critique a simple set

Interesting, because the pictures leave room for imagination and they bring back memories.
"Places where nearly everyone has been before".
Technically spoken, I like the compositions, the light on the floor and the somewhat enigmatic toys(?).
 
For me, trying to capture and communicate a mood or ambiance is the essence of this type of photography.
In cinematography, the quick, isolated, meditative shots used to establish ambiance/atmosphere come to mind.
Think raging bull, the debonair club, the initial shots to create atmosphere. Close-up of a coffee cup, shadows on a white tablecloth etc.
It takes a series of photos. A reflection on the floor, in and of itself may not work on its own. But when used in a series of photographs it becomes quantitative.
Can you create and communicate mood and atmosphere via still photography?
FWIW, I think you’re on to something.
 
The first one is very strong. I find N°2 interesting, leave place for your imagination to work. The other three are more difficult (to me) to be understood. I'll give a look tomorrow with fresh mind and come back with my impression. I like the series of photo, specially the ones a little difficult to be understood.
robert
 
I find the set a bit forced and boring, to be honest. Some of the images might work in a different series but this set just doesn't work. No emotion there, just a series of pictures with the same light.
 
These remind me that photgraphy is nothing more than the capture of a split second of what the mind perceives as a moving subject. Slices of time, conveying the feeling one had at that particular moment.

Though most of them are a bit underexposed due to the time of day, they still reveal what you were seeing, without any artfice of Photoshopping to bring out details. Sometimes it is best to leave alone what there is in the shadows.

The fourth one is my favorite (Grass Stalks In The Twilight).

PF
 
Brings me back to my country home as a child. It is important that they remain as a set to give the feel.
 
Their nice but they have no central subject in any of them, if there was somehting to draw me in more I would look at them for longer... but theres nothing that keeps my attention on the photo and stops me from moving to the next one.
 
With that triangular motif repeating throughout I think they hang together well, the colours are harmonic in each, but the composition in 1 and 3 is weaker than the others and the less sharp nature of 3 is a little incongruous, hung in the correct place I imagine they would look very good in a figurative post-modern way.

Personally I would like a bit more "subject" something to hang a narrative on, but then that's just me :)
 
Last edited:
wow, I wasn't expecting this kind of awesome and varied responses. :)

This past year, I've been trying to take pictures that touch our collective memories. Still working on refining things, obviously I need to work on a some kind of narrative approach, but I'm starting to like where its going enough to get some feedback. Its tough trying to get mood and feelings before my brain tries to over-think everything.

I agree that the set lacks a lot of a subject (unless you think of as the light and negative space as a worthy enough subject) and can be pretty boring. (I like to think of them as "Quiet Images") but that's a weak excuse if you ask me. =p

I'm horribly influenced by cinema and its visual concepts of Mise-en-scène and Ozu's "pillow shots."

My own issues with this set is that as nice as the pictures are, they are only good enough to play a supporting role in photographic storytelling. It needs more subjects, more people, more action, more telling than showing pretty things.

But I'm glad a lot of people picked up on the thread of memory, and the light. So happy in fact to hear that, that was were I was going with the set.

Jamie123 said:
I find the set a bit forced and boring, to be honest. Some of the images might work in a different series but this set just doesn't work. No emotion there, just a series of pictures with the same light.
Click to expand...
I was worried about that.

Arlen said:
I don't think this is relivant to what we were asked to critique?
Click to expand...
comments about being too dark are very relevant to any critique. I may pushed the images too dark, Although, they look very close to the in-camera Raws. I'm on the verge of wanting to rework them, but I'll keep them s they are for now. To get anywhere in creative things, you have to push it and see what sticks. Some stuck, some missed.

JayGannon said:
Their nice but they have no central subject in any of them, if there was somehting to draw me in more I would look at them for longer... but theres nothing that keeps my attention on the photo and stops me from moving to the next one.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I had that same feeling too while editing. I really don't want to fall into the trap of mistaking fashion for art. It takes more than a few interesting pictures, I need pictures to say something interesting.
 
Last edited:
Sparrow said:
[...] the less sharp nature of 3 is a little incongruous, [...]
Click to expand...

that's because the lens is a bit broken and a few images come out way too soft unexpectedly, but I liked the softness of this one, compared to the "sharp" variation of this picture.

that... and I don't believe in the USM filter. :angel:
 
PatrickONeill said:
that's because the lens is a bit broken and a few images come out way too soft unexpectedly, but I liked the softness of this one, compared to the "sharp" variation of this picture.

that... and I don't believe in the USM filter. :angel:
Click to expand...

I meant sharp in a pictorial sense, not technically, less-linear is probably a better word ... the lens looks fine to me
 
PatrickONeill said:
I agree that the set lacks a lot of a subject (unless you think of as the light and negative space as a worthy enough subject) and can be pretty boring. (I like to think of them as "Quiet Images") but that's a weak excuse if you ask me. =p
Click to expand...

It seems that you're pretty much aware of the shotcomings of this set. Go with your gut instinct. If you're not sure about it then you won't gain much by showing it to a bunch of strangers. If everyone of us said it was great then all you'd have learned is that you can't trust the judgement of random people on internet forums.

I can sort of see where you're trying to go with these images but you've got a long way to get there. They are indeed quiet images but at the moment I'd be inclined to call them mute rather than quiet. It seems to me like these are just one day's "keepers". That's fine but a meaningful project takes a lot more time and effort. Just keep at it until you have enough images you're seriously passionate about.
 
Image 1) Our main character, lets call him Jack, looks back on the setting sun, and knows he had better be moving on towards home.

Image 2) Jacks wife, Susan, looks out the window, hoping to catch a glimpse of his return.

Image 3) The old trail never seemed more lonely to Jack than it does tonight.

Image 4) The wind in the tall grass helps to hustle Jack along.

Image 5) Home. Never looked so good.

All it takes is a wee bit of imagination, and you have a story.

PF
 
Sorry about my comments about the Critique:

"
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arlen
I don't think this is relivant to what we were asked to critique?

comments about being too dark are very relevant to any critique. I may pushed the images too dark, Although, they look very close to the in-camera Raws. I'm on the verge of wanting to rework them, but I'll keep them s they are for now. To get anywhere in creative things, you have to push it and see what sticks. Some stuck, some missed."

I thought you were spacifically asked "Do you find this interesting or a bore?" In your original thread. Exposure can be off, but still maintain interest.
 
farlymac said:
Image 1) Our main character, lets call him Jack, looks back on the setting sun, and knows he had better be moving on towards home.

Image 2) Jacks wife, Susan, looks out the window, hoping to catch a glimpse of his return.

Image 3) The old trail never seemed more lonely to Jack than it does tonight.

Image 4) The wind in the tall grass helps to hustle Jack along.

Image 5) Home. Never looked so good.

All it takes is a wee bit of imagination, and you have a story.

PF
Click to expand...

Haha, that's funny. I don't think that's how it works. Sure, the pictures could be used to illustrate a story but so can any other image on flickr. The question is whether or not the series of images can stand on its own. I don't think it's necessarily as much about having a clear narrative as it is about them actually conveying something.

Personally, I take the OPs attempt to put together a meaningful set of pictures very seriously and I think there's no point in talking up something that doesn't work and that the OP himself isn't sure about.
 
First off, I would like to say I am a fan of quiet, soft photos that convey a certain thought. Like some paintings, you have to look deeper than the layers of paint to find the meaning, or in this case, the chroma layers.

If Patrick, the OP, has some doubts about his own work, who hasn't? And the fact that I don't find them boring, but you might, makes no difference in the world. Every piece of art will have it's fans, and it's critics. What works for me, someone else will not be able to see, and therefore it doesn't interest them.

We're not here to denigrate a fellow photographer with snarky remarks, especially from those who don't post any of their own work. He asked a simple question, and my answer is "No, I don't find them boring." I simply demonstrated how I came to that conclusion. I just saw something in these photos that others probably don't. Maybe Patrick didn't see it either.

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