I need some help...

bytch_mynickname

TPF Noob!
Joined
Jun 4, 2006
Messages
303
Reaction score
0
I am a beginner and would like your opinion, OTE. Thanks
Pictures723a.jpg



Pictures702a.jpg
 
It would also be helpful to let us know why you are seeking critique. Are you satisfied with your images technically, but not aesthetically - or vice-versa?

What do you want the viewer to think of when seeing these?
 
this is his from a thread in a different forum:

I am new here and to photography beyond a point and shoot. I recently bought a Canon Rebel XT and so far only have the kit lens. I have been practicing and need some constructive criticism. They aren't anything special but I need to start somewhere.
 
ok, the proboscis wielding fella first.

speaking to composition:

1 - i love the fact that you placed it at the right of the frame. there's sufficient weight on the left to balance its size and color.

2 - my eyes can't help but want a small crop up from the bottom. you can either create 'space' or 'tension'. space doesn't work here. create tension with the edges of the frame. something like this:


bf_t.jpg


a composition overlay to show you how things align (the red marks are the significant areas of difference):

cropped:

bf_t_gr.jpg


original:

bf_or_gr.jpg



3 - see yellow area(s) below:

bf_t_white.jpg


these are slightly bothersome. when i first looked at the image, i thought the poor thing was somewhat disfigured. the mind does eventually realize that the geometric shapes match the others in the image and the flower correlation takes hold, but that doesn't eliminate the fact that the placement of the petals do detract from the image.


points on exposure:

1 - your whites are blown out. you can get away with that with the background flowers as a shallow dof blur tends to neutralize a wash out, but the foreground flowers have no detail and my eyes want it.

2 - i don't have many visual clues, but my guess is that it was shot somewhere between 10:30ish and 5ish. i haven't a clue as to where you live, but here that is the 'poo poo light' time period . my point is that you should attempt to shoot in the morning or the evening. why? the image is slightly flat. ever so slight shadows will help build depth.

a while back i was setting up to do some studio shooting which happened to include flowers. flitting about setting up, my female cat decided that she'd have a go at the flowers. i had no intention of it being a 'good shot', just a shot of good ol' Psyche doing what she does best; eating things that i need. when i saw it, my reaction was 'UGH', even though it was for the archives destined for memory massage only. here it is:

psycheflower1.jpg


see how flat that sucker is? no depth. (she ate it, btw).

so try to get 'good' light. this should also help with the blowing out of the whites. a nice diffused light is a wonderful thing.

OR, as suggested elsewhere, a different angle would've helped add depth.

one more thing on depth.

bf_t_blue.jpg


imagine the center flower as not being there. then add detail the blue areas. now the wings ever so slightly elevated casting a nice shadow.

the reason i asked you to post it here is because i believe that you are on to something. this is an image that's nicely weighted without a bunch of irrelevant information in the shot.

keep it up.
 
Wow, that was very helpful. It is amazing at what the little things can do. You are right about the time, it was about 4ish and it was overcast out (Pennsylvania.)

What about the farm picture, is it decent? I really like it for some reason, I think it almost looks like a post card. Not sure if that is good or bad but there is something about it that grabs my attention. I knowneed to get rid of that white thing in the one tree top.

Thanks for all the help, I will keep it in mind.
 
Well, I'm at work at the moment and only have microsoft picture manager to edit with (I know, but they'll sack me if I install photoshop) so I've had to do one edit for the sky and one for the landscape as they need treating differently. I've done a slight crop from the bottom and right to get the landscape around 1/3 up on the right hand side, the tree tops around the same area on the other side and get rid of the grass in the foreground at the bottom. The clouds also work with the composition well with that strong band about a third down.

Original:

Pictures723a.jpg

Anyway, here's what I would do with the sky as I'd like to see some more detail in the clouds and a deeper blue for the background:

normal_Pictures723a_sky_edit.jpg

All I've done here is darken the midtones a little and give the contrast a slight boost, with a decent program you can do this to the sky alone and not the whole picture.

Same with the ground really except I've boosted both midtones and contrast to make the trees stand out more from the landscape.

normal_Pictures723a_Landscape_edit.jpg

Once again, with a decent program you can selsct which area of the picture to work with rather than having to work on the whole thing.

If you are able to retake the shot at all I would strongly suggest a polarizing filter as it will darken the sky and bring out richer colours in the landscape when you take the shot and will usually come up with much better results than you can get in photoshop.

ps. Take everything I say with a pinch of salt, I'm pretty much a newbie myself but I'm REALLY bored at work! :D

*edit* have also shrunk them a bit as well, sorry about that!
 
I can see what you mean about the different parts of the pic but it is kind of hard to 'see' it in my mind just b/c of how you posted the separate pictures. I am only working with photoshop elements but when I get time I will have to play around with it and see what I can do (still learning the program too. I am a complete n00b:blushing: )

I can retake the shot but I need to get the polarizing filter first. I just got my camera and haven't bought the accessories yet...working on that!

Thank you for your critique, I am taking it with more than a grain of salt, you do have more experience and very valids points. Thanks again.
 
sorry, I meant to post an edit on one pic last night but got caught up with a load of other things, I'll try and sort it out tonight and post an edit with just one pic and a walk through of how I got there although there are people on these boards who would do a much better job than me!
 
This is a very interesting and informative thread in a lot of ways. I don't agree with a lot of it, but I do think It is the type thing that should be going on here.

Of course it also reminds me a little of alice's restaurant and the blind judge.
 
Well I had to go look that up but I can see what you mean. I usually don't go in for posting on the critique gallery as I don't really consider myself a good photographer (yet...) just pretty bored at work and saw a shot I thought had some potential for a good edit and couldn't keep my hands off!

What don't you agree with and what would you suggest?
 
This is where i get the fun of saying ... I get so sick of the rule of thirds being quoted as if it was the gospel according to whoever the current guru is.

Guys the rule of thirds is a thumbnail approach to composition... it is not carved in stone. The rule of thirds is a guideline to teach you about balance not something to be used to justify an unbalanced photograph. If you stick the only object of interest in the left third of a print and have nothing of interest in the other two thirds. You have satified this mystical rule of thirds but you have a picture that looks as though it is about to fall on it's butt.

The only thing that will help that butterfly is to have something more on the right side. the rule of thirds is for the head of the butterfly to be in the top quadrant of the picture. and the body centered in the shot.

Now that is my unscientific take on that shot....

The composition on the landscape is fine If he had cropped it closer to the buildings not left so much blank space. He missed the chance for the natural ending of the shot. The shot is a little dark for my taste but it might be my monitor the one that is so bright is way too bright.

This is just my opinion which is probably worth less than my two cent worth. But hey I get to toss both in now and again
 
mysteryscribe said:
This is where i get the fun of saying ... I get so sick of the rule of thirds being quoted as if it was the gospel according to whoever the current guru is.

Funny. I didn't quote it as gospel. I was relating it to the golden ratio. And the golden ratio was used to show why motcom used the crop he did. I do think it's a better crop. The image has a much better feel to me like that, and the overlay is a way to demonstrate why.

Guys the rule of thirds is a thumbnail approach to composition... it is not carved in stone. The rule of thirds is a guideline to teach you about balance not something to be used to justify an unbalanced photograph. If you stick the only object of interest in the left third of a print and have nothing of interest in the other two thirds. You have satified this mystical rule of thirds but you have a picture that looks as though it is about to fall on it's butt.
I didn't see this happen either.

The only thing that will help that butterfly is to have something more on the right side.
I don't agree.

the rule of thirds is for the head of the butterfly to be in the top quadrant of the picture. and the body centered in the shot.
That's one way to interpret it, but my take is that it doesn't show an understanding of what the rule of thirds or golden ratio is about.

Some might say they are just tools, but they aren't even that to me. I was using this method of composition before I knew what it was. I put things where they looked good to me, and this simply explains why it looks good there. I guess I was lucky and had a developed eye before knowing the ins and outs and specifics. Using these "rules" (lousy name) is for people who haven't gotten the hang of seeing composition yet. Sometimes we can see that one composition is better than another, but we don't know why or how to get there. This is a way of leading people there. Composing using the rule thirds can be a jump start. Someone moves the composition, and suddenly they see something they like. Now they are on the trail and can adjust from there.

There are definitely times when you might want to compose centered, but people already know how to try that. This is a way of seing things a little differently.
 
Well it must be said that it's the first thing that get rammed down your throat when you start off with photography!

Joking aside I agree that it's a rule of thumb rather than a rule but at the moment I'm enough of a "noob" that it has really helped me as my composition has come on a lot by keeping it in mind. I do break it quite often these days but stuck to it religioulsy for a while and have found that my shots are better now, by no means great but better...
 

Most reactions

Back
Top