Critique #71 *Open Theme* 5 Participants

Biggles said:
Here's my submission
Click to expand...
Biggles: I really like the tones and the composition of this. The use of the fence and corner of the building to frame the diagonal made by the wire, that's great, and to top it, you made it a square shot. So we have lines, circles, triangles and a square (with lots of rectangles in the background).
 
shutterflower said:
Here's mine

RF645, 45mm, Arista.edu Ultra 200 @200 in Arista Premium (clayton F76) developer.
Click to expand...

There's a good symmetry, and placement of elements on the photo. A lot of lines; I'll say what I'm sure some have said about my photo: the purpose is...? I think that's a dumb question, though. I can look at this and find things to pay attention to.
 
formal said:
M6 - 24mm - Kodak BW400CN
Click to expand...
I really like how the eye is led from bottom left corner to upper right corner. The subject is engaging, and the exposure is perfect, to boot. I really can't add anything to this; the elements and the environment are so well captured, it all makes sense. The expressions and body language is just icing on the cake. Well done.
 
kmack said:
Parking Deck Stairs
Click to expand...
Ah, how many have tried this? But you have anchored elements well within the frame; it is very symmetrical, yet with a feeling of all "weighing" into the left center, like a sink, in the motion of the stairs. And although the people are frozen in this capture, there is a sense of movement by them and of them. I like it.
 
About my own photo: it was taken with...my M8 😱

I really liked how the scene looked, and I *really* was getting my fingers and face frozen by the wind. I just wanted to take the shot and move on; I wish I had had more time (and warmth) to compose it a little better.

Now, I really don't understand this generic use of the word "distracting". Why are the branches distracting? This scene was in the middle of this, and Winter is a main element of this scene. What is distracting about seasonal placement? I really am allergic to the misuse of the word "distracting" in photography circles, when it's used to try to say something that they can't find the words to describe it.

Thank you for the feedback, though. I need to know what works and what doesn't. I'm not quite sure about this photo myself.

Oh, btw, these are bike racks. Their solitude, how dead it was there in the middle of Winter is eerie enough, so their resemblance to crosses added to that feeling. To me, anyway.
 
Okay....

shutterflower's doors:

I really like all the tones, the smoothness of them, and the whole light/shadow thing that's going on. The composition's too centered and static for my eye, though, and I think I'd crop a lot of the top third of the picture out to positively upset the proportions.

_________________________________________

formal's nuns:

First thought when I opened it was "Penguins!" I like the juxtaposition of the identical uniforms and the somewhat chaotic goings-on on the floor. It's a great subject and a great snap.

I'd crop just a wee bit off the top to force the eye down; just enough to make the "CALLORVM" text disappear. The room still looks hella big without it.

(The picture looks soft on my screen, but I have an old, cheap screen, and we're really having to mash our pictures down now, so I presume that's part of it.)

___________________________________________

kmack's stairwell:

Very good picture. Perfect exposure = yummy tones to look at everywhere. Great geometry for the eye to play with. I would crop it ruthlessly at bottom and at viewer's left to further force the eye to run pell-mell down the stairs. Nothing else.

________________________________________________________

Gabriel M.A.'s bicycle racks:

Good line, good exposure (tones in the snow), nice smooth light on the racks' cross-trees; really nice bokeh in the far background branches. Only thing bugging me is that the nearmost bicycle rack seems bokeh-ed as well. The second one looks like it was the focal point. My brain's not liking that, so I'd consider cropping the first rack out completely.
 
Distracting

Distracting

http://www.thefreedictionary.com

Distracting -
Tending or serving to distract.

Distract -
1. To cause to turn away from the original focus of attention or interest; divert.
2. To pull in conflicting emotional directions; unsettle.

This is exactly what I mean by "distracting".

Yes, the branches are part of the winter scene, but they are still distracting.

David
 
Mine was shot on Ilford Fp4+ developed in Clayton f76+, scanned with a Minolta Dual Scan III. The body was a Bessa R and the lens an Industar 22 collapsable.

I got lucky, I saw them going down the stairs and I was able to get the camera out of my pocket and focused before they got out of sight.
 
Nuts 'N' Bolts: Leica CL, Leitz Summicron-C 40mm f/2, Neopan 1600 developed in Xtol, negative scanned onto a CD by a lab. Cropped ruthlessly. No Photoshop tweaks other than autolevels, I think.

formal & kmack suggested that the background bricks might've been better bokeh-ed out. Yeah, probably; and I'd have gotten that effect, too, if I'd remembered to bring my neutral density filter with. But on a sunny winter day in SoHo, loaded with 1600, shooting up at the sky, with my filter back home... I must've been at f/8 or f/11.

This lens gives me good bokeh, for sure, but I don't see all that much of it in my daylight shots. Gonna remember that filter, next trip.
 
Gabriel M.A. said:
About my own photo: it was taken with...my M8 😱

Oh, btw, these are bike racks. Their solitude, how dead it was there in the middle of Winter is eerie enough, so their resemblance to crosses added to that feeling. To me, anyway.
Click to expand...

For me you got most of that across. The three armed crosses added to eerie feel, but I don't feel the cold as much as I should.
 
Thanks for the comments.

St. Peters is rather dark - so low shutter speed and wide aperture have resulted in less that ideal sharpness.

shutterflower - I'm impressed with your vision. I actually scanned the negative twice and merged the two scans so that I could get more detail in the foreground. You are right, I do need to increase the contrast in the lower portion.

I hope the lack of tone was not too distracting 😉

David
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom