New to Photography. Thoughts on These Images?

[Vistra]

Thanks for all of the feedback on my images. I had thought the bottom right was my best too. The RR crossing is boring IMO, but I liked the way it looked. As far as the other two, I was trying to capture the feeling of abandonment because the house and school bus are extremely old and covered in moss and rust.

Edit: As far as the angles of the images... I was driving around out in the country and some of these places were on private property, and I wasn't sure how they would feel about having someone walking around their property and taking pictures. It was also extremely cold, so I was trying to spend as little time out of my car as possible. If I could, I would try again and take some different angles and perspectives.

 

[Designer]

I was driving around out in the country and some of these places were on private property, and I wasn't sure how they would feel about having someone walking around their property and taking pictures.

You are wise to consider that. If you see someone out there, you can usually ask to take pictures, providing you can convince them you mean no harm.

 

[bribrius]

Are there any specific tips to make sure my images are interesting? Honestly, I've only been doing "serious" photography for a couple of weeks.

Generally speaking. i think whether a photograph is interesting or not is totally in the eye of the beholder. Only my opinion.

 

[Bossy]

The BW has a lot of interest, its the only one with a specified subject. It brings my eye in nicely. The rest, I'm not sure what you are trying to say with them, you know?

 

[bribrius]

The BW has a lot of interest, its the only one with a specified subject. It brings my eye in nicely. The rest, I'm not sure what you are trying to say with them, you know?

i have trouble with critiquing things because of that. Because here, if you were someone who liked old school buses, trees, or whatever you would prefer a different picture. For instance, if a house remodeler sees some old picture of a house that is supposed to be some kind of art, he would probably just see a old house with what needs to be fixed.
Take pictures in the ghetto, someone who never lived in one or near one might think of it as some kind of street art. If you lived in or near one, the pictures may not have that same impact. A abstract photo, would draw a more abstract minded person. A person who is more a realist, might wonder what it is and why it was put in a frame. Lobster traps photo on here got some good reviews the other day. It was a good photo. But for me, living near the ocean and seeing lots of traps. It really didn't hit me with any sense of amazement as ive seen thousands of traps... which is why i think a lot of it has to do with who is looking at the photo as each person sees a different photo based on who they are.

 

[Bossy]

The BW has a lot of interest, its the only one with a specified subject. It brings my eye in nicely. The rest, I'm not sure what you are trying to say with them, you know?

i have trouble with critiquing things because of that. Because here, if you were someone who liked old school buses, trees, or whatever you would prefer a different picture. For instance, if a house remodeler sees some old picture of a house that is supposed to be some kind of art, he would probably just see a old house with what needs to be fixed.
Take pictures in the ghetto, someone who never lived in one or near one might think of it as some kind of street art. If you lived in or near one, the pictures may not have that same impact. A abstract photo, would draw a more abstract minded person. A person who is more a realist, might wonder what it is and why it was put in a frame. Lobster traps photo on here got some good reviews the other day. It was a good photo. But for me, living near the ocean and seeing lots of traps. It really didn't hit me with any sense of amazement as I've seen thousands of traps... which is why i think a lot of it has to do with who is looking at the photo as each person sees a different photo based on who they are.

Its not about the subjects, its about visual impact. The most boring subjects in the world can still be photographed in a way that creates interest. Part of photography is figuring out a way to make your subject interesting to everyone like its interesting to you. As an image, despite the content, the other 3 didn't have any visual interest, there was nothing to draw my eye around the image. There is no story or signature. Is it a broken down bus? Just a parked bus? Is the house just dirty or is it really abandoned? It looks like the railroad sign might be flashing but how could he take that picture and make a statement with it, you know? Slower shutterspeed maybe? Who knows.

Thats why I loved the traps image, yes I see those often too, but as a technical critique, the way it moves my eye was fabulous and the processing was great, and it had a story. Might not be a fascinating story, but it spoke. Does that make sense?

 

[bribrius]

The BW has a lot of interest, its the only one with a specified subject. It brings my eye in nicely. The rest, I'm not sure what you are trying to say with them, you know?

i have trouble with critiquing things because of that. Because here, if you were someone who liked old school buses, trees, or whatever you would prefer a different picture. For instance, if a house remodeler sees some old picture of a house that is supposed to be some kind of art, he would probably just see a old house with what needs to be fixed.
Take pictures in the ghetto, someone who never lived in one or near one might think of it as some kind of street art. If you lived in or near one, the pictures may not have that same impact. A abstract photo, would draw a more abstract minded person. A person who is more a realist, might wonder what it is and why it was put in a frame. Lobster traps photo on here got some good reviews the other day. It was a good photo. But for me, living near the ocean and seeing lots of traps. It really didn't hit me with any sense of amazement as I've seen thousands of traps... which is why i think a lot of it has to do with who is looking at the photo as each person sees a different photo based on who they are.

Its not about the subjects, its about visual impact. The most boring subjects in the world can still be photographed in a way that creates interest. Part of photography is figuring out a way to make your subject interesting to everyone like its interesting to you. As an image, despite the content, the other 3 didn't have any visual interest, there was nothing to draw my eye around the image. There is no story or signature. Is it a broken down bus? Just a parked bus? Is the house just dirty or is it really abandoned? It looks like the railroad sign might be flashing but how could he take that picture and make a statement with it, you know? Slower shutterspeed maybe? Who knows.

Thats why I loved the traps image, yes I see those often too, but as a technical critique, the way it moves my eye was fabulous and the processing was great, and it had a story. Might not be a fascinating story, but it spoke. Does that make sense?

To a extent you can add some flavor to get something received better, Agreed. i only think that gets you so far however. Perfect example. Different people. see it differently. i was staring at the train crossing sign wondering why he took a picture of it at all..... kind of like taking a picture of a stop sign i couldn't understand why he took it. But, i been around lots of trains. so seen enough crossing signals. You just said something about making a statement with it. For the life of me, i cant fathom what you are talking about. its a train crossing signal. That is all i see. if both lights are red. we could think maybe he slowed the shutter. if i didn't know anything about cameras i would just think it was broke and it is good someone took a picture of it to show the authorities and have it fixed asap.

 

[Bossy]

i have trouble with critiquing things because of that. Because here, if you were someone who liked old school buses, trees, or whatever you would prefer a different picture. For instance, if a house remodeler sees some old picture of a house that is supposed to be some kind of art, he would probably just see a old house with what needs to be fixed.
Take pictures in the ghetto, someone who never lived in one or near one might think of it as some kind of street art. If you lived in or near one, the pictures may not have that same impact. A abstract photo, would draw a more abstract minded person. A person who is more a realist, might wonder what it is and why it was put in a frame. Lobster traps photo on here got some good reviews the other day. It was a good photo. But for me, living near the ocean and seeing lots of traps. It really didn't hit me with any sense of amazement as I've seen thousands of traps... which is why i think a lot of it has to do with who is looking at the photo as each person sees a different photo based on who they are.

Its not about the subjects, its about visual impact. The most boring subjects in the world can still be photographed in a way that creates interest. Part of photography is figuring out a way to make your subject interesting to everyone like its interesting to you. As an image, despite the content, the other 3 didn't have any visual interest, there was nothing to draw my eye around the image. There is no story or signature. Is it a broken down bus? Just a parked bus? Is the house just dirty or is it really abandoned? It looks like the railroad sign might be flashing but how could he take that picture and make a statement with it, you know? Slower shutterspeed maybe? Who knows.

Thats why I loved the traps image, yes I see those often too, but as a technical critique, the way it moves my eye was fabulous and the processing was great, and it had a story. Might not be a fascinating story, but it spoke. Does that make sense?

To a extent you can add some flavor to get something received better, Agreed. i only think that gets you so far however. Perfect example. Different people. see it differently. i was staring at the train crossing sign wondering why he took a picture of it at all..... kind of like taking a picture of a stop sign i couldn't understand why he took it. But, i been around lots of trains. so seen enough crossing signals. You just said something about making a statement with it. For the life of me, i cant fathom what you are talking about. its a train crossing signal. That is all i see. if both lights are red. we could think maybe he slowed the shutter. if i didn't know anything about cameras i would just think it was broke and it is good someone took a picture of it to show the authorities and have it fixed asap.

Ok so for example, the railroad sign has great lines. I don't know if I can link here, but I did a google search for awesome railroad sign photo and actually found several visually interesting ones. Not my style, but good photography none the less. Then when you add other like photos to the collection, it adds up to something spectacular.

As for different people having different opinions on images, well yeah. But thats what makes us grow, we learn what we like and what we are confident in and also what we can get better in.