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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 11, 2008, 10:00 AM   #31
Senior Member
 
aladyforty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,964
Default

Love the original post, the hand is ok with me. To the original poster. There is no formula for what pleases everyone so go with your own instinct. Not everyone is going to like your photo but I guarantee that with this shot more will like it as is than not. The only things Id change is I would try and take some of the red out of his ear and maybe highlight the eye just a tad more. I like the crop and I must say the model reminds me of the actor Ben stiller
aladyforty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 11, 2008, 10:31 AM   #32
Senior Member
 
RodneyBlair's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 966
Default

aladyforty wrote:
Quote:
Love the original post, the hand is ok with me. To the original poster. There is no formula for what pleases everyone so go with your own instinct. Not everyone is going to like your photo but I guarantee that with this shot more will like it as is than not. The only things Id change is I would try and take some of the red out of his ear and maybe highlight the eye just a tad more. I like the crop and I must say the model reminds me of the actor Ben stiller
I see a lot of portraits that I like and just as many that I do not like. You share pictures on the other forums for that kind of feedback. Here, it should be a critique about what makes the work effective or not effective and then share techniques to achieve the effectiveness we should expect of a portrait. Hand, no hand, is a matter of personal preference, tho in this case the hand is the COI unless it is corrected in post.

Sure, at first glance I liked the original picture...It was a nice candid, but not an effective portrait. Why do you think the Masters are who they are? It isn't because they know how to use a camera because everyone here knows that much. What they have done that we don't see alot of on here is they have trained their eyes...They know what they see and why. They know how to lead the viewer where they should be or where they want them to be.

Why would you take the natural color out of his ear? I'm a bit confused on the purpose of doing that and will it look natural to highlight just the eye? I'd like to see an edit demonstrating those modifications.

Best regards,
Rodney Blair
RodneyBlair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 11, 2008, 10:43 AM   #33
Senior Member
 
aladyforty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,964
Default

the ear is very red, are his ears normally red? The eye only need a tiny amount of extra light in my opinion. The masters also edited their photos
aladyforty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 11, 2008, 11:10 AM   #34
Senior Member
 
RodneyBlair's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 966
Default

aladyforty wrote:
Quote:
the ear is very red, are his ears normally red? The eye only need a tiny amount of extra light in my opinion. The masters also edited their photos
True that the masters do some editing. Just as with film, there is a degree of processing that is required. The masters do not do heavy processing though because they achieve most of what they are after straight out of the camera. Besides, most of them still use film.


Yes the subject's ear is normally the shade of pink that you see on the original. I've seen other images of him and the ear is the same. Caucasians generally have pinkish ears and if you throw a little chill their way they will become even darker. Anyway, you demonstrate my point about trained eyes. You can see there is something wrong with the ear because it stands out in a bad kind of way so you conclude it must be the color. The problem is not the color of the ear. Instead, it is the brightness. The ear is brighter than the front of the face so after the hand your eyes are drawn directly to the ear. I don't know why you people refuse to see the light.:-)


Best regards,
Rodney Blair

RodneyBlair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 11, 2008, 11:15 AM   #35
Senior Member
 
aladyforty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,964
Default

MMM I will agree on the brightness of the ear. As for the film masters, for years many of them spent hours in darkrooms fiddling with their prints, I see it as no different from today with the digital darkroom. Mind you I dont like over processed photos, HDR is different for instance but not something I want to see all the time
aladyforty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 11, 2008, 11:24 AM   #36
Senior Member
 
RodneyBlair's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 966
Default

aladyforty wrote:
Quote:
MMM I will agree on the brightness of the ear. As for the film masters, for years many of them spent hours in darkrooms fiddling with their prints, I see it as no different from today with the digital darkroom. Mind you I dont like over processed photos, HDR is different for instance but not something I want to see all the time
It doesn't matter how much a photo is processed as long as the end results are achieved without the processing being obvious. Everyone will have their own methods of achieving an effective portrait, but we have to know some rules about what makes a portrait effective in the first place.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

Rodney
RodneyBlair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 12, 2008, 10:16 AM   #37
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,974
Default

Learning, understanding and implementing the rules of "Portrait" photography is about that. Rules which can obviously be broken to suit the needs, likes, limitations of the photographer. Rules outside of "Portrait" photography then does not make it a "Portrait". If there were no rules of any kind then we would not have any styles, or types of photography, just grab bag variety shots which would be mostly "hit or miss". Learning and understanding (something I find a challenge in what I am trying to achieve) takes time and I found myself moving away from the PP programs and trying to achieve my desired results with the camera I am using along with some lighting (flash, modifiers, reflectors and so on).

There are many ways to use light to achieve most if not all of what you need without the use of heavy handed PP programs which basically make up for the gap that people in general are not willing to learn and grasp as far as "Portrait" photography.

I find that many PP programs do too much in the way of my desired result originally and then I need to learn something else about that program to get the result I need. In my case I don't have any real desire or need to become a PP expert.

For those one time sessions that came up impromptu or not having the best tool for the job at the moment, but it is better than nothing, then, I feel PP to be an invaluable tool.

Seeing the light in how it works with a camera and not what I see with my eye (I am blind in one eye) is a challenge for me that makes photography interesting and exciting.

We all can attest to the feeling of capturing a shot that just speaks volumes about what we are trying to portray.


vIZnquest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 12, 2008, 10:33 AM   #38
Senior Member
 
Bynx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 8,646
Default

Taking pictures is fun for me. Getting an idea of what to shoot and how to shoot it doesnt come easy. But any picture I take can be easily duplicated by anyone. Now when we take it into Photoshop it becomes mine. My unique fingerprint that others can come close to but not EXACTLY duplicate. When I take a picture I want to feel its mine and no one else's. Is that selfish or egotistical.....I suppose so so what. I dont have to please anyone but myself. I love PP as much as or even more than the photography aspect. With HDR, and now Helicon Focus, we are able to go beyond simple click. We can break the rules of optics and push the envelope of the camera. And thats something I love the idea of.
Bynx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 12, 2008, 10:57 AM   #39
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,974
Default

That is what makes things unique or more of the same. Choice of what is your preference.

Neither is right or wrong. This is subjective. What may get raves in one place may get torn up to shreds elsewhere.

All subject matter has its audience even if it is the person who took and created the capture to their liking.


vIZnquest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 12, 2008, 11:49 AM   #40
Senior Member
 
Bynx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 8,646
Default

You know, its funny. I dont believe anyone posts a photo here that they arent proud of in one way or another. They seek agreement from others that its good so they can justify their own liking for it. Sometimes this doesnt work and its a blow to their way of thinking. That being said, some people post the most god awful pics and expect some positive reply.
Bynx 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 8:58 AM.