Them apples

Discussion in 'Critique Forum Archives' started by (Ghastly) Krueger, Jan 16, 2007.

  1. (Ghastly) Krueger

    (Ghastly) Krueger TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2006
    Messages:
    1,393
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Lost between tomorrow and yesterday
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I got the advice to go back to basics and keep it simple.
    One of the books I have on photography gives small assignments to build skills. I thought I'd follow some of them.

    One of the first assignments is "shape". The 3d shape of an object should be accurately represented in 2d... or something like that.
    Of the series of pics I took, this is the one I like most. I think the part of 3d shape is covered, but beyond that?
    Do you think the composition is ok?
    I underexposed it on purpose to avoid overblowing the brighter areas. It is a bit dark, but I like the tones. Please critique the exposure as well.
    [​IMG]

    Camera make: Konica Minolta Camera, Inc.
    Camera model: DiMAGE Xg
    Resolution: 768 x 1024
    Color/bw: Black and white
    Flash used: No
    Focal length: 10.4mm (35mm equivalent: 67mm)
    Exposure time: 0.033 s (1/30)
    Aperture: f/3.1
    ISO equiv.: 100
    Exposure bias: -0.70
    Whitebalance: Auto
    Metering Mode: matrix
    Exposure: program (auto)
     
  2. justphotos

    justphotos TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2006
    Messages:
    90
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Houston,Texas
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    The exposure's not so bad though it would have looked a little better if it was lighter. I really like the composition. I love monotone pictures. It adds a very artistic element to the picture.
     
  3. LaFoto

    LaFoto Just Corinna in real life Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2004
    Messages:
    34,814
    Likes Received:
    814
    Location:
    Lower Saxony, Germany
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    Erm .... what is the "2nd" and the "3rd" shape?

    I like what you did.
    It could do with a tad more shadows and highlights.
    I find it a bit grey.
    But I don't know how soon you would lose things by getting hot spots?
     
  4. (Ghastly) Krueger

    (Ghastly) Krueger TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2006
    Messages:
    1,393
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Lost between tomorrow and yesterday
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Thanks for your comments, justphotos and LaFoto.

    In this case I did my homework and bracketed the exposure. Here is the verision with no compensation.

    [​IMG]

    Oh, and LaFoto, sorry for the confusiuon, I should have put 3D and 2D, as in 3 dimensional and 2 dimensional... or:
    The 3 dimensional shape of an object should be accurately represented in a 2 dimensional image ;)

    Oh, yes, the EXIF:
    Resolution: 768 x 1024
    Color/bw: Black and white
    Flash used: No
    Focal length: 10.4mm (35mm equivalent: 67mm)
    Exposure time: 0.050 s (1/20)
    Aperture: f/3.1
    ISO equiv.: 100
    Whitebalance: Auto
    Metering Mode: matrix
    Exposure: program (auto)
     
  5. (Ghastly) Krueger

    (Ghastly) Krueger TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2006
    Messages:
    1,393
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Lost between tomorrow and yesterday
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Oh, and a color version. (Yup, grüne Äpfel ;))
    [​IMG]
     
  6. Alpha

    Alpha Troll Extraordinaire

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2005
    Messages:
    5,454
    Likes Received:
    41
    Location:
    San Francisco
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    IMHO, this photo would have been much beter shot with a proper macro lens (they make those for digital right?), or at least shot wide open. In spite of contrast issues, I think that the conversion could have been better-- i.e. it's totally flat. It looks like digital Delta. That may be due to the aperture issues. I dunno what digital cameras do to aperture, but man, 3.1 should have way more DOF than that. Open it up as wide as you can go.
     
  7. (Ghastly) Krueger

    (Ghastly) Krueger TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2006
    Messages:
    1,393
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Lost between tomorrow and yesterday
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Yes, some digital cameras have / accept macro lenses, but not mine.

    I do not have direct control over the aperture, either. I have to rely on the automatic programs (sports, portrait, etc) to get an aperture close to whati want.

    Flat in perspective or tones?

    What's digital delta?

    Again, thanks for your comments.
     

Share This Page