Critique me please (if you have time) :) Round 1

[blacktailcody]

What would you change? How would you have edited it? General advice? Thanks in advance for your time.



#1




#2



#3




#4




#5




#6




#7




#8




#9




#10

[spikehunter]

lOOKS GOOD TO ME 

[coachcw]

You should have left the elk in them.

[Katmai Guy]

Should have shot the coyote.

[Katmai Guy]

Seriously, some great shots.

[DRobnsn]

It could just be my old POS laptop but that number 3 pic just stands out as extremely detailed compared to the others 

They all look awesome but for some reason that one stands out big time for me in a good way.

Agreed should've blasted the Yote 

[Bean Counter]

#2 and #3 capture motion/time well. I might play with the orange and red hues in Lightroom to adjust to taste. There isn't really a "correct" setting. Its all about the expression of your vision.

#4 is 'nice.' since the context doesn't seem to add much for me so I would have zoomed in as much as possible for the viewers eye to focus on the mutt.

#5 is my favorite and has a lot of potential but looks comparatively awful in its current form. Great fore-middle-background elements.  Did you skip the polarizer? this would have been the best improvement and you can only do so much to replace it now. I would add a brush to the waves for more contrast, dodge and burn the forest to accentuate the red trees and deemphasize the green ones, and maybe play with their colors a bit too. Pull your luminance bar to the left on the blue channel and it will help with the skies and mountains in the background, and be sure to manually set your white point so that the snow caps pop.

#6. Rule of thirds. When I have a cloudless sky, I will put 2/3 on the landscape and relegate the blue to to the lesser 1/3. We love sunshine, but clear skies can make for some boring landscape photos esp here in Arizona 

#7. This one has potential too but I'm wondering if the highlights on the bird got blown out. Remember that when you're shooting a lighter subject against a darker background you'll usually need to use -1 to -2 stops of (negative) exposure compensation in order to not blow out the highlights. This can be 'helped' in post processing, but not completely ameliorated. Like a circular polarizer, the best results come from getting it right in camera.  Here is a good segment on how to expose properly when shooting:

Should start at 2:01:00 more or less.

#8. This is well composed but I would spend a few minutes tinkering with the exposure, lighting, and contrast in similar ways to #5 above.

[fishnfur]

I'm starting to like Bean Counter.  He obviously knows his craft.  Really, really good landscape and photography depends on commitment to getting the shot that you envision, based on what is in front of you.  You often don't have the opportunity to pose your subject, so you must decide what your real subject is, what appeals to you in what you are seeing, and play with the different ways that you can put in on "film".  If you are really serious, which you seem to be, I would recommend that you read volumes on every topic available to you in your desired subject matter.

As bean counter points out, you can use the settings on your camera to alter the amount of light entering your camera by f/stop, which in a fast lens, can in close up, produce really nice out of focus images both in front and behind the object of the photo.  You can zoom in and out to change the framing,  Move higher or lower to change your angle of view, catch the subject in the early morning or late at sunset for more subtle lighting situatons.... on and on.  It all depends on how much time you have and how devoted you are to getting the pic.  I believe Ansel Adams used to spend days waiting for just the right light for many of his photos.   You can luck into a perfect picture every once in awhile, but usually, you will have to make the decision before you take the photo, just what you want it to look like when it is printed.

So here's my critique, which should not dissuade you from liking what you like, it is just what I like:

#1 -  great pic.  Hard to get such an impressive mountain on film.  Nice job, but I'd defer to Bean's rule of 3rd's on this one too.  Painters use this rule endlessly.  More reading for you.

#2 - that's the shot I would have tried and been happy with.  I wonder what it would have looked like from up above looking down, or from the side in portrait vs. landscape.

#3 - My star in this pic is half missing.  I like the pool of water.  I would have shot that.

#4  - Zoom the shot or crop the pic down substantially.  It's nice as it is though.

#5 - It's a good pic, well composed.  Much of it is mid-tones.  The dark strip behind the boat draws your eye away, a bit, from the subject.  This one you could shoot a hundred different setting and decide later what you liked best.  Bean's comments on filters  - I'll take his word for it.  Go with that.

#7 - I like the subject.  The birds beak gets lost in the mid-ground.  That is fine for the undersides of the bird, your mind will fill it in.  We like to see faces.  A change in angle or waiting for the bird to move might have made this better.

#8 - fun pic,  I think if you played with the cropping for awhile, you might like it alot better.  Myself, I would loose a third of the right side, a little of the foreground, and some of the sky on the left.

#9 - Sitting eagles are rarely fun for me, especially from below.  I stay away from that subject and just enjoy watching them.  I don't try to compete with the pros on this subject.  It's all been recorded, ad nauseum.

#10 - I'm not sure what this is, but I like the idea a lot.  Good play on textures and light.  Not so good composition.  Cropping might help.  Balance in a painting or a photo is very important.  Darks carry more weight, and so this photo is lop-sided to the right.  This has the potential of being my fav. of the bunch.

I'm tired...   Go shoot some more!

[blacktailcody]

Wow! Really really appreciate the answers! I have a lot of learning to do! I'm only 17 though so I have most of my life ahead of me to get better at what I love. I will do my best to take your critiques and get some better pictures!

[blacktailcody]

I reworked the boat. Any better?

[huntnphool]

Make sure you are shooting RAW, it will make it much easier to adjust the images you posted, white balance specifically.

[blacktailcody]

I do! are my pictures to warm/cold?

[Bean Counter]

I'm curious about the boat on the water shot now...do you remember whether you had a polarizer on the lens or not?

[blacktailcody]

I didn't have one on. It was my telephoto lens and I usually have it on my wide angle.

[dmv9]

Overall, I liked all of them and wished I could have shot them myself.

#1 Looks a little washed out. Needs a little color pumping. It looks like one of those pictures from a magazine in the 1970's. Not that that's a bad thing if that's what you are going for.
#2 Looks ever so slightly out of focus.
#3 Nice contrast. Good color. I'm just not sure if it's cropped correctly. Try cropping the top and the right and see if that looks better.
#4 Yeah, he needs shootin
#5 I think the mountains need more color. The dark strip of land is taking a lot of focus away. The boat looks awesome.
#6 Washed out colors and needs some cropping

That's it for me.

[eastsidemallard74]

Awesome 1-10, great pictures, but I concur about the Yote......Bang Bang>>>>>

[Bluemoon]

Very nice pictures indeed.  I would have left out the picture of the jeep going through the river though, where it is a nice picture.  The rest of your shots show a very tranquil and serene outdoors.  The jeep just kind of ruins that for me.
It shows someone doing what not should be done, the type of person we don't want to be around when we are out and about enjoying the outdoors..just my  because you asked.. 

[Smokepole]

What lens are you using for these? 

[blacktailcody]

Just the kit lenses. An 18-55 and a 55-250. I am trying to earn enough for a little better glass. My camera is a Canon 70D.

[huntnphool]

I do! are my pictures to warm/cold?

 Image #1 for example, snow should be white, not have a red or blue tint to it. In this case it was too warm. Here I did a quick adjustment you can compare

[grundy53]

tagging

[Netminder01]

tag!

Great feedback Bean!

[fishnfur]

Cody,  You got the idea.  It is better to make the proper adjustment with the camera prior to taking the shot than manipulating a bad photo after the fact.  I like your adjustments on the boat pic.

Not to disagree with huntinfool, but snow often looks blue and purple in the shadows.  I like his re-work because of the bold darks and lights, but that is rarely how it works in nature.  We know in our mind that it is white and so when we draw/paint or process photos, our minds think it should be white.  Take a closer look at photos of snow in shadows, it is never white everywhere, only in the highlights of the bright sun.  Looking with your eyes instead of your brain, evaluating color intensity and hue is a hard thing to learn.  A great photographer is not made in a day.  Perhaps a college level class might be useful?

[timberghost72]

You have a good eye for composition which is something that usually can't be fixed in post processing (unless you're into "photoshopping"). Great photos.

Another thing you could try in addition to shooting in RAW to get the snow shot is to meter your camera to the sky 90* from the sun and then recompose and take the photo. I've had some success doing that but not always. You may have to play around with exposure a little with that technique but there is not too much dark forground so it shouldn't be to bad. But as Huntnphool stated, white balance is critical.

[Bean Counter]

  but snow often looks blue and purple in the shadows.  I like his re-work because of the bold darks and lights, but that is rarely how it works in nature

If you're looking at snow through cheap binoculars then yes snow often looks purple. Lateral color fringing ("chromatic aberration") is often purple In cheap glass, be it a camera lens or binoculars. 

My $300 canon 85mm f/1.8 exhibits a lot of purple fringing when shot wide open, and it usually disappears by f/2.5-2.8. It can also be corrected well in Lightroom 

[Jarhead Chase]

I do! are my pictures to warm/cold?

 Image #1 for example, snow should be white, not have a red or blue tint to it. In this case it was too warm. Here I did a quick adjustment you can compare

Darkening the rocks really makes this photo pop. In my opinion, if you wanted to try and clean up (I'm no photographer, so please forgive the laymen terminology) the foreground a little bit this would go from being a really good photo to an outstanding photo. By clean up I mean that it looks a little blurry and monochromatic. If you were to play with the color to give the trees greater individual contrast it would add more depth to the picture and would probably give better scale to the actual size of the mountain. 

[blacktailcody]

Yeah, I probably should take some class. I will see what I can find on YouTube for now. Thank you guys so much for all of your comments. I really really appreciate it. I'm trying to learn as much as I can.

In that mountain picture I was trying to go for more of a vsco film type look. I guess it's just personal preferance in that case.

[Bean Counter]

I reworked the boat. Any better?

Yep it looks better. If you want to email me the RAW file with permission to repost it I can show you how I would have done it, fwiw. Next time that shot presents itself take the extra 30 seconds to slap on your polarizer, please.

[blacktailcody]

Okay! I will send it to you when I get home. Thank you!
Yes sir!

[blacktailcody]

How can I email you?

[Smokepole]

It looks like most of your shots were taken in pretty flat light.  It's difficult to take popping landscape photos in those conditions.  A polarizing filter would help, but there's no substitute for good natural light conditions. 

I keep the white balance on my 50d set to auto for good results.  I shoot jpeg files and they don't take too much tweaking if the light conditions are good.  I like to hunt for good light rather than rely on software to resurrect marginal photos.  It makes it more fun to me to "hunt" for shots.

Some of the shots don't seem sharp enough to me.  That could be motion blur... too slow shutter speed shot offhand would be my guess.  You can crank up the iso on the 70d without much noise.  That will allow faster shutter speeds and offhand shooting.  That big lens needs a 1/500 shutter speed to shoot offhand when it's fully extended.  Study your image data to make sure your speeds are adequate for that lens.

I do think your compositions are very nice.  I would like to see what your big lens can do in better light.  It gets excellent reviews.  Great shots! 

 

[PlateauNDN]

You shot   the yote with the wrong "weapon" or is there an "after" pic to go with the "before" pic.?    great pics and thanks for sharing.

[blacktailcody]

Haha these pictures were taken in Canada and there were houses behind him a little ways. 😜

[fishnfur]

  but snow often looks blue and purple in the shadows.  I like his re-work because of the bold darks and lights, but that is rarely how it works in nature

If you're looking at snow through cheap binoculars then yes snow often looks purple. Lateral color fringing ("chromatic aberration") is often purple In cheap glass, be it a camera lens or binoculars. 

My $300 canon 85mm f/1.8 exhibits a lot of purple fringing when shot wide open, and it usually disappears by f/2.5-2.8. It can also be corrected well in Lightroom 
[/quote

The general idea of that was looking with your "eyes" not with your brain (or glass w/ chromatic aberration).  Try it sometime without your lenses getting in your way. 

[Bean Counter]

Cody,
Here's what I came up with. When I opened the RAW file I was like "oh man" as the haze really limits the ability to recover colors and contrasts without looking overly edited. Your edits were pretty good considering what you started with. We've beaten the polarizer to death but I'd like to also echo Smokepole who is 100% about the best lighting conditions. Usually that's sunrise and sunset. That would have given the photo some much needed warmth--as much as I like the composition. What I really wanted to see was to try to bring out the reds in the trees, which I attempted to do the best I could with LR. CSx would offer more editing options. Just another view and I hope it helps 

[Smokepole]

That's quite a good fix.  I will have to give lightroom a try.  I've been using cs3, but I get lost sometimes, especially trying to fix photos.  Haze is way worse now than it used to be when i got my first slr back in the 80's.  I've noticed in September - October the atmosphere is good and clear.  Must be the angle of the sun...

Nice job Bean Counter.  I'll send you all my crappy photos from now on.   

[Netminder01]

Nice job Bean Counter.  I'll send you all my crappy photos from now on.   

 

I'm loading up an external hard drive now Bean. 

[Bean Counter]

You can do more with elements or photoshop than you can with Lightroom. But I'm lazy and stupid and appreciate Lightroom's intuitive controls and speed. 98% of anything I ever want to do to a photo is available in LR.

Definitely try out LR5 while you can get it free for 30 days. Then try out LR6 free for 30 days, too. 

http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,170702.0.html