my back. i think that part turned out ok with the muscle definition but there is a lot of noise and i dont like the pose quite so much. my light source was also a tv which is kinda ghetto :thumbdown:
I would assume your are trying your hands first time on some act photography?
And you are trying to get an artistic look by deliberately not going the "beaten" path of photography, i.e. using extra light, flash, whatever, when there is little to no light?
Did you let your camera decide on the ISO then? That might explain the huge amount of grain/noise. My little compact camera does not do well when I up the ISO! It does not seem to work well with little digital cameras.
Well, there's several aspects about this photo that spring to mind, other than the noise and low light. I take those two things as intentional for the time being.
But I think that there is too much room above the head, while the back is cut off too early. Therefore the photo feels unbalanced to me.
Then I am not too fond of the "longish object" in the horizontal frame. I think I would - at least to test it out for once - try a vertical crop.
And if you should want to reshoot, do include some more ... a body does not end there only because showing a person's buttocks makes people squeamish in the States. You seem to be aspiring at act photography, which is some kind of art, if done well, not pornography.
What I do like is the skin colour in contrast with the purple velvet (that's what it looks like to me), I like the play of light and shadow on this back, but am not too fond of the occasional hot spots.
So all in all I would say: you are not totally and completely on the wrong track. Not at all.
that's what i meant
what i know is very hard is taking a picture of yourself. i can't do it, not even with a tripod and drawn targets and it's something that i think is not the object of a photographer. because you're no longer the one taking the picture but the model. eh but that's just my oppinion and it may be completely unrealistic enjoy your work and if you can do these photos you're a better photographer than i am
I think it works OK, then.
I like the lighting and the overall feel of it.
I just don't like the artefacts in the deep shadow down the left side of you.
Maybe a Photoshopper could help you there.
I think this is a beautiful job - you make yourself look bronzed. It has a very dreamy, impressionist feel to it. Probably the noise contributes a lot in this regard.
Love it! It's so different. :thumbup:
I also like it. I like the artistic look. Here is a quick edit to eliminate some of the noise. Not all of it, because I think the noise helps make it unique. I tried to keep the overall feel of the photo. My edit needs some work on the upper back area, but this was just a quick 3 minute adjustment.
That last post ruins all the beauty of the first post by introducing a plastic appearance that has it's own serious and detracting flaws. Also, we just discussed respecting a photographer and his work by not re-posting their image without their permission in another current thread in this forum. Forget that it is a "rule", it is simple common courtesy. Learn to communicate in words the changes that you feel could be done.
All the noise/grain/artifacts enhance the final product. If the intent was to achieve a smooth, sharp, clean image: this image fails. However, if the final rendition is to be an artistic interpretation as well as the "facts, maam", it succeeds very nicely. Primarily because of the "imperfect" presentation. Even if unintended, it becomes the artists canvas.
The only suggestion I might make is to slightly dodge the contours of the body on the shadow side to allow a slight outlining there.
I was just trying to give everyone that didn't like all the noise a different view.
First, I don't remember you being a part of that discussion? If you had an opinion, you should have voiced it within that thread. Edit: Sorry, I just read the thread you were referring to.
Second, the original poster, Onyx, clearly has "ote" displayed in his original post. Maybe you should take the time to research the site rules
Ooops. You are right woodsac - didn't see the "ote". I'm sorry. I was wrong.
Separate names with a comma.