Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Post Your Photos > Photo Critiques

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 13, 2007, 5:53 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,544
Default

These are rare and beautiful flowers; my first inclination would be to get them ALL in focus.

The first shot has the front-most flower in-focus but positioned in the upper left of the frame. You centered the group of three flowers in the frame, but only focused on the onein front.The two out-of-focus flowers detract from the the in-focus one. Perhaps cropping from the bottom and right (as I have done below) might place the in-focus flower in a more prominent position within the frame.

The second shot has a single flower in focus in the middle of a branch full of flowers, but it is partially obscured by another, out-of-focus flower. My attention is constantly drawn back and forth along the branch, all the while trying to focus on the out-of-focus flowers, so I get a headache.

I'd have kept the aperature small so as to get a greater depth of field, and capture all the flowers in focus.

I just think your experiment with depth of field didn't do well here.
Attached Images
 
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 14, 2007, 2:26 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
Torgny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Northeast Passage 10; Gothenburg, Sweden, Northern Europe, Planet Earth, Outskirts of Milky Way, Uni
Posts: 10,042
Default

TCav, The shallow DOF here is very much intended and works well. The position is just right for us westerners who read from left to right. BTW, (looking at your avatar), why don´t you hold your camera differently. The left hand is the important one. Take the camera from below in the palm of your left hand and hold it steadily. Otherwise your photos may be totally blurred with nothing "in focus"

/T
(r)
Torgny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 15, 2007, 11:51 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,544
Default

Torgny wrote:
Quote:
The shallow DOF here is very much intended ...
Wouldn't that be more for Monza76/razvanto say? Or am I communicating with Monza76/razvan/Torgny?
Torgny wrote:
Quote:
... and works well.
I disagree.
Torgny wrote:
Quote:
The position is just right for us westerners who read from left to right.
That is irrelavent. Reading from left-to-right is entirely cultural and has nothing to do with the way the eye and the mind perceive images.

Torgny wrote:
Quote:
BTW, (looking at your avatar), why don´t you hold your camera differently. The left hand is the important one. Take the camera from below in the palm of your left hand and hold it steadily. Otherwise your photos may be totally blurred with nothing "in focus"
Generally, while I'm using a camera, I brace my right elbow against my right side, and my left elbow against some rigid structure (as I did while taking the photo I used for my Avatar.) I find that this method works much better than just bracing both elbows against my body. Also, I frequently experience slight bouts of repetative stress, so I frequently vary the way I hold a camera.

Also, if I did as you suggest, you would lose the benifit of seeing my strikingly masculine chin. :-)
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 15, 2007, 12:20 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,306
Default

Thanks monza76 for passing up the inf.My net connection is too slow.thus so many of replies you get.B'coz i always had a feeling that my replies are still with me.Sorry,It looks bad
mcliu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 15, 2007, 12:49 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,306
Default

OK guys,we are here for constractive criticism and to learn .If all of you have noticed noboby is disagreeing over the science part of the image.It is the art part, were disagreement tend to creep in.Personally I love shallow DOF. but looking the same image through Tclav's eye, I feel he is not wrong in this image.May be if all three flowers in sharp may look good.Sorry razvan could not see your image for my net connection is so slowww that the 1st image has take quite a lot of time.so no comments.
I had a disagreement with Tclav once.(with all the due respect).Only here I disagree with him only on one minor point that is "headache".I think one should narrate why he does not like one's image and try to help him up
mcliu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 15, 2007, 1:03 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Torgny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Northeast Passage 10; Gothenburg, Sweden, Northern Europe, Planet Earth, Outskirts of Milky Way, Uni
Posts: 10,042
Default

TCav

Hi, we are nothing but friends. Finding a rigor place is always good. I am about to buy a good monopod (don´t think tripods work that well in nature - what do you think?)

/T
Torgny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 15, 2007, 1:16 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
Monza76's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,093
Default

I have been following this discussion with obvious interest and I just have a couple of comments.

First of all I will not comment on razvan's shot except to say well done. Try some different crops of the image to see if there is a way to focus the viewer's attention more precisely, it is fun to see what a little variety in cropping and format can do for an image.

TCav, I appreciate your comments but a with one exception, your "tone" comes across as being authoritative rather than suggestive, I think that may be why the reactions have been a little more pointed. I like your crop of the image but this is just artistic difference, my original intent was to work with the thirds of the image and the diagonal from the stalk. Here we disagree, although, as I have already stated, I do like your crop of the image.

Thank you all for your comments.

Ira
Monza76 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 15, 2007, 1:25 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,306
Default

Hi Trogny,
Even the light and cheap tripod will be much better than the monopod. What I have noticed monopod is good for small fuction vediography.But tripod rules in still photography.Only the thing which irretates me in tripod is installation takes time & jery movement,camera will raise or down by one teeth , no finer adjement.there should be some "hydrolic system" in tripod where we could raise & lower more 'smoothly' & have the more precise control over the hight.Any engineer out here is listening.????
Now days 'optical image stabilizer' has come in camera it works well to certain extend, after that "tripod" Now you know my recommendation
mcliu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 15, 2007, 1:46 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,306
Default

OK Razvan,now you photo has been downlaoded fully.Now I can pass the comments(hope you take it contructively)
1) look at the monza 76 snap it is less crowded.and more focused on one subject,(your is too crowded,hope you understand)
2) You will see some geometric pattern on monza76 picture like diagnol stalk, accentuated by flower desending order(yours is on a stright line and too maey flowers ahs ambushed your whole composition)
So next time before you click,think a)who is the main subject?
b)what are the other elements are there which enhance the main suject?
c)Should it be the static (like dead center composition )or dynemic(like monza76 picture , little off center)
d) read lots of photography book & last and but not the least,Visit us regularly(Ha,ha, just kiddng)
mcliu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 15, 2007, 2:27 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,544
Default

Monza76 wrote:
Quote:
TCav, I appreciate your comments but a with one exception, your "tone" comes across as being authoritative rather than suggestive, I think that may be why the reactions have been a little more pointed.
I apologize if my tone offended anyone. In my first post on this topic, I both started and ended my comments by identifying them as my opinion. In my second and subsequent posts, where I was not describing the actual composition and DoF, I only indicated whatmy preferencewould have been.

These forums are an invalueable resource for all of us, not just the budding photographers in our midst, and I would be disappointed to think that my opinions might be suppressing those of others, especiallythose thatmight be more experienced or competent than I.

I have disagreed with some of the people here, but it has always been just a difference of opinion. Quite often I will find that in one topic, I will agree with (perhaps even support) the opinions of those I previously disagreed with in another topic.

These forums are for the free exchange of ideas, and if I have in any way impeded that free exchange, I apologize to you all.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:41 PM.