RayPA
Ignore It (It'll go away)
Welcome to this critique thread. Please read the purpose statement and the guidelines/ground rules regarding participation.
Purpose
The primary purpose of this thread is to provide a forum where photographers can give and receive constructive criticism on one another's photographs. By setting up some basic guidelines we hope that this thread will provide a forum where the give and take of honest constructive criticism can help us become better photographers.
Guidelines/Ground Rules
The thread has very specific rules regarding participation. The one basic rule is that you cannot provide criticism on an image or comment in a critique thread unless you also have an image posted. To post an image to this thread you must be a participant. Participation in this thread is limited. Here are the guidelines and ground rules for participation:
• Participation in this thread is limited to 5 photographers
• Participants join the thread by posting their intention. You can simply reply with your intent to join by posting something like: "I'm joining," "I'm in," or just state your name
• Joining is on a "first come, first served" basis. The first 5 to reply become the participants
• Once the thread has 5 participants, no other photographers can join or participate in the thread
• Once the thread is full of participants all photographers will upload their image(s)
• Please abide by any thematic requirement (e.g., landscape, portrait, etc.)
•The number of photos for each participant is limited to one
• Photographers attach photos as thumbnails (no inline images or links)
• Photographers post their images supplying titles (if any) and other pertinent information (the amount of information should be minimal)
• Photographers can only comment on their own images and reply to comments only when everyone else in the thread has posted their comments on the image
• Every participant must comment on every photo (except their own—initially)
• Every participant must make at least two comments, one positive comment, and one constructive criticism (which is actually two positive comments)
• Once every photographer has commented then a free flowing discussion begins. It is at this point that every photographer can comment on their own work and reply to comments, ask questions, etc.
• The participants decide when the thread closes.
If you'd like to participate in a critique thread and need some ideas about how to proceed with viewing images critically, you may find this thread helpful:
How do you look at photos
You can also provide feedback on critique threads here:
Critique Feedback Thread
Remember: Please do not provide criticism on an image or comment in a critique thread unless you also have an image posted.
This thread is now active, please follow the guidelines if you'd like to participate! Have Fun!
.
Purpose
The primary purpose of this thread is to provide a forum where photographers can give and receive constructive criticism on one another's photographs. By setting up some basic guidelines we hope that this thread will provide a forum where the give and take of honest constructive criticism can help us become better photographers.
Guidelines/Ground Rules
The thread has very specific rules regarding participation. The one basic rule is that you cannot provide criticism on an image or comment in a critique thread unless you also have an image posted. To post an image to this thread you must be a participant. Participation in this thread is limited. Here are the guidelines and ground rules for participation:
• Participation in this thread is limited to 5 photographers
• Participants join the thread by posting their intention. You can simply reply with your intent to join by posting something like: "I'm joining," "I'm in," or just state your name
• Joining is on a "first come, first served" basis. The first 5 to reply become the participants
• Once the thread has 5 participants, no other photographers can join or participate in the thread
• Once the thread is full of participants all photographers will upload their image(s)
• Please abide by any thematic requirement (e.g., landscape, portrait, etc.)
•The number of photos for each participant is limited to one
• Photographers attach photos as thumbnails (no inline images or links)
• Photographers post their images supplying titles (if any) and other pertinent information (the amount of information should be minimal)
• Photographers can only comment on their own images and reply to comments only when everyone else in the thread has posted their comments on the image
• Every participant must comment on every photo (except their own—initially)
• Every participant must make at least two comments, one positive comment, and one constructive criticism (which is actually two positive comments)
• Once every photographer has commented then a free flowing discussion begins. It is at this point that every photographer can comment on their own work and reply to comments, ask questions, etc.
• The participants decide when the thread closes.
If you'd like to participate in a critique thread and need some ideas about how to proceed with viewing images critically, you may find this thread helpful:
How do you look at photos
You can also provide feedback on critique threads here:
Critique Feedback Thread
Remember: Please do not provide criticism on an image or comment in a critique thread unless you also have an image posted.
This thread is now active, please follow the guidelines if you'd like to participate! Have Fun!
.
ampguy
Veteran
i'm in.
forum sw sucks...
forum sw sucks...
Lutz
Member
me too. 
S
Socke
Guest
Ok, I'll try, too.
Chuck A
Chuck A
I'm in as well.
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
I'm in, too.
ampguy
Veteran
lone fisherman
lone fisherman
random bs:
Tonight for dinner I made Portobello Burgers With Red Pepper Mayonnaise. Instead of grilling the onions, I roasted them in the oven. Instead of spinach leaves, I used a mix of greens. Mrs. R helpfully made the mayo part of the meal. We used black olive ciabatta for the bread. Pretty dang good, and really simple. After dinner I went to WOW Hall and saw the last 3 songs of Deke Falcon's set ("last show ever" but I hear they might do a REAL last show at Luckey's, or at least that's a rumor I want to believe). Deke Falcon sounded so good. The crowd at WOW Hall was way too reverential and motionless, and mostly there to hear Magnolia Electric Company... who rocked me some. They had some songs that were so sad that they made me happy, if you know what I mean. Let's say, I thought a lot of the set "rocked," in a lyrical musical sense, but not necessarily a bodily sense--ALTHOUGH they did one very funky song, I must admit. I saw Jimbo groovin' to it. They looked like really really nice guys. It was not really a rockin' crowd, in my definition of the word. They were there to watch a band they loved, but dancing was definitely not part of this experience for 99% of the peeps. I did dance to several of their songs. All in all,
lone fisherman
random bs:
Tonight for dinner I made Portobello Burgers With Red Pepper Mayonnaise. Instead of grilling the onions, I roasted them in the oven. Instead of spinach leaves, I used a mix of greens. Mrs. R helpfully made the mayo part of the meal. We used black olive ciabatta for the bread. Pretty dang good, and really simple. After dinner I went to WOW Hall and saw the last 3 songs of Deke Falcon's set ("last show ever" but I hear they might do a REAL last show at Luckey's, or at least that's a rumor I want to believe). Deke Falcon sounded so good. The crowd at WOW Hall was way too reverential and motionless, and mostly there to hear Magnolia Electric Company... who rocked me some. They had some songs that were so sad that they made me happy, if you know what I mean. Let's say, I thought a lot of the set "rocked," in a lyrical musical sense, but not necessarily a bodily sense--ALTHOUGH they did one very funky song, I must admit. I saw Jimbo groovin' to it. They looked like really really nice guys. It was not really a rockin' crowd, in my definition of the word. They were there to watch a band they loved, but dancing was definitely not part of this experience for 99% of the peeps. I did dance to several of their songs. All in all,
ampguy said:
Attachments
Chuck A
Chuck A
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
Lutz
Member
S
Socke
Guest
I call it Inside The Crypt
I took it in the crypt beneath the Almudena cathedral in Madrid in April.
I took it in the crypt beneath the Almudena cathedral in Madrid in April.
Last edited by a moderator:
ampguy
Veteran
I think you stole my secret concept
I think you stole my secret concept
********* ignore below
There's perhaps no better proof that an idea has gained the attention of the mainstream than a mention on National Public Radio.
For blogging, that happened Wednesday -- and NPR's three-minute piece on how weblogging is transforming journalism was just one more sign that blogging has outgrown its underground trendiness.
Time magazine, The Times of London and several other newspapers have recently reported on blogging, with many of the outlets proclaiming blogs the thing of the future.
The practice of blogging is hardly new. Well before the dot-com swoon, blogging began to boom. Hundreds and then thousands of people set up their own weblogs, with some of the sites garnering traffic numbers that beat those dot-coms.
But weblogs have now crossed a tipping point, leaping from a "self-contained community" to a group "large enough that at least there's many different weblogs, and a million different kinds of weblogs," according to Evan Williams, who runs Blogger, one of the most popular services for creating a blog.
In January alone, at least 41,000 people created new blogs using Blogger, and that number is always increasing, Williams said. Some have put the total number of weblogs at more than 500,000.
Alongside the boom, however, there have recently been a few faint signs of backlash. As increasing hordes take on the task of trying to keep new sites looking nice, sounding original and free from banalities, more hordes just seem to fail.
In a column that was almost universally panned in weblog circles, John Dvorak of PC Magazine said that while a few blogs were insightful, many new webloggers were getting into blogging for all the wrong reasons. They were "wannabe writers" who were looking for "ego gratification," Dvorak wrote.
A few days after Dvorak's column was released, Dave Linabury and Leia Scofield, two bloggers themselves, unveiled the second-annual Anti-Bloggies. These awards roast bloggers for being boring or lame or obsessed or weird.
The award for Worst Abuse of the Third Person, for example, went to a blog called GothicGranola -- which celebrated the victory with the words "amanda hates stupid people" repeated about a hundred times. (But since the win, Amanda has reconsidered her third-person fix.)
Linabury and Scofield make clear that they love weblogging, but the Anti-Bloggies are their way of "making fun of the whole genre of blogging," Linabury said. "One of the things I don't like is the blog where someone says something like, 'Today I had a cheese sandwich.' That's the kind of thing you see in most of these blogs. You know, fascinating. I don't give a flying ... whatever what you ate. Don't tell me you have a flat tire. And if this is how boring their writing is, I can't imagine how boring they must be to talk to in general."
Even though Dvorak's column was not well received by bloggers, several echoed Dvorak's idea that some people are creating weblogs with the idea that they'll be famous in a few weeks.
"It depends on what you get into it for," said Matt Haughey, who created MetaFilter, a discussion site frequented by bloggers. "If you get into it thinking you are going to be popular, it'll fall out of fashion for you."
Linabury is more blunt on the subject. He has created a site that keeps a log of dead weblogs -- it's called ****ed Weblog, in homage to ****ed Company -- and he thinks that people don't realize how hard it is to do good blog.
"It really can take a lot of time," he said. "I spend two hours a day on my weblog. Many people don't realize this, they think it's a quick way to get popular. And after awhile they get really discouraged and say, 'he got 2,300 hits today, I got four.' The bulk of people out there get less than two dozen hits."
"I don't want to be elitist," Linabury added, "but all these people out there with popular weblogs, they've been doing it longer and they stick to their guns."
But both Linabury and Haughey defended the genre of weblogging by invoking Sturgeon's Law, which comes from sci-fi writer Theodore Sturgeon who said, "Sure, 90 percent of science-fiction is crud. That's because 90 percent of everything is crud."
In other words, so what if most weblogs aren't interesting? The good thing, said Williams, is that everybody doesn't have to read them all. Asked if he'd like to live in a world where virtually everyone blogs, Williams chuckled and said, "Yeah, I think it would be a great thing. It's not that you want to read them. But people have the desire to express themselves, and I think it's tremendously powerful activity. If you write every day, your writing improves, your thinking improves."
Dave Winer, a computer programmer who creates tools to make weblogging easy, also disagreed vehemently with Dvorak's assessment of the state of blogging. Winer runs Scripting News, one of the most popular weblogs on the Web, and he thinks that critics like Dvorak are "professional, ink-stained journalists who are scared by what we're doing here. We cover technology better than they ever could."
He rejects the idea that many blogs are boring or that they're no longer chic. "The Web doesn't go out of fashion," he said.
Winer added that the technology behind weblogging still needs to get significantly easier for the real talent to come online. "What I'm interested in is the doctors and professors and engineers and people who have a good education and a social area of expertise. We need to really reach those people, we have to go a couple of levels in terms of ease-of-use."
Winer is also interested in getting blogging into companies. He thinks that workgroups in firms would benefit from a log instead of e-mail, because it's searchable and collaborative, allowing people to "narrate (their) work."
Winer's firm, Userland Software, has seven employees, "but we're geographically diverse and we do all our work through these next-generation tools," he said. "I've got one guy working here I've never met but I still know him well. So there is definitely some powerful stuff coming. The weblogging we do in public, that's just the beginning."
But even before this new technology arrives, some of those who have taken a dim view of the mainstreaming of blogging say there is still a lot to be celebrated.
For instance, Dennis Mahoney, who runs a blog with a literary bent, recently posted a few suggestions for bloggers he thought were boring. (One of them was to stop posting digital photos of "everyday objects when, I'm sorry, it just looks like a bunch of **** lying around your house.")
But Mahoney said that all he meant was there's plenty of "potential to raise the bar." In an e-mail, he said that he's already seen that occurring.
Citing in particular a stunning weblog called Ftrain.com, "A number of weblogs have appeared with crafted writing at the center -- structured essays, voice experiments, richer narrative, etc. -- as opposed to centering the site on memes or quick commentary, as many weblogs have done," he wrote.
I think you stole my secret concept
********* ignore below
There's perhaps no better proof that an idea has gained the attention of the mainstream than a mention on National Public Radio.
For blogging, that happened Wednesday -- and NPR's three-minute piece on how weblogging is transforming journalism was just one more sign that blogging has outgrown its underground trendiness.
Time magazine, The Times of London and several other newspapers have recently reported on blogging, with many of the outlets proclaiming blogs the thing of the future.
The practice of blogging is hardly new. Well before the dot-com swoon, blogging began to boom. Hundreds and then thousands of people set up their own weblogs, with some of the sites garnering traffic numbers that beat those dot-coms.
But weblogs have now crossed a tipping point, leaping from a "self-contained community" to a group "large enough that at least there's many different weblogs, and a million different kinds of weblogs," according to Evan Williams, who runs Blogger, one of the most popular services for creating a blog.
In January alone, at least 41,000 people created new blogs using Blogger, and that number is always increasing, Williams said. Some have put the total number of weblogs at more than 500,000.
Alongside the boom, however, there have recently been a few faint signs of backlash. As increasing hordes take on the task of trying to keep new sites looking nice, sounding original and free from banalities, more hordes just seem to fail.
In a column that was almost universally panned in weblog circles, John Dvorak of PC Magazine said that while a few blogs were insightful, many new webloggers were getting into blogging for all the wrong reasons. They were "wannabe writers" who were looking for "ego gratification," Dvorak wrote.
A few days after Dvorak's column was released, Dave Linabury and Leia Scofield, two bloggers themselves, unveiled the second-annual Anti-Bloggies. These awards roast bloggers for being boring or lame or obsessed or weird.
The award for Worst Abuse of the Third Person, for example, went to a blog called GothicGranola -- which celebrated the victory with the words "amanda hates stupid people" repeated about a hundred times. (But since the win, Amanda has reconsidered her third-person fix.)
Linabury and Scofield make clear that they love weblogging, but the Anti-Bloggies are their way of "making fun of the whole genre of blogging," Linabury said. "One of the things I don't like is the blog where someone says something like, 'Today I had a cheese sandwich.' That's the kind of thing you see in most of these blogs. You know, fascinating. I don't give a flying ... whatever what you ate. Don't tell me you have a flat tire. And if this is how boring their writing is, I can't imagine how boring they must be to talk to in general."
Even though Dvorak's column was not well received by bloggers, several echoed Dvorak's idea that some people are creating weblogs with the idea that they'll be famous in a few weeks.
"It depends on what you get into it for," said Matt Haughey, who created MetaFilter, a discussion site frequented by bloggers. "If you get into it thinking you are going to be popular, it'll fall out of fashion for you."
Linabury is more blunt on the subject. He has created a site that keeps a log of dead weblogs -- it's called ****ed Weblog, in homage to ****ed Company -- and he thinks that people don't realize how hard it is to do good blog.
"It really can take a lot of time," he said. "I spend two hours a day on my weblog. Many people don't realize this, they think it's a quick way to get popular. And after awhile they get really discouraged and say, 'he got 2,300 hits today, I got four.' The bulk of people out there get less than two dozen hits."
"I don't want to be elitist," Linabury added, "but all these people out there with popular weblogs, they've been doing it longer and they stick to their guns."
But both Linabury and Haughey defended the genre of weblogging by invoking Sturgeon's Law, which comes from sci-fi writer Theodore Sturgeon who said, "Sure, 90 percent of science-fiction is crud. That's because 90 percent of everything is crud."
In other words, so what if most weblogs aren't interesting? The good thing, said Williams, is that everybody doesn't have to read them all. Asked if he'd like to live in a world where virtually everyone blogs, Williams chuckled and said, "Yeah, I think it would be a great thing. It's not that you want to read them. But people have the desire to express themselves, and I think it's tremendously powerful activity. If you write every day, your writing improves, your thinking improves."
Dave Winer, a computer programmer who creates tools to make weblogging easy, also disagreed vehemently with Dvorak's assessment of the state of blogging. Winer runs Scripting News, one of the most popular weblogs on the Web, and he thinks that critics like Dvorak are "professional, ink-stained journalists who are scared by what we're doing here. We cover technology better than they ever could."
He rejects the idea that many blogs are boring or that they're no longer chic. "The Web doesn't go out of fashion," he said.
Winer added that the technology behind weblogging still needs to get significantly easier for the real talent to come online. "What I'm interested in is the doctors and professors and engineers and people who have a good education and a social area of expertise. We need to really reach those people, we have to go a couple of levels in terms of ease-of-use."
Winer is also interested in getting blogging into companies. He thinks that workgroups in firms would benefit from a log instead of e-mail, because it's searchable and collaborative, allowing people to "narrate (their) work."
Winer's firm, Userland Software, has seven employees, "but we're geographically diverse and we do all our work through these next-generation tools," he said. "I've got one guy working here I've never met but I still know him well. So there is definitely some powerful stuff coming. The weblogging we do in public, that's just the beginning."
But even before this new technology arrives, some of those who have taken a dim view of the mainstreaming of blogging say there is still a lot to be celebrated.
For instance, Dennis Mahoney, who runs a blog with a literary bent, recently posted a few suggestions for bloggers he thought were boring. (One of them was to stop posting digital photos of "everyday objects when, I'm sorry, it just looks like a bunch of **** lying around your house.")
But Mahoney said that all he meant was there's plenty of "potential to raise the bar." In an e-mail, he said that he's already seen that occurring.
Citing in particular a stunning weblog called Ftrain.com, "A number of weblogs have appeared with crafted writing at the center -- structured essays, voice experiments, richer narrative, etc. -- as opposed to centering the site on memes or quick commentary, as many weblogs have done," he wrote.
Socke said:
Chuck A
Chuck A
ampguy - lone fisherman
ampguy - lone fisherman
Holy cow ampguy! You sure are prolific. Anyway, I guess I will get started.
Because it is so small, the merits of this own escaped me at first. I like how the fisherman is in a brighter spot, allowing him to stand out without being too obvious. The black shore and the white foam surrounds him making him even smaller and vulnerable. Have you tried this one in B&W, that might work as well.
The only problems I have are the vignetting in the upper left and I think the color cast is too blue. Also, I would make it larger.
ampguy - lone fisherman
Holy cow ampguy! You sure are prolific. Anyway, I guess I will get started.
Because it is so small, the merits of this own escaped me at first. I like how the fisherman is in a brighter spot, allowing him to stand out without being too obvious. The black shore and the white foam surrounds him making him even smaller and vulnerable. Have you tried this one in B&W, that might work as well.
The only problems I have are the vignetting in the upper left and I think the color cast is too blue. Also, I would make it larger.
Chuck A
Chuck A
gabrielma - minimalist portrait
gabrielma - minimalist portrait
I really like this one. It is very sensual and appealing. (with my luck, it is probably your wife or daughter and I am bordering on offending you.) The blue clothing and background allow the skin tones to stand out and the designs on the clothing are a nice counterpoint with the smoother skin. The color in this photo really makes it.
I really can't see anything that I would change. Well seen.
gabrielma - minimalist portrait
I really like this one. It is very sensual and appealing. (with my luck, it is probably your wife or daughter and I am bordering on offending you.) The blue clothing and background allow the skin tones to stand out and the designs on the clothing are a nice counterpoint with the smoother skin. The color in this photo really makes it.
I really can't see anything that I would change. Well seen.
Chuck A
Chuck A
Lutz
Lutz
Lutz, I saw this one on your imprevues website and it is my favorite. It is so multi-dimensional and layered. You can spend alot of time exploring this one. It is almost like the sweeping girl is dreaming about the wonderful dress that will adorn the manequinn. Perhaps she is earning money to buy it. It has a dreamy appearance, while the left side anchors it in reality. Beautiful tonality and composition.
There is nothing that I would change here. Beautiful. BTW, I am the guy who asked about the jazz piece on your website over at photo.net.
Lutz
Lutz, I saw this one on your imprevues website and it is my favorite. It is so multi-dimensional and layered. You can spend alot of time exploring this one. It is almost like the sweeping girl is dreaming about the wonderful dress that will adorn the manequinn. Perhaps she is earning money to buy it. It has a dreamy appearance, while the left side anchors it in reality. Beautiful tonality and composition.
There is nothing that I would change here. Beautiful. BTW, I am the guy who asked about the jazz piece on your website over at photo.net.
Chuck A
Chuck A
Socke - Inside The Crypt
Socke - Inside The Crypt
I like the composition , and there is mystery here. It looks like you took time to position yourself for symmetry. I like how it goes from a dark empty place to a gradually lighter and more detailed room. It draws you in and makes me want to see more of this place.
I am struggling a bit with this one. I am having trouble discerning the subject matter here. Perhaps if it were larger and I could make out more detail. I am not sure what to do with what bothers me here. The yellowish color cast makes the shadows seem weak somehow and takes away from their power. Perhaps experimenting with the color might help. Sorry that I don't have much more to add. Perhaps the others can be more articulate.
Socke - Inside The Crypt
I like the composition , and there is mystery here. It looks like you took time to position yourself for symmetry. I like how it goes from a dark empty place to a gradually lighter and more detailed room. It draws you in and makes me want to see more of this place.
I am struggling a bit with this one. I am having trouble discerning the subject matter here. Perhaps if it were larger and I could make out more detail. I am not sure what to do with what bothers me here. The yellowish color cast makes the shadows seem weak somehow and takes away from their power. Perhaps experimenting with the color might help. Sorry that I don't have much more to add. Perhaps the others can be more articulate.
ampguy
Veteran
Chuck - wedding
Chuck - wedding
I like this very much. It captures the emotions of each of the characters well. The three bridesmaids look like sisters or close relatives and are bickering about something, and the poor bride is just trying to get through the ordeal. The bride looks the prettiest. The framing and exposure are just right.
Chuck - wedding
I like this very much. It captures the emotions of each of the characters well. The three bridesmaids look like sisters or close relatives and are bickering about something, and the poor bride is just trying to get through the ordeal. The bride looks the prettiest. The framing and exposure are just right.
Chuck A said:
ampguy
Veteran
hmmm
hmmm
Nice color renditions. Maybe you were envisioning her topless?
hmmm
Nice color renditions. Maybe you were envisioning her topless?
gabrielma said:
ampguy
Veteran
Lutz
Lutz
This photo has too many reflections and shadows going on, it is too busy. It might be fun for those who like sudoku type puzzles to figure out what is real and what is a reflection or a reflection of a reflection.
Lutz
This photo has too many reflections and shadows going on, it is too busy. It might be fun for those who like sudoku type puzzles to figure out what is real and what is a reflection or a reflection of a reflection.
Lutz said:
ampguy
Veteran
Socke -- Inside the Crypt
Socke -- Inside the Crypt
With my monitor brightness and contrast all the way up, it looks like it would be a nice print. Good framing and centering of the pillars and arches. The eye moves to the middle, which is small and out of focus. I would have used more DOF, or focussed on the center portion more.
Socke -- Inside the Crypt
With my monitor brightness and contrast all the way up, it looks like it would be a nice print. Good framing and centering of the pillars and arches. The eye moves to the middle, which is small and out of focus. I would have used more DOF, or focussed on the center portion more.
Socke said: