My first "Urban"ish photos

[OfMikeandMen]

Constructive criticism welcomed and encouraged, as well as praise. I am a newbie, and am looking to get better. I'm really working on exposure right now. I haven't read anything on urban, but if you have any suggestions for composition, exposure, or anything, really, it's welcomed. Enjoy.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5. (This one wouldn't post for some reason so here's a link) http://img801.imageshack.us/img801/6591/dsc1465y.jpg

I know 5 is a lot to post, but any picture you want to give feedback on, if only just one, would be great. Thanks everyone.

 

[Austin Greene]

Before I give you an answer to your question, I need you to answer mine.

What were you trying to convey with your photos? Did you have a message you were trying to tell the viewer?

If you answered no to either one of these, even for a brief moment, then I would recommend you set goals before your next shooting outing. Personally, I draw up almost all of my shots, sometimes mentally rather than physically if I'm in a rush. I keep those images in my head, and create the real image to mirror them. Most every photo has a meaning to it, some kind of message, before the camera has even been picked up. Thats just my style, it doesn't work for everyone, but its a suggestion


Otherwise I'd give you the same old advice everyone gets at some point. Isolate your subject. In most of the above images its quite hard to determine what you were wanting to shoot, let alone why, or what value said subject held. Don't shoot just for the sake of shooting, your shutter only has so many actuations till it croaks, make them last

 

[2WheelPhoto]

#3 is a candidate for the brick wall thread

 

[OfMikeandMen]

Before I give you an answer to your question, I need you to answer mine.

What were you trying to convey with your photos? Did you have a message you were trying to tell the viewer?

If you answered no to either one of these, even for a brief moment, then I would recommend you set goals before your next shooting outing. Personally, I draw up almost all of my shots, sometimes mentally rather than physically if I'm in a rush. I keep those images in my head, and create the real image to mirror them. Most every photo has a meaning to it, some kind of message, before the camera has even been picked up. Thats just my style, it doesn't work for everyone, but its a suggestion


Otherwise I'd give you the same old advice everyone gets at some point. Isolate your subject. In most of the above images its quite hard to determine what you were wanting to shoot, let alone why, or what value said subject held. Don't shoot just for the sake of shooting, your shutter only has so many actuations till it croaks, make them last

Haha. Well, I went with my girlfriend to the gym and took photos instead of going in. Honestly, right now I'm shooting just to shoot and get practice. I liked the way these photos look and so I posted them. As far as meaning, I was actually thinking about that as shooting them. When I took them, they had no meaning. But, afterwards I was thinking about various things, none of which are deep, nor do they have direct meaning for me. I was just thinking about the people and machinery that constructed those things because one of the photos has a name on it. But I'm not going to bs and say they had meaning for me. I realize what you are saying about making the subject stand out. While I know very little about composition, I think a lot of it has to deal with my aperture. My lens that came with my d40x seems to suck we. It comes to depth of field. When I use my girlfriends camera and various lenses the depth of field is much easier to control. I don't know if its just my lack of understanding with my Nikon, or what. Do you have any suggestions on how to make various subjects pop out in the above photos? And thanks for the feed back. I appreciate it. I'm sorry if my reasoning for shooing is disappointing haha.

 

[ceeboy14]

Personally, I draw up almost all of my shots, sometimes mentally rather than physically if I'm in a rush. I keep those images in my head, and create the real image to mirror them. Most every photo has a meaning to it, some kind of message, before the camera has even been picked up. Thats just my style, it doesn't work for everyone, but its a suggestion

You're not much into spontaneity, are you? I certainly appreciate this approach works for you, but it is the rare, rare moment I put a camera (on the street) to my eye with forethought as to what I am going to shoot nor do I think Mike did - hence his statement of "urbanish" shooting. Watch some of Jay Maisel's walks around NYC on youtube and you'll understand at least one other approach to shooting on the street approach. I would encourage more spontaneity and less a clinical approach to a newbie. But that's just me.

 

[Geaux]

While I know very little about composition, I think a lot of it has to deal with my aperture. My lens that came with my d40x seems to suck we. It comes to depth of field. When I use my girlfriends camera and various lenses the depth of field is much easier to control. I don't know if its just my lack of understanding with my Nikon, or what. Do you have any suggestions on how to make various subjects pop out in the above photos? And thanks for the feed back. I appreciate it.

First step...stop blaming your gear. There are many photographers who get good shots with iPhones, it's all about composition in your shots.

2. and 3. stand out the most to me. I'm a lines and symmetry sort of guy so 2 does that for me. It's not a WOW shot, but it's not bad either. #3, I'd flip the image to make it look like it's the real electrical poles instead of a reflection, it'll make people second look at it. Right now, its just an upside down pole haha.

 

[Austin Greene]

Personally, I draw up almost all of my shots, sometimes mentally rather than physically if I'm in a rush. I keep those images in my head, and create the real image to mirror them. Most every photo has a meaning to it, some kind of message, before the camera has even been picked up. Thats just my style, it doesn't work for everyone, but its a suggestion

You're not much into spontaneity, are you? I certainly appreciate this approach works for you, but it is the rare, rare moment I put a camera (on the street) to my eye with forethought as to what I am going to shoot nor do I think Mike did - hence his statement of "urbanish" shooting. Watch some of Jay Maisel's walks around NYC on youtube and you'll understand at least one other approach to shooting on the street approach. I would encourage more spontaneity and less a clinical approach to a newbie. But that's just me.

I took his statement of "urbanish" as being the locale, not the shooting style.

Almost everything I shoot is spontaneous in nature, purely macro and wildlife with the occasional portrait session. That said, I have an image in mind before I head out, and I wait until my opportunity comes to get the shot I wanted. There are shots in between, but rarely do they make it when stacked up against the original concept. I'm not conforming nature to my idea, I already know its going to happen because I spend enough time in the field, so I just wait until its the right moment. Look at most successful photojournalists, this is to some degree the same strategy.

I think you may have seriously misinterpreted my own approach if your coining it as "clinical," that might be my fault, maybe I wasn't clear enough.

Here's an example of a recent day of shooting, which ended up with one of my best macro images yet.

At home:
- Thought of what I want to shoot (not saying I won't shoot other things, this is just a goal, a starting point)
- Think of what colors I might have to work with, what flowers are in bloom? What gear might I need?
- What do I want to be unique about the photo? I settled on coloration to produce a unique bokeh, while having the fly on a vibrant flower.

Head out to the field:
- Find an area with my subjects, in this case Hover Fly.
- I observe their behavior, think of what angle I want to shoot them from to get my shot. I've spent thousands of hours in the area, so I already have an idea.
- Wait until one is in the right position for me to get the composition and angle I want. In this case it took three hours of waiting between two bushes they frequented. Every fly that arrived was different, behaved different, and required spontaneous shooting.

End result was a beautiful image, mixed between the loose qualities I wanted, and what the fly brought into the image behaviorally. This isn't at all an unemotional, calculating way of shooting (by definition whats meant by "clinical"). I just care about my subjects enough to put some forethought into my photos, rather than doing them the injustice of spraying and praying.

Everyone gets lucky shots every now and then, but IMO if you don't put the forethought into an image, it will routinely pale in comparison to those that are really inspired and have had some consideration put into them.

Not trying to be argumentative, just trying to clarify. There are an infinite number of approaches to shooting. I personally enjoy those shooting styles used by many NatGeo photographers that I've gotten to speak to or have otherwise learned about, for most its a derivative of the "compose, then wait" mindset.


Here is one example:

 

[ceeboy14]

I did misinterpret, then...good explanation and good direction to the newbie.

 

[manaheim]

Very very few of my shots that I like are "planned"... though a number of them were impulse shots that almost worked, that I then went back to re-shoot with better lighting, scene elements, etc. That's just me, though.

To the OP... I think #4 had the most overall potential. Looks a hair underexposed though.

When you shoot pictures of "stuff", my suggestion is to try to think of the stuff not so much as objects but patterns and colors. Try to create a painting (often an abstract one) with the various lines, colors and patterns available in the "stuff" you are shooting. You may find some very interesting results. Your #4 does this... look at the lines of the wires and the poles, the rippling reflection of the water, the reflection of the cool clouds in the sky which form a pattern of their own, etc. Good stuff there.

If not that, you need to have a subject. Many of your shots either have no subject (the wall, for example), or have a subject that isn't interesting enough to hold our attention. (the pipe) There's no emotion, no connection. If it's a shot like this I need to care about it in some way. Like it, hate it, love it, want to marry it, want to save it, want to kick it, afraid of it, laugh at it... whatever. SOMETHING.

Keep working at it.

 

[omega1234]

#3, I'd flip the image to make it look like it's the real electrical poles instead of a reflection, it'll make people second look at it. Right now, its just an upside down pole haha.

I agree, I think it looks great:

 

[The_Traveler]

If you don't know why you took any particular picture, then no one else will.
You have to know what you are shooting and then compose and expose around that.

The fact that one of your pictures is interesting is really a case of 'even a blind squirrel finds an acorn now and then.'

Photography, like any art, is partly a creature of intent.
You should be seeing something and then trying to capture that in a way that the viewers see what you see as worthy of capturing.
Otherwise you are only doing what the Google street view vans, or for that matter any surveillance camera, are doing.

 

[OfMikeandMen]

Wow, thanks everyone. A lot to think about. I think all the advice here will be VERY helpful to me in the future. To be honest, these photos were just me messing around with exposure and trying to figure depth of field out on my camera. I haven't really studied anything on composition, or the reasoning behind various shoots, etc. However, I understand what you're all saying, and I will definitely do this in mind as I practice my shots. I occasionally write, and my writing professor once told me that we should just write. The art and meaning behind the story will come out in the final product. This was advice taken from Stephen King. I took this approach to my photos, but I can understand how photography is vastly different. Then again, when I moved onto poetry, almost every word I wrote had meaning. I suppose I should look at photography as more of visual poetry. Right now my mindset is, "What do I need to get a correct exposure for this shot and the images I want in this photo," rather than including that mindset with, "What am I looking to convey in this picture, and what do I want it to look like," which, I can see now, actually plays a role into the depth of field. Anyways, thanks everyone. I'll try to be positive about the criticism (I tend to take things more harshly than intended -- Lew, your comments in particular, haha, but I respect your voice considering the quality of your photographs), and make a change with my next photos. Thanks again for all of your time. I really appreciate it. Thanks.

Also, would Michael Freeman be a good author to explore these ideas? It seems from the descriptions of his book, that those might help. But, I really don't know.

 

[manaheim]

Wow, thanks everyone. A lot to think about. I think all the advice here will be VERY helpful to me in the future. To be honest, these photos were just me messing around with exposure and trying to figure depth of field out on my camera. I haven't really studied anything on composition, or the reasoning behind various shoots, etc. However, I understand what you're all saying, and I will definitely do this in mind as I practice my shots. I occasionally write, and my writing professor once told me that we should just write. The art and meaning behind the story will come out in the final product. This was advice taken from Stephen King. I took this approach to my photos, but I can understand how photography is vastly different. Then again, when I moved onto poetry, almost every word I wrote had meaning. I suppose I should look at photography as more of visual poetry. Right now my mindset is, "What do I need to get a correct exposure for this shot and the images I want in this photo," rather than including that mindset with, "What am I looking to convey in this picture, and what do I want it to look like," which, I can see now, actually plays a role into the depth of field. Anyways, thanks everyone. I'll try to be positive about the criticism (I tend to take things more harshly than intended -- Lew, your comments in particular, haha, but I respect your voice considering the quality of your photographs), and make a change with my next photos. Thanks again for all of your time. I really appreciate it. Thanks.

Also, would Michael Freeman be a good author to explore these ideas? It seems from the descriptions of his book, that those might help. But, I really don't know.

Visual poetry... I may just need to steal that.

 

[The_Traveler]

Then again, when I moved onto poetry, almost every word I wrote had meaning. I suppose I should look at photography as more of visual poetry.

My small experience in writing fiction (two unpublished novels) convinced me that there is always tendency to look on my own work as I did my own children and the absolute danger is the inability to be objective about one's own work. Very early on in photography, too many people don't yet have the knowledge and experience to recognize the lack of universal imagery in their pictures and mistake the personal attachments for emotions that would impact every viewer. Witness the way that parents gush over horrible pictures of their own children.

 

[OfMikeandMen]

Then again, when I moved onto poetry, almost every word I wrote had meaning. I suppose I should look at photography as more of visual poetry.

My small experience in writing fiction (two unpublished novels) convinced me that there is always tendency to look on my own work as I did my own children and the absolute danger is the inability to be objective about one's own work. Very early on in photography, too many people don't yet have the knowledge and experience to recognize the lack of universal imagery in their pictures and mistake the personal attachments for emotions that would impact every viewer. Witness the way that parents gush over horrible pictures of their own children.

Oh, yes. I related to what you're saying. I remember writing my first novel and being told to cut it down 30%. We must kill our darlings for the sake of artistry. Anyways, I feel like I've learned a lot through posting these. I share them with a select few people I know, and of course get the, "Great photos I like the _______ one." They never give criticism. It's like our society has become fearful of growth. Then again, only a handful of those people are photographers. The rest know next to nothing, so I'm not getting the best feedback. Which, is why I post some images here. Thanks again. If you have any recommendations in the future, or whenever, I'd be glad to hear them.