Portrait of a Skater

[MTVision]

In a somewhat related vein, here is a cropped version of your image rotated by -3 degrees (left). Not intended as an "See how much better I made your image", but rather to demonstrate that in fact your original was rather badly tilted (unless Sask Power pounds its poles in on awful angle!). Note that this does not render the image truly vertical (that was at -4.8 deg, but rather is a compromise between accuracy and appearance, accounting for the subject's slouching posture).

Is it just me or did nobody else notice the 3rd person? I didn't even see him in the original picture - not until it was cropped.

 

[rexbobcat]

Can't tell if troll or very very pretentious....

It is tilted. Look at the telephone pole.

I just don't really understand what the telephone pole, and the rest of the dead space does for the photo.

There is also a long weird structure sticking out of his head.

Annie Leibovitz this photo is not. I'm sorry.

 

[JamesRPhoto]

Why, someone please inform me, is it impossible for myself to have a different perspective on the photo as users on here? I get a feeling from the original that I don't get with those elements missing that you find disposable. Is that the thing with photo forums, just go along with what everyone else likes and don't dare trying to disagree? :thumbdown:

 

[o hey tyler]

It's not impossible to have a different perspective. But you can learn a lot when putting your work in front of unbiased photographers looking at it from a critical standpoint. You were there, taking the photo, spending time with the subject, at the skatepark you know and are used to... None of us were, so what we see is much different than what you see and perceive.

That's the great thing about people who are completely disconnected from the shoot. They can tell you what the image needs to make it "work" rather than having your own judgement clouded by the context that you insert as the photographer from experiencing the scenario firsthand. This is the whole point of receiving and learning from critique. It's unbiased collections of opinions regarding your photo that you were not previously exposed to. Generally, when there's an overwhelming opinion regarding a photo (as there is in this case) it's a clear indication that there's something wrong with the image... At least that's how most photographers see things whilst getting critique. Not quite sure about you at this point.

Rexbobcat is also a youth photographer who has placed in at least one photography contest that I know of, yet he doesn't allow that to cloud his judgement. He posts images for critique, and adopts it where he sees fit. Yet he remains humble the entire time.

As I see it, when you know the photographic "rules," and you've expressed your knowledge of them, it is then your honor to break said rules and try something different. Breaking rules still means that the image should "work" for the majority of viewers. This time, your image didn't work for the majority... At least for this group of photographers.

 

[JamesRPhoto]

That's fine that it doesn't work for you guys, I think I've said that. The image was taken for a specific purpose, and I more or less posted it here for the sake of posting some content. I have other threads with other work that haven't been posted in at all, that I feel contain images that would convey a lot more emotion and feeling to a general audience.

 

[JamesRPhoto]

I decided to read this thread over again on the off chance that maybe I'm just crazy...and sadly I found that I am. I completely see how I could have been percieved as arrogant here, although I assure everyone it wasn't my intentions. My apologizes. Guess I blew the first impression, eh?

 

[Derrel]

JamesRPhoto, I stopped by your on-line portfolio. Your best photos posted on that page are better than the shot posted here. The shot posted in this thread is poor. It has a weak composition,shows poor camera-handling fundamentals, it lacks a clear subject, has the guy's hands cropped off awkwardly, and the post processing is weak and ineffective. The photo fails to communicate squat. You say it's a skateboarder portrait. But the photo as an editorial photo, is a massive failure. It does NOT say, or show "skateboarder". What it shows is a crooked horizon, dead grass and litter, a crooked telephone pole, and a pond, and an uneven, crude vignette. Your opinion that the photo is good, that it is successful, is an opinion you are free to hold. Your perspective on the photo is a perspective that you are clearly free to hold, all by your lonesome. Your photo is not liked by anybody here because it is weak. Your failure to understand that your photo is poor is indicative of strong conviction on your part. Your attempts to blame other people for calling out its flaws is...well, it is what it is. Perhaps some day you will become more aware of how the language of visual communication is shaped by MANY underlying principles. Perhaps if you study photography for a few more years, you will come to understand why the photo posted in this thread has met with solid disapproval. And perhaps, some day, you will look back on this photo, and be able to see the multiple weaknesses that it exhibits. I would wager that after only six months, the flaws in this photo will become evident to you.

 

[JamesRPhoto]

:/ thanks for the critique.

 

[o hey tyler]

I decided to read this thread over again on the off chance that maybe I'm just crazy...and sadly I found that I am. I completely see how I could have been percieved as arrogant here, although I assure everyone it wasn't my intentions. My apologizes. Guess I blew the first impression, eh?

No worries. We're not here to bash your style or belittle your work. Just other photographers (some on different levels than others) bouncing ideas to help other photographers improve their craft or see things that they missed.

It's very adult for you to apologize and it won't go unnoticed.

 

[JamesRPhoto]

Thank you for being cool about that, I still maintain that it fit it's purpose but I completely agree that it's very weak out of context and I should maybe rethink it as a display piece alone, I let my connection to the subject increase it's value in my eyes.

 

[Derrel]

I decided to read this thread over again on the off chance that maybe I'm just crazy...and sadly I found that I am. I completely see how I could have been percieved as arrogant here, although I assure everyone it wasn't my intentions. My apologizes. Guess I blew the first impression, eh?

No worries. We're not here to bash your style or belittle your work. Just other photographers (some on different levels than others) bouncing ideas to help other photographers improve their craft or see things that they missed.

It's very adult for you to apologize and it won't go unnoticed.

You know what...you just made a hell of a GOOD "second impression" on me,JRP.

 

[o hey tyler]

I let my connection to the subject increase it's value in my eyes.

BINGO!

This actually happens a lot when parents take photos of their kids... I'm not kidding. It's tough when you become attached to your subject as a photographer. You're less likely to admit fault, or issues within an image. Something all photographers can struggle with at times. It's good to just take a step back and assess the situation, especially if you have a group of people in the same field as you in harsh disagreement.

 

[o hey tyler]

BTW, the EXIF on your 1D reads that the artist is:

Andre Hendarman. ​

I believe you can change that with EOS utility. Assuming that you bought the camera from Andre, and aren't stealing his work.

 

[JamesRPhoto]

I know this, unfortunately the 1D II only connects in EOS info with windows XP and a firewire connection, neither of which I have at my disposal, nor do I have a mac. I also bought it from the secound owner, so I don't know who Andre is, though I did google him once in curiosity. I now shoot with 5D's so I don't have it, hopefully the new owner has been able to change it.

 

[o hey tyler]

Ah, I shoot with a 5D and 5D2. I agree, the ability to change the "Artist" info is quite easy. I don't even think I've got mine configured at this point. Not that it matters a whole lot. If there were ever a copyright dispute on my end, I'm the one holding the RAW files.

Don't see a name in this exif, do you? My exif reader is somewhat limited IMO. The 5D2 I use is refurbed, so I am assuming Canon wiped it clean before they sent it.