Overexposed?

SabrinaO · May 9, 2011

The_Traveler said:
SabrinaO said:

Oh so I should be grateful for this edit???

Click to expand...

or perhaps even just polite?

I'm sorry but your edit looks worse than the original. Isn't that what you all do around here? Tell it like it is?
But thanks for trying. I really mean that

j28 · May 9, 2011

Oh so I should be grateful for this edit???

Yes. Someone took time out of their day to show you something that could help you AND to baby step you through how to replicate it yourself. You could drop the defensive tone and throw out a "thank you".
It can be difficult to have your work criticized, but there is a lot to learn from it at the same time. There are so many people here who are willing to share things that only time and experience can provide. It isn't a personal affront, it is trying to help someone else grow. It can be hard to be objective of our own images sometimes. We get so wrapped up in the vision we have that sometimes we fail to see when it isn't working, or isn't coming across to others.

kundalini · May 9, 2011

SabrinaO said:
Oh so I should be grateful for this edit???

You should be grateful for the amount of time, attention and free education you've received on this thread to try and make a disastrous product shot for your "business" into an image that actually promotes said "business", even though the general concensus is for a re-shoot. So yeah, you should.

kundalini · May 9, 2011

SabrinaO said:
Also.. please show me/link me a high key photo that doesn't have any spots of blown details. I may be a little confused because doing a search shows photos with blown details here and there... but not to a point where the whole picture is overexposed. I made an example on what im thinking.

High Key Imaging

Now I'm done with you.

The_Traveler · May 9, 2011

What was wrong with the picture , imo, was primarily the dappled light and the discontinuous foliage which introduced essentially random bits of white splotches and made it very difficult to focus on the points of interest. High key, in that situation, didn't work for me.

You mentioned that the pictures look different on each of your monitors. My inference is that you haven't calibrated your monitors.
There's not much sense talking about brightness of images in that circumstance.

And I would be interested if you would point out a source for your statement that Chromatic Aberration can occur in PPing.

subscuck · May 9, 2011

SabrinaO said:
Also.. please show me/link me a high key photo that doesn't have any spots of blown details. I may be a little confused because doing a search shows photos with blown details here and there... but not to a point where the whole picture is overexposed. I made an example on what im thinking.
The first picture has a couple blown spots here and there but not enough to label the entire picture "overexposed". The second has blown spots everywhere and the details are hard to make out and i would definitely call this overexposed. This is basically how I determine of a photo is high key vs. overexposed.

OK, one more then I'm off to bed. You yourself referenced ghache's thread. What do you notice about the pic? You can see all the detail in her face, clothes, shoes, arms ,legs, etc. There is some clipping on her hand, but that's no big deal. The greatest area where it's pushed to clipping is the wall behind her. Big woop. It's not the subject. In your picture, the teapot is the subject, or at least one of the subjects. While not pushed all the way to clipping, it's pushed far enough that the ridge detail is almost invisible, the logo on the side is all but invisible. In short, you've lost important detail.

subscuck · May 9, 2011

kundalini said:
SabrinaO said:

Also.. please show me/link me a high key photo that doesn't have any spots of blown details. I may be a little confused because doing a search shows photos with blown details here and there... but not to a point where the whole picture is overexposed. I made an example on what im thinking.

Click to expand...

High Key Imaging

Now I'm done with you.

Thanks for the link. It seems I was off on my definition. See what happens when you open yourself up to learning? Learning is fun!

SabrinaO · May 9, 2011

kundalini said:
SabrinaO said:

Also.. please show me/link me a high key photo that doesn't have any spots of blown details. I may be a little confused because doing a search shows photos with blown details here and there... but not to a point where the whole picture is overexposed. I made an example on what im thinking.

Click to expand...

High Key Imaging

Now I'm done with you.

Disastrous? lol... i find that funny. Reshooting? No.. its not even that serious. But I know now what to look out for with lighting conditions with the people that actually HELPED. Its funny you actually think that you and the other wannabe photog-elitists think you have some sort of pull. I don't care what the "consensus" says about reshooting. I don't care that the bokeh is nauseous to one of you, that i shouldn't of stacked the cups up like that (this is my vision, not yours!) or that you think that pictures of my props should tell a story. Well here's the story for the one that couldn't make out the obvious!

My BUSINESS and this event will do just fine thank you. I don't think my clients will be like "eww... theres dappled sunlight in that shot!" or, " omg... that "bokeh make me nauseous" or, "why is that vase and teacup cut off in that picture?" or gross... theres brown leaves. omg." or any other nonsense you people want to pick apart. Again... will I know next time what to look out for and what not to do? of course. But to call this shoot disastrous and I should reshoot? I find that hilarious and reshooting will be unnecessary.

Goodbye Kundalini!!

jands · May 9, 2011

PrimeDesignsHD · May 9, 2011

Maybe a tad overexposed in my opinion, but really nice shots.

misstwinklytoes · May 9, 2011

On my desktop now and I still see some overexposure, but I agree, for the most part and for the use of the shots, I think they're pretty good.

Bitter Jeweler · May 9, 2011

It's so hard to escape the stigma of running a photography business, asking questions on a beginers photography forum, and rejecting the information, cuz you know better.

:lmao:

mwcfarms · May 9, 2011

Too bad because Kundalini is a very valuable source of knowledge and always willing to help with lighting and well every simple question. I didn't find anything in this thread he said too harsh. But your not going to hurt his feelings any with your grand farewell. One less person who thinks they know it all to ask him simple questions. I find it highly peculiar that your running a business, and asking basic beginner questions every week. You do have some talent Sabrina and are capable of producing some nice shots but you need to lose the pretentiousness when your asking for others opinions. Write me off too if you will either way doesn't hurt my feelings.

vtf · May 9, 2011

I really have missed the trolls lately, it's nice to see the fun return. Not only here but another one who persists because it's not a dslr. :thumbup:

OrionsByte · May 9, 2011

SabrinaO said:
Well here's the story for the one that couldn't make out the obvious!

I know you didn't ask for C&C on the flyer, but something you may want to consider is that with the way your photos are edited (regardless of any argument for or against that style), and the pastel colors you've chosen for the text, the text is kind of hard to read.

One thing you might try is adding a pure white layer between the photos and the text, and adjusting it's opacity to something like 25-50%. That would wash out the photos and give them that "airy" feel you're going for, while also giving the text a chance to pop.

Just my unsolicited opinion. :sexywink: