I'm Dying for a Critique!

gw2424 · Dec 21, 2012

Hey TPF'ers! I am a 14 year old photographer and really need a constructive critique. I have been producing some work lately that I think is just "so-so" so I really would like a second opinion. Criticize away!

Flickr: GabeWisePhotography's Photostream

Thank You and Happy Holidays!

GW

dxqcanada · Dec 21, 2012

What you need to do is take one image ... post it and ask for C&C on that specific image.

Then do it again, if you want, to another image.

gw2424 · Dec 21, 2012

IMG_0043 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/wisephotographic/8255003371/in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/wisephotographic/8155230571/in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/wisephotographic/8296146988/in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/wisephotographic/8030534221/in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/wisephotographic/8030534791/in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/wisephotographic/8296160462/in/photostream/

amolitor · Dec 21, 2012

Lots to like there, and some things to dislike.

The colors are great, the technical details like focus and exposure are on target (one could quibble about this and that I suppose, but whatever).

The wine glass, being transparent, is lost against the busy background. It's quite hard to light glass, but this is begging for some more beefy reflections on it to make it stand out despite the fact that you can see through it. The frame feels simply too big to me, there's a lot of stuff in it, and not all of it serves the image. You've gone quite wide to get almost all of the table setting in frame, which isn't a bad idea, but that brings in a massive amount of the out of focus background, which is quite busy and distracting. It does give it a nice urban flavor, but I think there's too much of it.

If I wanted the whole table setting, I would change my angle to bring the whole thing into frame while I am somewhat closer, to make the classes bigger in the frame.

Not sure about the choice to lose the top of the napkin in the glass, and the nearest fork. It feels deliberate -- probably -- but I would either get them in-frame, or chop a bit more aggressively so as to make it clear that it's not a mistake.

dxqcanada · Dec 21, 2012

Ok, hmm.

You cut off the top of the napkin.

The background lights are distracting. You should always look at what the background is doing.

You have some dead space on the left (I think you wanted to include the OOF forks) ... the image might be weighted better by moving the glass to the left of the scene (sacrifice the forks), which also would have include the complete background glass to compliment it.

gw2424 · Dec 21, 2012

amolitor said:
Lots to like there, and some things to dislike.

The colors are great, the technical details like focus and exposure are on target (one could quibble about this and that I suppose, but whatever).

The wine glass, being transparent, is lost against the busy background. It's quite hard to light glass, but this is begging for some more beefy reflections on it to make it stand out despite the fact that you can see through it. The frame feels simply too big to me, there's a lot of stuff in it, and not all of it serves the image. You've gone quite wide to get almost all of the table setting in frame, which isn't a bad idea, but that brings in a massive amount of the out of focus background, which is quite busy and distracting. It does give it a nice urban flavor, but I think there's too much of it.

If I wanted the whole table setting, I would change my angle to bring the whole thing into frame while I am somewhat closer, to make the classes bigger in the frame.

Not sure about the choice to lose the top of the napkin in the glass, and the nearest fork. It feels deliberate -- probably -- but I would either get them in-frame, or chop a bit more aggressively so as to make it clear that it's not a mistake.

Does this capture the scene better?

IMG_0042 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

I appreciate all of the feedback!

dxqcanada · Dec 21, 2012

Better, though the background distractions are still there.

amolitor · Dec 21, 2012

That is precisely the photograph I was wishing the first one would be

Well, almost. You'll notice that there's a strong white shape on the empty wine glass, relfecting or refracting from something. That's good, but I'd like a bit more of that, or maybe even just bring it up in post a little.

Not sure I love the red light in the background. It's distracting, but it's also interesting, and the color plays well with the napkin. If it were my photo, I'd clone it out, and then stare at both versions for a while, because I really truly don't know if it's better with or without. It's certainly not bad to leave it in.

dxqcanada · Dec 21, 2012

Not paying as much attention to the background is one of the most commonest things that kills an image.

gw2424 · Dec 21, 2012

Great Points! I should probably begin paying more attention to the background. I didn't notice the red light before you pointed it out however, I understand what you are stating.

gw2424 · Dec 21, 2012

IMG_9579 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Opinions?

dxqcanada · Dec 21, 2012

Better to start a new post for each image you want C&C

Derrel · Dec 22, 2012

I went thru a bunch of your shots on Flickr. You are "almost there" on many of your food shots. My biggest criticism on your food shots: the early ones have ugly lighting...looks like a flash,with no modifier...I see specular highlights on the food...not good...food usually looks better with more-diffused lighting, and NO specular highlights, no big areas of white or purple, flash-lighting "sheen" on the food.

The food shots after the apron on mannequin are generally better. My biggest concern though, is the f/2 aperture...it's just not enough of a DOF zone on many shots to not appear "gimmicky". I know a lot of young photographers are fascinated with shooting at f/2 with a 50mm lens....but honestly, it looks "noobish" to me. If you want to improve, I suggest that you try some aperture bracketing...shoot at f/2, but also shoot at f/2.8, and f/4, and even f/5.6. See which shot looks better. Experiment with exact focusing placement; like for example, the second shot of the custards or puddings in the bowls....ehhh...the focus placement is not right...coulda' been a good shot.

Same with the asparagus and the avocado slice plate...such shallow DOF...and the background bokeh of that specific lens is...UGLY. Buy a cheap $12 m42 screw-mount 55mm Super Takumar...it has a much prettier defocused background look than your 50mm. Overall though, for a young person, I think your food shots are FAR better than the majority of those I have seen by people just starting out.

Your upcoming 70-200/2.8 Canon will have MUCH prettier background defocus than that 50, so that will be nice!!!

gw2424 · Dec 22, 2012

Derrel said:
I went thru a bunch of your shots on Flickr. You are "almost there" on many of your food shots. My biggest criticism on your food shots: the early ones have ugly lighting...looks like a flash,with no modifier...I see specular highlights on the food...not good...food usually looks better with more-diffused lighting, and NO specular highlights, no big areas of white or purple, flash-lighting "sheen" on the food.

The food shots after the apron on mannequin are generally better. My biggest concern though, is the f/2 aperture...it's just not enough of a DOF zone on many shots to not appear "gimmicky". I know a lot of young photographers are fascinated with shooting at f/2 with a 50mm lens....but honestly, it looks "noobish" to me. If you want to improve, I suggest that you try some aperture bracketing...shoot at f/2, but also shoot at f/2.8, and f/4, and even f/5.6. See which shot looks better. Experiment with exact focusing placement; like for example, the second shot of the custards or puddings in the bowls....ehhh...the focus placement is not right...coulda' been a good shot.

Same with the asparagus and the avocado slice plate...such shallow DOF...and the background bokeh of that specific lens is...UGLY. Buy a cheap $12 m42 screw-mount 55mm Super Takumar...it has a much prettier defocused background look than your 50mm. Overall though, for a young person, I think your food shots are FAR better than the majority of those I have seen by people just starting out.

Your upcoming 70-200/2.8 Canon will have MUCH prettier background defocus than that 50, so that will be nice!!!

Thank you so much, that is great advice! I also have an olympus 50 f1.8 which may be better for this genre of photos. (example: Starbucks 2 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!) For the lighting, would a 9 inch softbox help? I have been working with a pair of cheapo flash triggers and a $10 softbox. I will work with a slower shutter speed and a slower aperture next time.

Thanks,
GW