Critique my shots please

[scythefwd]

Ok, understand I dont have the settings anymore. If you can find them in the exif or properties of the pics, by all means. Two outside shots, one inside.

These are unprocessed, as they came out my camera. Camera is a pentax q10.

I'm looking for tips on composition (the pond one was far enough away I ran out of zoom and still had that much open area.. 30-40y)
This is a 1/2.3 sensor, so depth of field is a little harder.

This was all shot manual, with fstop and iso adjusted to get my light meter happy. I had just learned how to read that meter a few days before.

Do these look over exposed? Is the color saturation good? In general, if you were to go for a different look, wwhat direction woud you have moved what setting? (not saying got to fstop 2.8.. but maybe a lower shutter would have given you better exposure from the one you used, if you can determine that stuff)

I'm not really looking for super artistic, but want my pictures to represent exactly what I'm seeing with my naked eye.. which is turning out to be harder than I expected.

 

[scythefwd]

Nothing? No were those shot on a webcam? No they look ok? Nothing?

 

[Pejacre]

Ok, I'll give you my feedback for what it's worth. The first seems exposed ok but is kind of a cluttered mess - if the turtles are meant to be the subject, draw attention to them more by getting closer and eliminating the distracting background elements. Less is more. Same goes for the second image - you seem to be trying to get too much in the picture. Get low, close up on the ducks, use a wider aperture and blow out the pond. The third is composed a little better, although the fish kind of blends into the rock so maybe try an angle where it's against the black background. Also a little underexposed.

I'm not as accomplished as others here but hopefully some of that is helpful.

 

[Actinia]

I can only critique these using my ex-professional hat as a zoologist. The turtles in #1 are just doing what turtles do. Unfortunately they are rather low contrast. It would help if this could be increased. In #2, the shag should be the focus of attention, but its dark plumage detracts from it. The postcard (the duck near the top) also seems a distraction. The lion fish, #3, is too dark to see much.

 

[Forkie]

Hi Scythefwd,

I am going to be very harsh in my following reply. Please don't take any of this personally - none of it should be taken as a dig at you, it is purely a strong criticism (not a critique) of the photos. One tip that will help you become a much better photographer is that you must cut all sentimentality you have attached to any photos you shoot. You will become a much better photographer in the long run

Now, take a seat and a deep breathe :hug::

You may not be getting replies because there are a lot of issues in these images.

None of them appear to have had any thought put into them with regards to composition, exposure or general artistry.

Image #1: Turtles really are well camouflaged, aren't they? Isn't evolution a wonderful thing? There are a plethora of problems here. We are looking at the arse-end of three turtles sitting somewhere over there on a piece of wood. No attempt has been made to showcase behaviour, character, or beauty in these animals. You have literally walked up to the enclosure barrier and snapped a shot.

And what is that in the background? A stripy blue and bright pink t-shirt? Why is that in the shot?

The trick with zoo shots is to make them appear as if they were shot in the wild.


Red Panda by Forkie, on Flickr

Where was my shot of this Red Panda taken? I could tell you it was on my conservation trek through the jungles of Nepal and Malaysia. But I've never done a conservation trek through the jungles of Nepal or Malaysia. In fact, it was shot at Whipsnade Zoo just off the M1 motorway about 45 miles outside London.

---------------------

Image #2: A cormorant and a couple of non-descript ducks sitting next to (not even in) a scummy concrete water-hole which has been shot from standing height. What is this actually a picture of? When shooting birds - especially water birds, get down to the water level. If you can't get down to their eye level and isolate them, don't even bother - you will never have an interesting shot of a bird if you shoot it from the same place everyone sees it from every day in real life and doesn't even look back twice at it.


Untitled by Forkie, on Flickr

Water or eye level. Always. Without fail.

-----------------

Image #3: I would bet my entire next month's wages on the fact that your Lion Fish falls on the right-hand third of the frame (i.e., the correct place) is entirely coincidental. The image is out of focus because of the distortion through the tank glass, the image is dark, murky and brown. I can barely make out its head.


Ray by Forkie, on Flickr

I can just about get away with this shot by the skin of my teeth if I only display it very, very small. It will certainly never even touch my portfolio with a long stick and if someone steals it off my Flickr and uses it on their site - more fool them! This was the last shot I will ever take through fish tank glass. It's not even worth it. Get to a diving school and get into underwater photography for this stuff and do it justice!

Have a good read of this: Rule of Thirds

And also, this: How to Expose a Photograph, and you will be well on your way to creating better photos. Most importantly, have fun doing it! Good luck! :mrgreen:

 

[mmaria]

well... Forkie gave you a really good critique

 

[Forkie]

Hey mmaria,

I looooove your blog! Really great stuff!

I'm now following you on FB too. :thumbup:

 

[scythefwd]

didnt see anything really that harsh. Getting close wasnt an option, or I would have gotten closer to that duck.. it was a distance away.

The fish was intentionally on the right 1/3, BUT I agree on the contrast making it hard to see. Focus is hard to do on the camera, I may start using auto focus due to the crap LCD on the back.

First.. unless I crawl into the enclosure, there isn't any other angle on that one. I do appreciate the input. These were the first attempts I've done with a manual settings. i was just trying to get things properly exposed and in focus and with good color saturation. Art wasnt a consideration, and wasnt the intent. I wanted a realistic representation of what was there.. not cherry picking the beauty in the midst of the chaos.. the chaos IS the beauty to me. I will definitely keep what you said in mind though. I had already read the rule of 3rds before. Still trying to determine when and if to trust the meters on the camera..

No need to warn me about taking things personal.. I dont..., at least not from anon folks on the net.