Photo critique thread?

[runamuk]

um the vast majority of my photography is fetish stuff and not allowed on a site like this.  my non fetish stuff is what I do as snapshots just for kicks.  wonder if there are no body parts and just items if that would be doable.  I also tend to make a print and not edit so much for digital, like things to be one of a kind and only one of them.

ok this is just a fun flower I ran across while on a little hike this does give an idea of my vision I tend to tight crop and get in close to what I shoot. 

[timberghost72]

Run, been waiting for someone to see that trail. That is why I like this pic and why I chose it. I knew there were problems with the pic as a whole but the trail leads you out to the expanse and its why I like it. As for the horizon it's hard to say because that plateau is at an angle and moving away from my position, not perpendicular,  so it naturally looks slanted to the right and two individual plateaus are a lot further away. When I get home I'll correct the horizon and see how it affects the valley floor and where it meets up to the plateau. Im thinking the valley floor might end up being skewed upward.

And yes, I think an artists outlook is a great addition to this. 

[jyerxa]

I've seen these type of threads on other sites so I thought I'd see if there is any interest here. The idea I was thinking is if you have a photo and are not sure about its composition, exposure, DOF, sharpness or post processing outcome you can post it up here and get some advice or feedback on it. One reason I was thinking this is sometimes I am not sure if my post processing is making the photo worse or better. Or how to improve on it. I am not a big fan of post processing only because I'd rather not sit at my computer for hours doing this. My eyes just get fuzzy  so my skills there are not great. So you can post one photo or post a before and after photo. What do you all think? I know there are some great photographers here and getting their ideas along with everyone else's would be beneficial. I'll post up first if there is some interest.

Tony

I LOVE this idea! 

I am my own worst critique. But I think that is good. I want excellence every time I touch the shutter release. I know what I am after and I don't think I have ever really mastered a camera. A camera has just been an extension of what I see. And then I try to capture it. I do take a lot of memorable family pictures. But the excellence of a photograph I find elusive. There are some truly outstanding photographers here. And I have learned a lot from their experience. It is just applying it now. And usually I forget before I get around toit. CRS. 

In my way of thinking using photoshop is really taboo. I want captured what I see. And this thread can help all of us and maybe even help our master photographers too. Teaching also teaches the teacher with the questions asked. 

[jyerxa]

Alright guys, lets have it...

I'm just catching up to all of this.

I love that photo's composition. Very cool. If I would try to take that same photo I would want to reduce the haze and make it sharp. Is there a way to do that? I don't know. That is exactly how you took this photo right?

[timberghost72]

@ Runamuk,
I think you nailed the rule of thirds with this photo  . I really like how the flowers flow across the top of the photo, then drop down into the third segment of the photo. It flows well and it adds much more than just a flower shot. I like some extra saturation in photos so if it were mine, I'd probably bump that up a bit and maybe sharpen it up some.

[jyerxa]

I think those of us who are going to participate should show some work too. Here is one of my favorite shots.

THAT is a really cool tree.  Oh yeah. Beautiful photo too.

[runamuk]

Wapiti that tree is pretty spectacular as an object.  The image is appealing to me I like the almost monotone quality however there is something about the water that I want to see differently but I am not sure I can begin to explain how or what, thats where my working as a process person would just start tweaking until it felt right.

That image is very painterly I really do love it.


Thanks Rinber I bumbed the saturation pretty high for me I was always a want to shoot it and not have to edit, then I learned cameras stink at capturing reality, so I learned how to edit to show MY vision how I see the world.  I really dont care if the photographers like it because its not about photography for me its about my vision my reality my view of the world which may not be how the world is.  Learning that all the great masters created those landscaped through vast amounts of editing made me feel better about "falsifying" my images through editing

[Bean Counter]

I am curious if an artist might be allowed to critique?  while I am not a photographer I am pretty educated in art, emphasis in sculpture and photography and visual arts education.  I was taught to critique.  However my own predilection is not even close to what many of the photographers might choose.

PERFECT. An eye for composition, colors, and lines without getting caught up in technical photo crap.  Last thing we need is another tool bag with an overpriced camera who is overly fixated on pixels and flash sync speeds... i.e. me 

Alright guys, lets have it...

....I love that photo's composition. Very cool. If I would try to take that same photo I would want to reduce the haze and make it sharp. Is there a way to do that? I don't know. That is exactly how you took this photo right?

A circular polarizer is the way you reduce haze, reflections and enrich colors. Unfortunately, a polarizers effect is greatest 90 degrees from the sun, and almost worthless at 0 & 180 degrees from the sun. For this sunset shot, the sun was 180 to the moon--at my back. Polarization is one effect you cannot replicate in PP. The best we can do is play with colors, sharpness, and contrast.

I like this shot. It is hard to capture the pastels of the low light and not overexpose the moon. Because of the pastels, I don't even mind that it is not sharp. Excellent composition too. So my question is. Was this an actual moment in nature or did you need to phptoshop it?

I tried using Photoshop Elements and I hated it. Yes, that's really where the moon was at that time in the day. In addition to hating the interface of Photoshop, I don't like what it stands for. To me it has become more about graphic design than actual photography... cutting and pasting one object from one photo and putting it in another or making a fat person less fat or legs a bit longer than normal is just plain tacky IMHO 

I like this shot. It is hard to capture the pastels of the low light and not overexpose the moon. Because of the pastels, I don't even mind that it is not sharp. Excellent composition too. So my question is. Was this an actual moment in nature or did you need to phptoshop it?

Your comments about sharpness along with the others about noise reduction are really what I was getting at... This is what I am lacking in my PP skills. Its a tool available to me in Lightroom but I don't seem to get it right. I need to watch more YouTube tutorials. One thing I'll say: the sky looks  a lot smoother on the file on my computer, but somehow when it gets uploaded it gets more clumpy. Also, the foreground vegetation is a bit outside the depth of field because I am focused on the mountains in the distance and this is shot at F4 on a full frame. The greens were more meant to serve as framing and not be in the focal plane. I thought about stopping the lens down and cranking up the ISO to compensate but didn't want the vegetation in focus.

BC, cool photo. The moon with the sunlit peak is neat.  Was this taken at high ISO? I'd maybe try and use a bit of noise reduction with adding some black and a little saturation on it. Definitely a keeper 

EXIF Metadata: ISO 320 with 200mm focal length for 1/400 second @ F/4 (full frame). 

I wondered if I had over saturated it! 

[blacktailcody]

How 'bout this one.

[Bean Counter]

That's a great buck.

Great composition. I'm not sure if the highlights are quite clipped but you might try pulling them down if your editor allows it. The neck, face, and vegetation in front of the deer are a bit blown out for my tastes.

[jyerxa]

And just as we speak. I got an Amazon emial telling me that the very polarizing 72 mm lens we just talked about is on sale for $27.90

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00004ZCGX/ref=oh_details_o00_s00_i00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

[jyerxa]

I take pix for fun and forget about some of the ones I liked too.  So here is one I always liked. And I am not to sure what I could have done better. I was really after the morning mist and the hot summer sun rise. I was really trying to landscape scene. There are some cows in the mist that you can't see so in that I didn't get what I was after. You got to be quick with the shutter to catch a moment that is always changing.

I should also say that my lens was the basic economy 70-300 Nikor 1:4-5.6G lens. Is that G also the F/stop?

[Bean Counter]

Seems as though the fog is your intended subject, or the cows. I definitely would have composed the shot a little lower, or cropped the out the sky in post. Eyes are attracted to the lighter, warmer colors and with there not being much of interest in the sky it makes the photo fall flat. I also probably would have waited until the sun was a little more high in the sky but its tough to say without having been there if any fog would have been left. You have to wait for just the right moment to make a shot like this pop. That would have given you options as to either zoom in on the cows and played around with their arrangement in the scene, or maybe you could have done a semi-pano with the fog and he cows as an afterthought.

The range in the F-stop (4-5.6 means that the widest minimum aperture changes as you zoom out. i.e. the widest you can shoot the lens at 70mm is F/4 (or "G/4") and at 300mm its 5.6. Contrast that with the more expensive offerings that allow for a constant F/4 or even F/2.8 across the entire zoom range. You can still shoot great landscapes with a cheaper telephoto but may need to pack your tripod to make up for the slower speeds--even if your lens has VR.