Geothermal...

[Mully]

Where is Charlie when you need him??????

 

[o hey tyler]

OP, you seem to have a large stick or possibly a farm animal of some variety lodged in your bum. Take a deep breath, and calm yourself. ;-)

The photos have a subject, yes. It's a geothermal area, which I would not have known without you saying that. Simply because you took photos of a geothermal area, And titled your thread "Geothermal," does not mean that your images have a clear subject or focus; much less any compositional merit to speak of. You may see them as the best images ever, but if you were your own judge, your photography would never improve.

You did indeed do some flavor of tone mapping, which really botches the images as a whole. Tonal range is all over the place, everything looks plastic, and it doesn't do anything to make the "subject" (whatever that may be) pop or stand out.

I'm sorry dude, they're just plain ol' not good, and your attitude is off the charts in a bad way.

You could continue on this trend of insulting forum members and publicly refuting the critique shared by numerous members if you'd like... Since clearly you are at the top of your game and have no one to look up to. Right?

Or...

I've heard of this great site, it's called Google, and you can type in a subject you want to know more about, and it will give you a bunch of different links of varying importance for you to browse. I think your first and most important search should be "composition in landscape photography."

 

[terri]

OP: if you don't like what people have to say about your images, thank them kindly for looking and move on. Please do not engage in name-calling from a defensive posture. You have several seasoned members here telling you the same thing about these shots, and you find you are having to explain each and every one. Could it be possible, just maybe, that they aren't as good as you'd hoped? You have to have a thicker hide than what you've displayed here to get along on this forum.

Where is Charlie when you need him??????

We don't need him. Potential bad call.

 

[Snakeguy101]

One would think that because the subject IS unclear, to the objective viewer.

Then, i would propose that the so called 'objective' viewer is either:

a) Blind.
b) Suffering from some form of cognitive retardation
c) Trying to look knowledgeable by parroting a previous statement which was made by someone who is either blind...or suffering from some form of cognitive retardation...

I honestly thought the first two shots were some kind of composite Photoshop image created to look like the day after the Apocalypse.

Really...even though i clearly labeled the thread Geothermal...and then labeled the pictures 'Mud pools', 'Geothermal 3', 'Geothermal 2' and 'Geyser and Mudpools'....?

They are very nice Doomsday photos.
But they have such an overcooked "feel" to them that your intent to show the geothermal areas is lost on me.

Then i guess, you'll never be able to view geothermal areas, as this IS what they look like...


I'm gonna try to say this in the nicest way possible--you will get much more out of this forum, and out of the C&C given, if you will not become quite so defensive and jump down people's throats when they say things you don't like.
WHY would Tevo need to first ASK if it's HDR?? It LOOKS like HDR, badly overcooked at that, so he worked from that basis. He DID add "in the event that these are not HDR photos..." -- I thought he did a very accurate assessment.

I'm going to try to say this in the nicest way possible--I would get much more out of this forum, and out of unasked for C&C if those critiquing were actually offering a reasonable critique and not just being aloof and jumping down my throat about ridiculous things that have nothing to do with the photos i posted...

Who knows why TEVO would ask if it's HDR...? Maybe, for the same reason he also claimed that 'the subject in the first two is unclear'...This either makes him incredibly dumb, or lacking the gift of eyesight...

The fact that many of you then JUMPED on this complete lack of reasoning and ran with it doesn't say much about your reasoning, either...:er:

I'd hate to see how he (and many of you) critique a landscape photo...'My god...where am i supposed to look, where is the subject of this image...aaarrrhhhhhh...'

Let's start with baby steps...


Playtime's over by SPD speedscene photography and design, on Flickr

Now, i know you may be distracted by the footpath, or the out of focus gravel and boxing in the background...but, the focus of this photo is the 'trike'...

And this:


Spec C by SPD speedscene photography and design, on Flickr

Now i know many of you have difficulty and probably think the grass is the focus in this image, but, it's actually the car....

Now, even though you didn't ask for critique on your reasoning skills, i hope my critique and examples have been useful to you...:mrgreen:

Here I edited one of your images to the same over-the-top level of the originals that you posted so that you can understand why we think that over editing is not a good thing.

Now- you might be able to squint your eyes and tilt your head a little and make out that it is a trike. I could also title it "tricycle" but the part of the image that stands out the most is the posterization and NOT the intended subject.

 

[pic_chick]

you know Stic you are not a nice person your photo are bad I don't like them they ARE hard to look and you are hard to read.I think the 1st thing you should googleis manners. your colors are everywhere and none of them look real they look like a bad acid tripping dream. IF I liked you more if you would listen I would have spent more time on CC

 

[STIC]

HDR...

 

[STIC]

HDR...

 

[o hey tyler]

You guys are are awesome...

Thanks for all the positive feedback.

It's nice to see there is a website where you can post photos and get good solid (bold and harsh) critique, whether you asked for it or not...

It's also extremely helpful to have people critique a non existing factor of you images, even when you've pointed out several times that this is not a component of the image...

Looks like some of you are also a little defensive, hey Snakeguy...cut a bit close did it? :lmao:

It's not a non existing factor if everyone is critiquing it...

Hopefully you have absorbed said critique and either chose to apply what you see fit, or disregard entirely. In the future, I suggest you use the "Just for Fun!" forum to post images that you do not wish to receive critique on. I think that would work best for preventing future threads that end this way.

I have to ask though... and please be honest. Are you over the age of 13? I think that's in the ToS that you have to be 13 or older to join but I could be wrong.

 

[Light Guru]

Who knows why TEVO would ask if it's HDR...? Maybe, for the same reason he also claimed that 'the subject in the first two is unclear'...This either makes him incredibly dumb, or lacking the gift of eyesight

I'm shire he HAD the gift of eyesight but perhaps he looked at the photos to long and damaged his eyes.

Simply put they are extremely ever processed so much so tht I find them hard to look at.

You guys are are awesome...

Thanks for all the positive feedback.

It's nice to see there is a website where you can post photos and get good solid (bold and harsh) critique, whether you asked for it or not...

It's also extremely helpful to have people critique a non existing factor of you images, even when you've pointed out several times that this is not a component of the image...

Looks like some of you are also a little defensive, hey Snakeguy...cut a bit close did it? :lmao:

It seems to me that you are the one who is the most defensive here. One of the things I find refreshing about this forum is how people do not hold back their real opinions on things. Yes they are blunt but at least they are honest.

 

[baturn]

why do you guys even respond to dicks like this guy ? Ignore him.

 

[STIC]

HDR...

 

[Mully]

Since the OP seems to have his own view why not open the jar and let him escape.... his views are harmless so why spit venom in the jar ....let him go to drown is his own vomit

 

[STIC]

HDR...

 

[Light Guru]

It seems to me that you are the one who is the most defensive here. One of the things I find refreshing about this forum is how people do not hold back their real opinions on things. Yes they are blunt but at least they are honest.

Well, why wouldn't I be?

Honest?...when they are all claiming to not even be able to work out what the focus of a photo is, even when it has a HUGE mud pool in it, and is titled MUD POOL in a thread called GEOTHERMAL?

Why wouldn't you be? Well thats the best way to learn. Someone saying they don't like your image does not mean they are saying they don't like you so don't take it personal. When people get defensive they are not willing to listen to things that can make them better.

As for why people cannot find the subject of your in your photo sometimes something else stands out so much that it distracts the viewer from the subject. It's much like when you see someone with a big zit on their face you have a hard time looking at anything else. I honestly found the processing so distracting that I didn't even bother looking for a subject in the image I just closed the image.

 

[o hey tyler]

Well, firstly, yes, i am over 13...cheers, but thanks very much for the implied insult...

Also, "It's not a non existing factor if everyone is critiquing it...", well, it's just that it IS!

THEY ARE NOT HDR...! I don't care if you think they are, or think they look like they are, or for that matter, think they are artificially coloured B&W prints...i never provided them AS HDR, mentioned HDR, hinted at HDR or implied HDR...any mistake of assuming they WERE HDR is the viewers only...cheers. Please don't critique me for YOUR mistakes...thank you.

Now, go back and see just how many blind mice couldn't (or claimed to not be able to) figure out what the photos were of...and this is the OTHER main critique point...seriously, i need to put labels on the objects in my photos to let you know what i was intending as the focus of the image?

When did that become a requirement?

I never mentioned HDR DUDE. I said they look tone mapped, as per the egregious halos. If you are shooting straight to jpeg and your camera is spitting out files like this, you have an issue on your hands. But no, you processed the images poorly and/or tone mapped them.

And no, there is no requirement to put labels on photos to describe them, your goal is to make a photograph where a description is not needed.