Interested in your views,good and bad.

Less contrast to start, and brighter. I'm not seeing enough in either highlights or shadows.

I'd do a little cropping - same proportions, but lose some from the top and left edge- make the girl & balloons create more tension within the frame by putting her nearer the edge. The extra sky could go too.

Nobody looking at the camera don't bother me one bit.
 
I'm guessing what caught you eye was the one little girl facing the other direction, getting a kiss(?). The perspective of the table is interesting and the scale of the people. I ponder many photos like this myself. Seems there are some interesting elements but as a single image it doesn't sing. When I look at the Gallery area I realize there is no hesitation is enjoying/seeing a good photo - no need to try to make it work in my mind. Seems I have countless shots I "try" to make work, but when my mind is clear I realize the easiest thing is to move on. Looking at your shot again, the kiss is sweet and has nice lighting. There is always something to learn and take away. Thanks.
 
Thanks adavis 47 sage advice.


Sepia reverb............there are no balloons in the photo,advice to you is to look before you leap;it will help with your bullshxt problem.
 
Last edited:
Wasp nest? what the feck is the girl looking at? I even downloaded a copy and lightened it to try and see what was going on, couldn't tell what it was. Now I get it- after being told it was some old bat I see her.

So replace 'balloons' with 'old bat in a flower dress'. My comments stand, I think it would be improved with less space to the top and left, and with some drastic improvements to the tonality.
 
Last edited:
I'm puzzled as to what motivated you to post this particular image ... you must like it or feel it has potential?

I really enjoy a lot of the work you post in the gallery and see real quality in it ... but not with this sorry!

Mind you I keep going back to it to try and find the balloons! 😛
 
I quite like it, there's a detachment for the viewer with so many faces obscured, which gives it some intrigue, and I like the little girls lost face with the kiss, but I'd like to have seen less of the trees top left and more of the heads at the table bottom right. It doesn't do enough for me compositionally but I can see the intent.
 
I don't know why taxi38 posted but I'm glad he did. Good photo, bad photo, it has created some interesting feedback. I find that too often feedback in this forum is too simple – I like it, or I don't like it – more opinion than critique. I've learned from others thoughts on this photo so it has been an excellent post IMHO.
 
I think if the children could be put to bed more might post as a serious discussion could be assured and might prove interesting to many.
 
Hi, hope you don't mind, but I posted my interpretation of the image in the gallery (i can't work out how to post images in these threads). I'd play up the gothic/weird/vampiric aspect of it.....
 
BTW, I think it would've been a stronger image if the elbow wasn't in the right hand corner, and if the adults around the table were removed; then there'd be only children around the table with the creepy granny lunging out of the bushes.... I'd alter the tones, too.
 
Neil,

I feel like you inadvertently captured two images in one. First on the left I can imagine a private moment with a child and elder sharing a moment in a grove of trees. The second on the right the host of a garden party about to present a toast. This dichotomy seems to complicate the image. I don't think composition or cropping could necessarily enhance this particular image. If you had taken two separate images and presented them a diptych, each could stand on their own strengths while telling the whole story as a pair. Of course hindsight is always 20/20. Just my two cents.

Jeffrey
 
Personally it appears that it is simply a 'nearly' shot. I don't have an issue around the two stories idea as I think it would make a nice image of an intergenerational 'talking to' during a picnic or family gathering but the timing and positioning of the photographer isn't quite right to get it across; both are fractionally wrong IMO.

Some people have a problem with intentional cropping of peoples bodies within the frame, others find it perfectly acceptable though this only works when the composition is strong enough, here I don't think it is and so you should have ( if you could ) moved to create a stonger comp.

I'm also interested in why you posted this for discussion, what makes it fail or work for you?

I have so many images that have failed due to my timing being fractionally out or not being in quite the right position to create the composition that would probably have made the image 'worthwhile.'

As for gallery comments on images, I understand not everyone wants their images critiqued, is capable of a decent critique or is interested in what others have to say. However, I for one wish that more people would give, polite, constructive criticism as its an interesting process to realise what others make of your photographs even if you disagree with their summation.
 
I think the photo is awesome, and I would leave it exactly as it is, crop- and tone-wise—mystery and complexity. There is tension and remoteness, largely on the part of the viewer (camera)—a perspective present and observing but not interconnected. Reminiscent to me of photos of Wynn Bullock. Awesome work.
 
jmcd said:
I think the photo is awesome, and I would leave it exactly as it is, crop- and tone-wise—mystery and complexity. There is tension and remoteness, largely on the part of the viewer (camera)—a perspective present and observing but not interconnected. Reminiscent to me of photos of Wynn Bullock. Awesome work.
Click to expand...


...and right here is why I love photography. Everything is different to different eyes.
 
OurManInTangier said:
I'm also interested in why you posted this for discussion, what makes it fail or work for you?
Click to expand...

exactly, why? it seems he (Taxi) invites criticism but when someone (Sepiareverb post # 5) offers an attempt of constructive criticism, Taxi responds with a direct personal insult to him stating he has BS opinions! even though one aspect in the muddled picture was misinterpreted by Sepia, (for what ever reason-so what!) which offers some insight in itself, not unlike looking at clouds and seeing a animal. the insulting response hardly invites others to make comment. it shows the rather childish frustrations of the OP wanting to hear what he expects and nothing else.

if people express humour, that could be interpreted as polite indifference to the picture and failure to hold the interest of the viewer as well.

the chance to criticise the criticisum offered may be what this is really about

I too would like to hear what Taxi38 thoughts are on this photograph!?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

lynnb
W/NW the infinite
2
Replies
27
Views
1K
Sanug
S
p.giannakis
The concept of micro-contrast
2 3
Replies
51
Views
4K
peterm1
peterm1
E
Hasselblad in Space.
Replies
7
Views
2K
largedrink
largedrink
S
Early Nikon Rangefinder?
Replies
10
Views
1K
Sandxssun
S
Miles.
Leica M10 or M11 in 2025?
2
Replies
33
Views
11K
Bill Blackwell
Bill Blackwell
Back
Top Bottom