Please critique my photos?

[MaryCarol]

Hello,

I have been learning photography by myself for a while now. Unfortunately for me, there really isn't anyone out there that can teach me photography hands on. My school used to offer it but people didn't sign up for the class or something like that so they canceled the class. So the only way I have known to use a DSLR camera is by online videos, forums, books, and anything from the sort. Actually, we got this 'free photography shoot' thing at my school's auction a while ago and its good for 3 years and I was thinking instead of a photo shoot I would ask her if she could possibly do a hands on lesson with her if she was willing to do so.

Anyways I've learned how to use manual exposure and its helped my pictures with leaps and bounds.
My plans are with any photography is to focus on horses. Its just my thing and its another one of my passions. This spring I was actually thinking of seeing if anyone would allow me to take pictures of them and their horses for free, for experience and so on.

So I have some pictures that I have that I would love to get some critique on them...


ISO 200
208mm
f/5.6
1/400


ISO 200
131mm
f/5
1/640


ISO 400
74mm
f/4.5
1/2500


ISO 400
55 mm
f/4
1/1250

(these two below are a little older than the ones above so I don't have all of the information)





So I would high appreciate the critique! One last thing, in your opinion what level would you say I am in, beginner wise. I was thinking a intermediate beginner. Just my thought. I would like to hear other people's opinions.

Thank you!
(Also I don't really like people editing my pictures, especially when they are used in a inappropriate way--If you are going to edit one, for educational purpose, please only have it be posted here and on no other forums, thank you!)


EDIT: You may need to click on some of the images, the thumbnails give some of the pictures a greenish tone to them that wasn't originally added.

 

[cgipson1]

I like the first four (although I would lose that vignette on #2, it does not help!) They are well exposed, good focus, and reasonable framing. The last two.. not so much, unless you are trying for equine abstracts. They don't work for me at least.

As far as edits go, we DO use them for showing a better way to do the image. We don't steal them, and we don't post them on other sites. Typically those that allow edits (in their profile) get more and better C&C, but that is your call!

 

[Ysarex]

Welcome to TPF.

The color problem you noted between the thumbnails and your photos has to do with their embedded ICC profiles. Your photos are tagged with the Pro-Photo color space profile. You don't want to do that when you post images on the internet. What software do you use to process your photos? Before you post them on the web make sure they are converted to the sRGB color space.

Joe

 

[MaryCarol]

Thank you cgipson1!

I'm a little more cautious with my pictures because I had a prettty bad thing going on with one of my 'friends'. Won't go into details but it just wasn't good, but got it under control.
Thank you for the critique.

Ysarex- I use mainly use Adobe Lightroom 4, but I will occasionally use Adobe Photoshop cs6.

 

[pgriz]

Some technical comments, if you don’t mind. In general, you get the lowest noise by shooting at the camera’s native ISO, which is 100 for Canon and 200 for Nikon. Going above that ISO is useful when you can’t get the exposure without going to very slow shutter speeds, or more aperture than your lens can give you. In #3, and #4, you’ve gone up a bit in ISO to 400, for no obvious (to me at least) reason.

Your focus placement seems pretty good, and it appears you like to shoot with a relatively thin depth-of-field, which gives you blurred backgrounds.

Your shutter speed is kinda high. That is OK if you’re trying to use a wide aperture or if you’re shooting with a telephoto, you could have used a lower ISO and a lower shutter speed.

In terms of processing, I find #1 to be somewhat too saturated, #2 has a pretty heavy vignette, #3 is way too dark (to my taste), #4 is pretty much bang-on.

I find numbers 5 and 6 to be uninteresting – yes, I see the eye... and not much else. Not being a horse person, perhaps I’m missing some important information, but as images, these don’t appeal to me.

In terms of visual reaction, I find #4 (the dog) to be pretty good, followed by #2 of the horse which shows good separation between the horse and the background. #1 is sharp, but flat. #3 is much too dark for me to clearly see the horse’s eye.

And I concur with the earlier comments of my esteemed colleagues.

 

[ph0enix]

Some technical comments, if you don’t mind. In general, you get the lowest noise by shooting at the camera’s native ISO, which is 100 for Canon and 200 for Nikon. Going above that ISO is useful when you can’t get the exposure without going to very slow shutter speeds, or more aperture than your lens can give you. In #3, and #4, you’ve gone up a bit in ISO to 400, for no obvious (to me at least) reason.

Your focus placement seems pretty good, and it appears you like to shoot with a relatively thin depth-of-field, which gives you blurred backgrounds.

Your shutter speed is kinda high. That is OK if you’re trying to use a wide aperture or if you’re shooting with a telephoto, you could have used a lower ISO and a lower shutter speed.

In terms of processing, I find #1 to be somewhat too saturated, #2 has a pretty heavy vignette, #3 is way too dark (to my taste), #4 is pretty much bang-on.

I find numbers 5 and 6 to be uninteresting – yes, I see the eye... and not much else. Not being a horse person, perhaps I’m missing some important information, but as images, these don’t appeal to me.

In terms of visual reaction, I find #4 (the dog) to be pretty good, followed by #2 of the horse which shows good separation between the horse and the background. #1 is sharp, but flat. #3 is much too dark for me to clearly see the horse’s eye.

And I concur with the earlier comments of my esteemed colleagues.

I agree with almost everything that's been said so far but only 2 of the 11 Nikon DSLRs in the current line-up use the native ISO of 200. Those are the D90 and the D300S. All the others use 100. Just FYI.

 

[MaryCarol]

Thank you guys for the replies, I forgot I should've mentioned that the camera I used in this was just a Canon Rebel T3i.

 

[pgriz]

Thanks, Ph0enix. I am a Canon shooter, and was passing on the "wisdom" from some of my Nikon-shooting buddies. But good to know!

And MaryCarol, I shoot with "only" a T1i. But for what I do, it does the job quite well. So "only" does not mean either good or bad. It is what you make it.

 

[ATVrider43]

Welcome fellow Michigander! Yes I do like the first four and understand what some people mean by the last two. Were you focusing on the eyes of the horses or just a different angle? Though its in perfect focus I would crop the last two a little more. I do like the colors of the horse so the vignette may not be necessary unless you like that look. Its all your style so what I say is only an opinion Good start though!

 

[tirediron]

Moved to the General Gallery (vice Nature and Wildlife for greater visibility).

Edited to add: While you have your preference set to "Do not edit" no one should edit them and if they do, it will be taken down by moderating staff.

 

[raaskohx10]

"Intent" is the soul of every photograph. Unless, our intent is not reflected in the picture we can't be sure about its purpose. To me these pictures are random shots of horse and dog face pictures from various angles without telling a story or expressing a specific mood or facial expression. However, if your purpose is to get some feedback with regard to technical details than it can be said that these are well framed, well exposed, sharp, and well processed. Try something new. Why not sit on horseback and take shots from there. That will give you a new angle and an entirely new perspecive in which horse neck, head, and ground would be visible. Use a wide angle lens and see for yourself how impressive your pics may become.

 

[Juga]

"Intent" is the soul of every photograph. Unless, our intent is not reflected in the picture we can't be sure about its purpose. To me these pictures are random shots of horse and dog face pictures from various angles without telling a story or expressing a specific mood or facial expression. However, if your purpose is to get some feedback with regard to technical details than it can be said that these are well framed, well exposed, sharp, and well processed. Try something new. Why not sit on horseback and take shots from there. That will give you a new angle and an entirely new perspecive in which horse neck, head, and ground would be visible. Use a wide angle lens and see for yourself how impressive your pics may become.

I am no professional but I don't agree with this. Just because you don't see 'intent' or a story within these pictures someone else might. Not all pictures are going to send the same message to every person because we all vary in our interests and what we see. What I see is someone who is trying to showcase the beauty of these creatures that we are very blessed to have with us on this planet. I do agree that getting different angles and approaches, such as riding, would send a different message but perhaps these horses would not accessible to the photographer. Of course all feedback can be good feedback if used the right way and you are certainly entitled to your opinion.

 

[O'Rork]

I can not improve on this evaluation.

I will say you've got it going on. Stay focused.

Some technical comments, if you don’t mind. In general, you get the lowest noise by shooting at the camera’s native ISO, which is 100 for Canon and 200 for Nikon. Going above that ISO is useful when you can’t get the exposure without going to very slow shutter speeds, or more aperture than your lens can give you. In #3, and #4, you’ve gone up a bit in ISO to 400, for no obvious (to me at least) reason.

Your focus placement seems pretty good, and it appears you like to shoot with a relatively thin depth-of-field, which gives you blurred backgrounds.

Your shutter speed is kinda high. That is OK if you’re trying to use a wide aperture or if you’re shooting with a telephoto, you could have used a lower ISO and a lower shutter speed.

In terms of processing, I find #1 to be somewhat too saturated, #2 has a pretty heavy vignette, #3 is way too dark (to my taste), #4 is pretty much bang-on.

I find numbers 5 and 6 to be uninteresting – yes, I see the eye... and not much else. Not being a horse person, perhaps I’m missing some important information, but as images, these don’t appeal to me.

In terms of visual reaction, I find #4 (the dog) to be pretty good, followed by #2 of the horse which shows good separation between the horse and the background. #1 is sharp, but flat. #3 is much too dark for me to clearly see the horse’s eye.

And I concur with the earlier comments of my esteemed colleagues.