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.
• Please, only join this thread if you are able post an image within 24 hours of joining.
• 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)
• Photos should be standard screen resolution (72~90) and the longest side of the image approximately 10 inches in length.
• 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.
• Please, only join this thread if you are able post an image within 24 hours of joining.
• 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)
• Photos should be standard screen resolution (72~90) and the longest side of the image approximately 10 inches in length.
• 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!
.
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
Yes, I'll join in.
formal
***
I'll also join.
David
David
raid
Dad Photographer
OK, I am also in.
Raid
Raid
ampguy
Veteran
I'm in.
................
................
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
I'm in.
The message is too short, so I'm adding lots of more words so that the program will be happy. There, there they are, enough words, I hope. Yes, I hope so very much. Thank you.
The message is too short, so I'm adding lots of more words so that the program will be happy. There, there they are, enough words, I hope. Yes, I hope so very much. Thank you.
ampguy
Veteran
here is mine - "broken windows"
here is mine - "broken windows"
attached.
............
here is mine - "broken windows"
attached.
............
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
raid
Dad Photographer
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
formal
***
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
ampguy: I love this one, the colors and the composition are exactly right.
Gabriel M A: I like it for the classical look. I would like it more without the patches of light.
Raid: This what rangefinders were made for and it works well, although I think I'd prefer it without the color cast.
formal: there's an old chair right in the foreground! No, seriously a nice take on a common scene from Rome.
Gabriel M A: I like it for the classical look. I would like it more without the patches of light.
Raid: This what rangefinders were made for and it works well, although I think I'd prefer it without the color cast.
formal: there's an old chair right in the foreground! No, seriously a nice take on a common scene from Rome.
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
Beautiful image, Formal. It is both "immediate" and makes you wonder what happened, what is going on, what will happen. The tones are beautiful, the composition is great. Wonderful job.
Jon: here's what a critique isn't: I would like it more without the blur. That said, it evokes something strange. Is it an accident? Is it commentary on the subject's state of mind? There seems to be a paradox of ideas here, but it may be a coincidence?
Raid: the highlights are overblown, and it is not leveled; I cannot see the woman's face, and the men's faces are barely visible. There is a wooden post right in front of the man in the center of the frame. What is the intended effect?
ampguy: the colors aren't "exactly right," but this has a great mood; there is a consistency in the texture that is cleverly matched by the "crossprocessed look" of this photo. One can see nothing through one neat window, but something through the broken one, but it's virtually impossible to know what that is. It makes you look. Good one.
Jon: here's what a critique isn't: I would like it more without the blur. That said, it evokes something strange. Is it an accident? Is it commentary on the subject's state of mind? There seems to be a paradox of ideas here, but it may be a coincidence?
Raid: the highlights are overblown, and it is not leveled; I cannot see the woman's face, and the men's faces are barely visible. There is a wooden post right in front of the man in the center of the frame. What is the intended effect?
ampguy: the colors aren't "exactly right," but this has a great mood; there is a consistency in the texture that is cleverly matched by the "crossprocessed look" of this photo. One can see nothing through one neat window, but something through the broken one, but it's virtually impossible to know what that is. It makes you look. Good one.
formal
***
ampguy
---------
Good abstract image; I like the textures and the vertical symmetry.
The colours are a bit too saturated for my tastes.
Gabiel M.A.
--------------
Good composition and I like the shallow DOF.
I find the foreground a bit too bright and distracting, so I would prefer it cropped out.
raid
-------
I like the composition and the expression on the face of the guy to the right. I'd like to see a bigger image.
Not too keen on the colour nor on the poll in front of the main character.
Jon Claremont
----------------
I like the look on the man's face - he appears to be engaged with you. There is an awful lot of camera shake but his face is still clear, so I like the image.
The yellow object behind the man is distracting.
David
---------
Good abstract image; I like the textures and the vertical symmetry.
The colours are a bit too saturated for my tastes.
Gabiel M.A.
--------------
Good composition and I like the shallow DOF.
I find the foreground a bit too bright and distracting, so I would prefer it cropped out.
raid
-------
I like the composition and the expression on the face of the guy to the right. I'd like to see a bigger image.
Not too keen on the colour nor on the poll in front of the main character.
Jon Claremont
----------------
I like the look on the man's face - he appears to be engaged with you. There is an awful lot of camera shake but his face is still clear, so I like the image.
The yellow object behind the man is distracting.
David
ampguy
Veteran
critiques
critiques
Gabrielma - A very unique perspective of a guy sitting on some rocks. The contrast of the rocks and sunlight, in b&w, matches closely with the man's clothes, so it's hard for the eye to find focus. I might have tried removing some of the foreground, and possibly trying to keep the top half in focus as well. Maybe reduce the contrast overall.
Raid - nice street shot. I think I would try cropping the top 1/3rd off, and right 1/4th to focus in on the guys expression more as he checks out the ladies and almost walks into the pole.
Jon, this is a nice portrait, but I think the the subject or camera moved during the exposure. I'd try a faster shutter speed, and blurring out the background more.
formal - very nice, depth of field for miles. But something is crooked, something shows it was a very wide angle lens with some barrel distortion or something, otherwise it's a very nice vertical shot. Is this the Pope's house??
critiques
Gabrielma - A very unique perspective of a guy sitting on some rocks. The contrast of the rocks and sunlight, in b&w, matches closely with the man's clothes, so it's hard for the eye to find focus. I might have tried removing some of the foreground, and possibly trying to keep the top half in focus as well. Maybe reduce the contrast overall.
Raid - nice street shot. I think I would try cropping the top 1/3rd off, and right 1/4th to focus in on the guys expression more as he checks out the ladies and almost walks into the pole.
Jon, this is a nice portrait, but I think the the subject or camera moved during the exposure. I'd try a faster shutter speed, and blurring out the background more.
formal - very nice, depth of field for miles. But something is crooked, something shows it was a very wide angle lens with some barrel distortion or something, otherwise it's a very nice vertical shot. Is this the Pope's house??
raid
Dad Photographer
ampguy: The image of this old house is very colorful. The roof is onlly partially shown. Was there a reason for doing this cropping? Is the roof that blue or is there maybe some color cast effect? Nice image.
gabriel: The bright area in the foreground is distracting. Not bad. A man thinking alone.
jon: The photo is a little too blurry for my tatse, but thus is not about my taste. I would have liked sharper eyes in the image. Nice.
formal: The chair ... is what this image is about. Does the image refer to a fallen power (in the palace) ? Interesting.
Raid
gabriel: The bright area in the foreground is distracting. Not bad. A man thinking alone.
jon: The photo is a little too blurry for my tatse, but thus is not about my taste. I would have liked sharper eyes in the image. Nice.
formal: The chair ... is what this image is about. Does the image refer to a fallen power (in the palace) ? Interesting.
Raid
formal
***
Thanks for the comments.
ampguy: It is St. Peter's, I think the Pope's apartments are to the right.
There were hundreds of chairs on either side of the pathway lined up in perfect order. I guess this chair broke and was discarded. What really surprised me was quality of the chairs given that Kings, Heads of State, etc. sit on them.
ampguy: I think your right about the distortion, but there was also a slight tilt and the length of curtain on either side of the path was slight different. Is the attached any better?
Regards,
David
ampguy: It is St. Peter's, I think the Pope's apartments are to the right.
There were hundreds of chairs on either side of the pathway lined up in perfect order. I guess this chair broke and was discarded. What really surprised me was quality of the chairs given that Kings, Heads of State, etc. sit on them.
ampguy: I think your right about the distortion, but there was also a slight tilt and the length of curtain on either side of the path was slight different. Is the attached any better?
Regards,
David
Attachments
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
ampguy
Veteran
Hi formal
Hi formal
It wasn't the curtains that I see the distortion in, it's the building, which I think would have a perfectly flat roof and other lines. The roof is slightly convex on my monitor when I line up a piece of paper on the image.
I'm nit picking though, I'm sure your lens is excellent, as good or better than my Sigma 18mm SLR lens was, but the slight distortion in the building is visible. What lens did you use btw?
Hi formal
It wasn't the curtains that I see the distortion in, it's the building, which I think would have a perfectly flat roof and other lines. The roof is slightly convex on my monitor when I line up a piece of paper on the image.
I'm nit picking though, I'm sure your lens is excellent, as good or better than my Sigma 18mm SLR lens was, but the slight distortion in the building is visible. What lens did you use btw?
formal said:
ampguy
Veteran
Thanks all, my shot was pp'd with picasa, no photoshopping done at all. Raid, the colors were there, but probably less dramatic than what is shown. In picasa, I kept color preservation high, but did apply some tint and saturation.