Funny story about these...

[KevinPutman]

They aren't the best, blah blah. Give me some pointers to help me improve? ^-^

While taking these pictures, in a heavily grassed area, I somehow managed to lose my car keys! So I spent about 45 minutes wandering around, retracing my steps to find them.
Finally right as I was giving up and going back to my car to make some phone calls, I happened to look down and find then buried under some dead grass.


Anyways,
c&c?

 

[tirediron]

C&C per req:

1. I like the perspective and the way this image has been shot. The use of a 1 stop G-ND to enhance the cloud detail would have made it even stronger.

2. Not much to say about this one, however if you're going to shoot a lot of water-related subjects, invest in a good CPOL.

3. A storm-drain outfall w/ over-exposed background. Sorry, I get nothing from this. What was your thought/intent with this image?

Just my $00.02 worth - your mileage may vary.

~John

 

[OrionsByte]

Can your P&S take attachments like lens filters? If so, what tirediron is saying is true - a circular polarizer would make a world of difference in that second shot.

 

[KevinPutman]

Can your P&S take attachments like lens filters? If so, what tirediron is saying is true - a circular polarizer would make a world of difference in that second shot.

Yeah, it's a bridge camera so it can take other lenses and filters,
but I'm too broke to afford either at the moment =/


And as for the storm drain, lol idk.
I was looking around for something to shoot, and that was there. -shrug-
thanks for the input =]

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

And as for the storm drain, lol idk.
I was looking around for something to shoot, and that was there. -shrug-

This is something that bothers me. You are ambivalent to your own subject choice. How can viewers be excited about an image, if you are not? I believe there was something there that you felt had merit to photograph. What was it? What about that made you stop and say "Hey! There's something!" That's where you start thinking creatively. What was your decision to convert to black and white?

Something that was brought up in your other, now infamous thread, was the ambiguity of "help me improve."
Are you looking for technical assistance, or something more than that? Do you just want to know if it is exposed well, and in focus?

 

[KevinPutman]

And as for the storm drain, lol idk.
I was looking around for something to shoot, and that was there. -shrug-

This is something that bothers me. You are ambivalent to your own subject choice. How can viewers be excited about an image, if you are not? I believe there was something there that you felt had merit to photograph. What was it? What about that made you stop and say "Hey! There's something!" That's where you start thinking creatively. What was your decision to convert to black and white?

Something that was brought up in your other, now infamous thread, was the ambiguity of "help me improve."
Are you looking for technical assistance, or something more than that? Do you just want to know if it is exposed well, and in focus?

Well,
so far this week I've been to a lake, 2 creeks, under 2 different bridges, and up and down a railroad track. And no matter where I seem to go (aside from the photos I'll be posting in a few minutes) everything around here seems dull and repetitive. I go down to the creek, and see mud, rocks, trees, dead grass, and some murky creekwater. The pipe struck out to me because it's one of the first unique things that I noticed when I got to that location.

Something I'm really interested in seeing or trying out, is having a more advanced photographer than myself come out to the same location, at the same time, same lighting, etc, and see what kind of shots they would come up with. I feel that would give me a much better eye for what would actually look good in a picture and what wouldn't.

When I shoot I try to look for something unique. Not just another tree, or another rock. It's hard around here because the weather is always very dull and gloomy, and flowers won't be blooming for another month or more. Wildlife is sparse due to the cold weather, and I just find it a challenge to get something appealing to shoot.

So the pipe was more than just a "hey look a pipe *snap snap*, it was more of a, "tree, tree, tree, rock, shovel, tree, oh hey a pipe! much more interesting than a rock, I think I'll shoot it."
Unfortunately a creek and a bridge lay between me and different angles on it.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

Kevin, I am not sure what the capabilities of your camera are, as far as close focusing distance, or zoom, so keep that in mind as I continue.

Sometimes details are interesting, and sometimes the scene as a whole is interesting. Sometimes the subject is interesting because of it's environment, and sometimes the environment the subject is in matters not. The garbage can shot in the other thread is an example I will use as illustration. When I saw that image, I saw a can that said keep Omaha beautiful, with a background that was a hill with browned out grass. To me, the irony was that apparently Omaha isn't very beautiful. You explained the irony you saw, which I missed, was the trash on the ground in front of he can. Another, possibly more effective way to have gotten your point across, would be to fill your frame with the actual subject. In my eyes shooting wide lessened the impact of your intention

To look at your first image in this thread, the sky isn't really a key player. Get less of it. What I do see, that would show me how boring th area is, is that you could have shot down from a bit higher to show the detail of the corn stalks, an shown that they go on forever. Monotony.

My guess is, if I went to the same locations with you, I wouldn't come back with much, and would be disappointed. But something to think about, is trying to tell a story of the area in a Triptych. If you took 5 people from this forum with you, you would see 5 different points of view. I shoot for details or parts of a whole, and lean towards abstraction. I am not big on wide perspective and landscapes.

What other areas are available to you? Small town? Bigger city? Manufacturing/agriculture/industry? People? I only suggest you try to shoot anything and everything, in many ways to find what you really enjoy, find your voice, style, etc. Look into post processing, and how you can use it to help get your point across.

I hope my ramblings are useful in some way.

 

[KevinPutman]

Definitely helpful, I took a couple other shots of the corn as well, I'll see if I can find one and edit this post with it.

I'm interested in someone better than mine's, point of view with an area like the ones I've been shooting.

I have an amazing downtown area at my disposal, but it's a bit of a drive. I've been shooting what's closest to me this week. I'll venture outwards more and shoot at different places when I can. For now I'm stuck at the creeks and the lake (right across the street from my house).

As for my camera, it can get the job done, yea. But I'm missing a lot, with it's limitations. I can't do Bokeh (spelling?) which I love, also not having as much control over my focusing. I hope to get some lenses/filters for it, maybe that will improve.

For now I just make due with the things I have available to shoot. But definitely need to improve on my creative eye =]

Found it,
the corn field from a different angle.
As you said, boring and repetitive.

I think the angle I had on the other shot made a better picture than this one, but that's my opinion.

 

[doziergraphic]

This is something that bothers me. You are ambivalent to your own subject choice. How can viewers be excited about an image, if you are not? I believe there was something there that you felt had merit to photograph. What was it? What about that made you stop and say "Hey! There's something!" That's where you start thinking creatively.

All good points BJ - having just re-entered the world of photography about a year ago, I confess I did the same thing kevin is doing - shooting anything and everything, but not really seeing anything. When you look at other people's work as a newbie, it appears to be easy to get the correct framing, exposure, etc until you get out in the field and realize you have no idea. It's very daunting, but you just keep going and started 'seeing' things (posting here is great way to learn.)

But you have to take those 'worthless' shots in order to start comparing and realizing what you SHOULD have done - as I assume Kevin is learning.

My opinion, shot 1 should have had the viewpoint of shot 2, and shot 2 should have had the viewpoint of shot 1. EVERY photo in magazines like Outdoor Photographer has something in the foreground - otherwise it's just a snapshot. Like you could have got down to water-level and tried using one of the rocks in the foreground, worked on your DOF and start looking at your compositions that way.

In 1 - I don't konw if the cornfield is a home garden, or acres of farmland. A higher perspective might have added something.

But in general Kevin, we all fall subject to the 'there's nothing around my town to shoot,' but there's tons! get up next to a building, or some sort of pole with something on top of it, and shoot straight up! Do the same with a tree and work on angles. The branches of trees can always be played with by moving around. Flowers are getting ready to pop up, get in close, or get to a generic field with dandelions and try to get a 'meadow' sort of shot.

bottom line, shot EVERYTHING! You'll learn from every shot, even the throwaways.

Bitter, my goal was to ramble more than you! But I think mine was more mindless! lol

 

[KevinPutman]

This is something that bothers me. You are ambivalent to your own subject choice. How can viewers be excited about an image, if you are not? I believe there was something there that you felt had merit to photograph. What was it? What about that made you stop and say "Hey! There's something!" That's where you start thinking creatively.

All good points BJ - but having just re-entered the world of photography about a year ago, I confess I did the same thing kevin is doing - shooting anything and everything, but not really seeing anything. When you look at other people's work as a newbie, it appears to be easy to get the correct framing, exposure, etc until you get out in the field and realize you have no idea. It's very daunting, but you just keep going and started 'seeing' things (posting here is great way to learn.)

But you have to take those 'worthless' shots in order to start comparing and realizing what you SHOULD have done - as I assume Kevin is learning.

My opinion, shot 1 should have had the viewpoint of shot 2, and shot 2 should have had the viewpoint of shot 1. EVERY photo in magazines like Outdoor Photographer has something in the foreground - otherwise it's just a snapshot. Like you could have got down to water-level and tried using one of the rocks in the foreground, worked on your DOF and start looking at your compositions that way.

In 1 - I don't konw if the cornfield is a home garden, or acres of farmland. A higher perspective might have added something.

But in general Kevin, we all fall subject to the 'there's nothing around my town to shoot,' but there's tons! get up next to a building, or some sort of pole with something on top of it, and shoot straight up! Do the same with a tree and work on angles. The branches of trees can always be played with by moving around. Flowers are getting ready to pop up, get in close, or get to a generic field with dandelions and try to get a 'meadow' sort of shot.

bottom line, shot EVERYTHING! You'll learn from every shot, even the throwaways.

Sorry Bitter, my goal was to ramble more than you! But I think mine was more mindless! lol

Nope you definitely make a valid point ^-^
If you check my post above yours you'll see the higher angle view of the corn field.

As for the water shot...
well, the creek banks are very steep around here, and that's about as close as I could get without falling in =/

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

I think the angle I had on the other shot made a better picture than this one, but that's my opinion.

I agree. What I was trying to say was trying to keep the close detail you have but shoot from just a little higher up, a little more down angle to fill the frame with dirt and stalks into the distance, resulting in less sky. A small change in perspective can make a drastic difference. The image here is a pretty big change in perspective.

 

[KevinPutman]

Ahhh! now I understand =p