Discussion in 'Critique Forum Archives' started by Leigh Wanstead, Nov 5, 2006.
Shot by nv-gs400 photo mode.
The time was around 7pm.
It is a good photo but it would be even better with no people or just one person I just think that it has no "point of interest" your eyes go crazy and dont know where to look, there is no flow to it. but that is just me.
Hi, you seem like you have a seious interest in photography. You have posted several times with several pictures, and have gotten very little "positive" feedback. (not that people have been rude, but you get the idea) My point is, you keep coming back for more, and I like that.
There are a couple of problems with what I have seen so far..........
1) You are shooting with a video camera that has a still mode. It is probably very limited in the choices it lets you make. If you want to take really good pictures, at some point you need to be able to make decisions for the camera instead of it making them for you.
2) You seemto be trying to make "pretty pictures", but not really completely understanding composition and how much "prettier" a well composed photograph can be than a photo of "pretty" scenery. (By the way, this is the best composed photo i have seen you post yet. It's good, just a little over saturated.)
I hope that last sentance made at least a little sense.
I would suggest a few things. First, find a book about composition. I am a painter first, photographer second. (though, the majority of my income comes from photography) The only books I can suggest are ones for artists, but they would work just the same.
Getting a camera comes second, and that can cost far less than you might think. You can get a fully manual 35mm for pennies. I just bought another medium format camera for $50. I will research digitals for you if you wish, just point me in the right direction as far as price point. (just pm me)
I write all this because it looks like you really have a drive to take good pictures.
Thanks for the input.
I am reading the book [ame="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0787263168"]The Art of Photography: An Approach to Personal Expression[/ame]
You know, photography is like golf, not instant. I am not in a hurry. For the camera part, I don't want to buy any camera now. The reason for that is the camera does not matter.
this is a very good point youve put across..... i think you can create better effects if your using a fully manual camera rather than a point and shoot. but the website is problery rite to some degree.... quite a nice pic by the way...
That website is right to a large extent, but.......
Cameras like yours have built in software (algorythms) that try and guess what you want to do with your pic, and they "improve" it without asking you if thats what you wanted to do. It does not take much to confuse these cameras resulting in not so consistant images.
Can a good/great photographer make good photos with just about any camera they are handed? YES
Can a good/great photographer make an even better (great) photos if you give them a camera that lets them make the decisions? YES
To quote that article you posted (it actually says this a couple of times)
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"1.) Good tools just get out of the way and make it easier to get the results you want. Lesser tools may take more work."
[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Most digital Point and Shoots, and video Cameras are not designed to "get out of the way", they are designed to "help" the user get a nice shot.
Having said that about the article, that is why I said that I would get the book first and the camera second. You are going about it right.
One thing needs to be cleared.
I always using manual mode for my nv-gs400 minidv camera. I want to take control of the tool and never let the camera to make decision for me. I also set everything inside camera menu to get as not sharp as possible to stop camera add unnecessory logic similar to adobe photoshop usm filter.
By the way, this saves me lots of money by following not to get a new camera advice. I think that is quite important too. It ease my pocket.
By shooting digital, I can shoot as much as I want(actually there is a limit on my 512mb sd card, around 256 photos can be taken one time.) But I usually take around 200 photos per day and never reach 256 photos limit. It cost me nothing once I bought my nv-gs400 and sd card two and half years ago.
I like the composition, as in that it leads the viewers eye into the frame...but I agree that there needs to be a stonger point of interest to really hold the viewer's eye.
The bad thing that jumps out to me...is the purple fringing. This is most likely chromatic abboration or something similar.
My bad on the assumption that your video camera didn't have manual controls. It seems we were saying the same things (had the same ideas) after all.
The reason I jumped to that conclusion was the amount of color saturation in these images you are posting. Are you adjusting the color in software after you download them?
Yes, I love to change the curve of the photo I shot. Sometimes I can't resist to overdoing it.
The process I did was
1 change to 16bit mode
2 change to lab mode
3 bring curve command on a new layer
4 adjust brightness and a, b
5 image size to 25% original, the reason for that is I think software will be easy to half smaller. If I select some odd value i.e. 800. The image software might stuggle to do that, thus reduce the quality of the image
6 change lab mode to rgb mode
7 change 16 bit mode to 8 bit mode
8 Optimize save image as JPG 100%
"the camera does not matter"......
I do not support this popular myth. I currently have a Canon A-1 with several lenses of various brand names. Quality of results from these lenses vary. I have 2 different DSLR's with kit lenses and a point & Shoot. The p&S produces higher qualilty than either of the DSLR's with kit lenses. I also have access to Canon "L" glass upon occasions. Nothing I've ever used can compete with the quality of the results from "L" glass. My experience with "L" glass just further substantiates my notion that 'you get what you pay for'.
Composition - absolutely fine, the best feature of the shot, and in this kind of shot, probably the most important quality. I think the figures are in good locations, are "pointed out" by the structure of the pier, and they spread interest across the frame. The picture "reads" left to right very well.
Colour - looks false. If that's unintentional it needs de-saturating. If it's intended, what it brings to the image is lessened by your treatment of the image as a "photograph" rather than an "art photograph".
Contrast - O.K.
Horizon - not level. In general the horizon needs to be level or considerably off level (so that it's clearly intentional).
Purple fringing - doesn't make or break the shot, but is extremely obvious, and can be removed in software.
Suggestion - with the focus softened a bit more, this image, particularly because of its colour (but also the subject) would have a very attractive "painterly" quality in the style of Seurat or Monet.
My immediate thoughts. Hope they're helpful.
Separate names with a comma.