Critiques welcome

[konijntjesbroek]

A couple from a road trip this weekend up the Mississippi River.

 

[bronzeo]

I would probably treat the first one to this crop... I would remove the blue or all but a small border of it.

 

[The_Traveler]

First, welcome to the site; this is a great place for learning.
These are reasonably well exposed and caught.
Unfortunately they are also very much typical of new photographers who are 'seeing' for the first time.
New photographers look for a striking nature shot and silhouette trees against a sunrise or in this case sunset.
They also become aware that things they've ignored every day have interesting textures and shapes.

This new 'seeing' is the first part of photography and you will quickly get past that in your skills.

Lew

 

[Derrel]

First, welcome to the site; this is a great place for learning.
These are reasonably well exposed and caught.
Unfortunately they are also very much typical of new photographers who are 'seeing' for the first time.
New photographers look for a striking nature shot and silhouette trees against a sunrise or in this case sunset.
They also become aware that things they've ignored every day have interesting textures and shapes.

This new 'seeing' is the first part of photography and you will quickly get past that in your skills.

Lew

What Lew wrote might be considered harsh, but I think truer words were never written. I do think the exposure, especially on the sunset, is good. The fire hydrant (?) shot though...there's a good deal of unused space that is "just sidewalk"...which doesn't add much to the shot. Perhaps a different camera position would have eliminated the concrete walk, and shown us more of the hydrant? A thought about this exact type of incidental found object photo: MANY subjects of this type lend themselves well to a SQUARE composition, and those look great when shown in collections of 9 or 12 frames, or three rows of five frames each. Making a good picture out of a simple, rather dull found object is an acquired skill, based mostly around skill at composition, but also awareness of lighting. It's EASY to make a pleasing photo of a gorgeous woman or an amazing natural scene, but much more difficult to make a good photo out of a simple, found object.

 

[The_Traveler]

I didn't think I was being harsh and I'm sorry if it came across that way.

Following on with what Derrel said about the hydrant picture.
To a parent, every picture of their child is beautiful because their child is obviously the most beautiful child in the world. This is a clear lesson that we don't see what our eyes see; each of us processes the input from our eyes and moderates that according to our own special set of likes, dislikes and experiences.
When you take a picture, you see the results with all the personal and emotional overlay; when someone else sees that picture, they see only what the camera shows.

Thus, to make a point with the viewer so the viewer can appreciate the scene, we must compose the image in the frame, leave out what is distracting or unimportant and make certain that the viewer can see and appreciate what we saw when we took the picture.
The viewer, who is not you, tries to parse the contents of the frame and understand the story you are telling; after all, you included stuff and so you must want the viewer to include that in the 'story.'

That being said, I have no idea why you took the hydrant picture.
What is important?
Why is it in one corner?
Why do you include so much sidewalk?

You haven't shown me and I can't figure it out- and thus the photo fails.

 

[konijntjesbroek]

So first, I a a crisis manager by trade. Don't worry about hurt feelings/harshness. I understand that I am new to this and expect to screw up a lot for the first few years. As long as I can manage to screw up in different ways. . . that's progress. The thought behind the hydrant was more showing the passage of time in the layers of oxidized paint and rust and the missing hardware. Is there a way that I could better convey that feeling or history?

 

[The_Traveler]

A viewer tries to fit everything you put in the frame into a story and some kinds of unanswered questions confuse that story because it's clear that the photographer did something and the viewer needs/wants to know why.

Why is only part of the hydrant shown?
Why is it off in the corner?
Clearly the photographer did that so it must be important to the 'story'.

It's nice to have some mystery in a photo but the viewer needs to know what you want them to think about.

Here are two pictures that have a hydrant as a center of interest.
Can you pick out why they are 'different' from your picture, what impressions you get and, most important of all, what about the picture gives you those impressions?
Understanding the mechanics of telling a story is crucial - color, position, framing, composition

 

[konijntjesbroek]

A viewer tries to fit everything you put in the frame into a story and some kinds of unanswered questions confuse that story because it's clear that the photographer did something and the viewer needs/wants to know why.

Why is only part of the hydrant shown?
Only part of it was interesting to me. Additionally was the only way I could figure to get the details (peeling paint, rust, the word open) to pop into focus. Any farther back and those faded into the hydrant-ness of a stable picture.

Why is it off in the corner?
Clearly the photographer did that so it must be important to the 'story'.
It's nice to have some mystery in a photo but the viewer needs to know what you want them to think about.
To locate the peeling top nut and the word open near to the focal points on the right side, could crop to fill more of the frame.

Here are two pictures that have a hydrant as a center of interest.
Can you pick out why they are 'different' from your picture, what impressions you get and, most important of all, what about the picture gives you those impressions?
Understanding the mechanics of telling a story is crucial - color, position, framing, composition
The main difference is a sense of context of the hydrant which is dropped from mine. So if I had lowered the camera about two feet a focused towards the scene below (DOF would have been challenging as I was firing wide open on a 50mm f/1.4 AI-S, because of the available light. Could have bumped ISO and bummed a couple of stops), it would have allowed for the context of a small town sunset on main street still allowing the age and stalwartness of the hydrant to shine over its domain. Might have switched to the 24mm to grab the house on the corner lot also.

Thanks again for taking the time to help.

 

[The_Traveler]

No problem.