Discussion in 'General Critical Analysis' started by nomade, Aug 10, 2007.
Well, it may be the blue mosque which I am familiar with, but your shot is blue and needs colour correction. The grass near the water needs to be its natural green colour. The clouds in the sky need to be their natural colour too, which is white not blue.
Can't say I like the heavy blue coloring and I wish you could have shown all 6 minarets.....more of the mosque and less of the park fence.
It's not like I am blind, and it's not like I didn't notice it's blue, the sky wasn't white that day, it was more of a blue gray, there wasn't less of a blue, I had a filter that should warm the photograph a little, it was a dark day.
And I liked how everything is blue, and I like the photo as blue, I gave it to the criticism forum, not to hear what could make it better, and how the 6 minarets are not shown, because it's done and I ma not going back there, I am looking for a critique, not a correction. I was looking for yeah it works for me or no it doesn't and because. I was not looking for words like the sky ain't white or the grass ain't green.
This is my photograph, it's not made according to your imagination, obviously you don't like it, so thank you. It's not that I don't appreciate suggestions, but I don't believe that this is what this forum is made for, I had a series of this mosque, with 6 minarets or on its own at night with the light show...But this is some other angle, some other view, and some photograph. And it stands as it is. It doesn't work for you, I understand, but this is not a critique.
This is the blue mosque on a blue day. And the sky wasn't white Skieur, it was after sunset and it was blue, and it's warmer than it should be actually...
I agree there are also colour casts in reality, and unless you do product photography, it often makes sense to leave the colour casts. There are times of the day / night where the light just gives a colour cast and if you remove it, you lose the mood of the moment.
But that translates into "It does not work for me because the sky ain't white and the grass ain't green", doesn't it? Sometimes it is just easier to explain what you do not like by telling how you would like it better. Of course every comment on here is just an opinion and you do not have to share that opinion. In fact I do not share many of the opinions I get from others, but it tells me how a general audience feels about my images.
Indeed Alex, but when you tell me you should do that or this, or this should have been colored like that or this, or you should have cropped that and showed more than this, it means you are giving me indications to how you'd like to see it, and of course there are 1000 way to say what you want.
But a critique should have more respect to the photograph as it is, in other way, I'd like to have comments on what this image is not on what it should be, I know people, any sort of people will say that, but I'd expect from people who are into photography, to have a deeper perspective in that.
It bugs me and I objected to it, not as a rejection to having a counter opinion, I accept a different opinion and I accept the fact that people don't like it, but I can't accept the fact that these comments are more of what I expected when I saw the title, rather than how the photo is.
Getting an opinion beyond that is what makes you post in this forum, is what helps you to improve, all I am saying is that this is not helping at all.
If I have photos that I consider the best, I would hesitate to post them here, just not to get myself down.
It's my right to express myself, isn't it??
We are all fairly untrainted "critics" which is why offering in-depth critique of a photo is not an easy task for most, which is why most often suggestions for changes are being made instead of a critique which does NOT suggest anything different, you see, nomade? Also often other members mean to be friendlier in their attempts to formulate their critisism as a suggestion.
Well, I recognise that you took this photo at "The Blue Hour", that time of the day when sometimes all the warm tones (also to the naked eye!) disappear and only a clear blue cast remaines. If you meant to capture THAT light phenomenon along with the Blue Mosque, then - of course! - you will not want to make any changes about that effect.
My impression about this photo is that it is actually two.
It is the Blue Mosque as one subject, and that park fence leading round the grass alongside the people on the benches as the other, and I don't get the feeling that the fence is leading my eyes to the mosque. It leads my eyes away and much rather to that little hut, which unfortunately looks very similar to a "port-a-loo", if you know what I mean. I doubt it is one, but that was my immediate thought.
And if such a thing happens in the viewer then something is (not only mildly) distracting in a photo, isn't it so?
The "busy-ness" of the photo (row of benches with people behind that fence, row of cars behind the people) and its division in two halves/two subjects is my major critique about it.
I am sorry. But I am confused. I thought critique was where you got people to say what they do and don't like about your image so you can try to make it better, or learn for next time?
Without the title, I would have no clue what the subject of this picture is intended to be.
Let me explain my initial statement......
The title "Blue Mosque" drew my attention to the post thinking there was a picture of the mosque with its 6 minarets. However it was only a part of the shot, the fence and park takes up about 2/3rds of the shot and there just happens to be a mosque in the background.
To make the park and fence blue in reference to the mosque does not, IMO, add to the title or the shot. If the sky, was in fact bluer than normal and there was a haze of blue surrounding the area, then ok, but to color the entire shot blue
well, it doesnt seem to accomplishing anything.
For me, the title is a bit misleading and I was disappointed when viewing the shot. This was my first impression without considering any technical aspects of the shot. Someone with a greater degree of technical experience might better serve that purpose.
BTW, I have visited Istanbul and Cairo in your country. Excellent experiences both!
Way too blue, subjectless and no flow- or something.
Thank you all for your response.
LaFoto; all I know is that when you decide to make a critique about something, you really need to make the effort. Point out what's wrong and not how to fix it but rather in detail why is it wrong...How to fix it would be nice too, but what's the difference between this forum and the other galleries??
Anyway like I said before, I used a warm filter on a dark gloomy bluish hour, it's what I had available, and it didn't seen a bad idea to leave it as it is(I actually tend not to work a lot on photoshop or other softwares), in other way I wanted to add something dynamic, which is the fence...
However I realized later that the rest of the fence should be misleading rather than leading you to the mosque, in other words, I didn't mind the blue tone, I'd prefer some photos to be unbalanced sometime,s which is personal. Not just that, but I don't like refining photos of something real, to make an unreal effect to it, if I can't shoot blue scenes maybe I shouldn't but the solution ain't making it whiter...
And then if you don't want to make the effort for a critique it's okay. But don't give me too little...
PNA thank you for taking the time to give me more of what you think, about the blue, well I didn't make the entire shot blue, that's how the available light was, and I didn't really think of the blue to suit the blue mosque, it was more of how it really was.
Separate names with a comma.