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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 14, 2009, 12:37 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
pj1974's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posts: 2,914
Default Water works

Hi Critiques and Techniques friends

Here are two photos... that I'm just not sure about... if they "work" - and therefore are worth keeping, or are just a far fetched grab at something unusual for me... but that do NOT really work for anyone.

Firstly, I took this photo of a tree reflected in a little creek of water... and just love the colours (reflections often have deep colours, it seems). However maybe there is just not enough (compostion, and 'setting') to make this photo work. Your thoughts?
Attached Images
 
pj1974 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Aug 14, 2009, 12:41 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
pj1974's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posts: 2,914
Default next.....

I took a photo of something that I never have really done before... Just above the water of the creek (in the photo above) was a swarm of insects (I think mosquitos or similar little buzzing flying things) - they were a very dense swarm...

.. So I set my 100-300mm zoom lens to manual focus, and at various zoom and aperture settings, as well as me walking closer / further away, attempted to capture these. This particular photo is at 240mm zoom, aperture f7.1 (show in effect quite a narrow focal plane, as I was still fairly close to the "in focus" insects).

Does this work for you... or not! I look forward to your honest feedback.

Many Thanks!!!

Paul
Attached Images
 
pj1974 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 14, 2009, 1:56 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
musket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,782
Default

Reflections I think work well when you can see their counterparts ie the image mirrored
and because the detail is less or diffused in the reflection a wider view it seems to me
would work better as well.

Just as well there is a description for the second shot as I wouldn't have been able to
guess at what it was, it could have been bacteria growing in a lab test, the first thought
that came to mind.

Full marks for thinking outside of the box and being adventurous.....musket
musket is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 16, 2009, 9:30 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
bahadir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Izmir, Turkey
Posts: 6,263
Default

Eeerrr...To give to Caesar what is Caesar's...the colours are really eye pleasing in the first image ....yet, thought tried as hard as I could, I haven't come up with a strong abstraction, my friend As for the second one, looks like as if you hooked up your camera to a microscope! Aghh, perhaps I need a fresh eye!!!
bahadir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 16, 2009, 2:13 PM   #5
Member
 
GSFinlay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 57
Default

I've done one like the second photo. This shot was at the top of a fountain with a bed of roses in the background. These photos are pretty "hit-and-miss". Take several and find one that works.

Garry
Attached Images
 
GSFinlay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 17, 2009, 8:40 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
pj1974's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posts: 2,914
Default

Musket, thanks for your valued comments. I would never have thought about the "looking like bacteria growing" - but hey, yes now that you say it... can sort of see the connection. Thanks for looking and for your worthy critique!

--------------

Bahadir, also appreciate your thoughtful insights. I think that the "microscope" theme is also there with you. Hmmm... interesting

----------------

Hi Garry, thanks to you too, for your thoughts / refelctions (ha... pun intended!) I like your waterdrops capture... it is interesting and yes, sort of similar the level of focus / out of focus. The brilliant reds in the background make it feel vibrant.

----------

I guess from all of this, my feeling is that yes, I should generally stick with what I naturally feel I do better at - landscapes, some wildlife, etc- the more "tangible" things (at least to me) - rather than the abstract.

Makes sense... when I review my own character, and tastes, etc.

Thanks all!!! Your honesty is humbly appreciated.

Paul
pj1974 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 17, 2009, 10:28 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
bahadir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Izmir, Turkey
Posts: 6,263
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pj1974 View Post
I guess from all of this, my feeling is that yes, I should generally stick with what I naturally feel I do better at - landscapes, some wildlife, etc- the more "tangible" things (at least to me) - rather than the abstract.
Since everything can be considered a 'sign' in life consisting 'signifier' and the 'signified', taking your proven good taste, deep insight and photographic knowledge into account, please forgive me if I say yours sounds a bit much hastily and severe verdict relying on two examples only, my friend...Ah, again the good old 'practice makes perfect' rule applies!
bahadir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 17, 2009, 11:16 AM   #8
Member
 
GSFinlay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 57
Default

When judging your own photos, step back, wait a few days, then look at them printed. What looks fine on screen may look better in print. A large print often looks entirely different than a small one. Then ask others. Lots of eyes see things differently.

Garry
GSFinlay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 18, 2009, 5:02 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
pj1974's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posts: 2,914
Default

Hi Garry

Yes, I often do revisit my photos are a little while (days, weeks or sometimes months) to determine if they'll be favourites, keepers, or recycle bin material. That's good normal logic.

I only print a very small amount of photos (maybe about 0.1% or less - yes, maybe 1 in a thousand) - so I have maybe printed a few hundred photos. I don't print much because I have a good monitor, and I prefer viewing on a bright large monitor than on paper. And when I do print (even professional studio quality), I never find any changes or difference in my opinion to what I saw on screen.

It's also easier, cheaper and better for the environment for me to share my photos electronically - though yes, I do print my photos when needed (for sales, fund-raising or special requests). Also because I travel a lot, it's easier to have my photos on my USB drives or laptop than a paper portfolio- as I share photos with people in lots of places.

It's true as you wrote that often I ask others for thoughts, feedback, critique. This was one such opportunity. Different people and new eyes see differently to meine. Thanks again for what you wrote.

Paul
pj1974 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 2:27 PM.