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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 16, 2005, 6:23 AM   #1
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

I was at a friend's house for dinner. Flash was out so I was using my 50mm f1.8.

The lighting was incandescent bulbs in whatever configuration they happened to be really and posing would have been rather intrusive on the social aspect. Everyone's fairly indulgent about me snapping photos but there is a limit.

The question really is how much can be done within those limits. I'm sure there is room for improvement and a better awareness of the circumstances which might be conducive to better pictures.

Anyway - this is my dear friend and her son.
Attached Images
 
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Mar 16, 2005, 6:24 AM   #2
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

The youngster.
Attached Images
 
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 18, 2005, 2:04 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
RodneyBlair's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 966
Default

Hmmm...two weeks ago I would have had a lot to say about your question. I realized that I'll "fit-in" if I keep it simple and agreeable. Maybe other participants can better answer your question.

It looks like you had fun.

Rodney
RodneyBlair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 18, 2005, 2:44 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Stevekin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,611
Default

RodneyBlair wrote:
Quote:
Hmmm...two weeks ago I would have had a lot to say about your question. I realized that I'll "fit-in" if I keep it simple and agreeable.
Come now Rodney, this forum was set up for you. Well not in the sense, "let's set up this forum for Rodney", but you know what I mean .

I for one do not have the talent or vision to give Peripatetic the kind of constructive criticism that he requests and that I have seen you give others. But I darn well enjoy seeing what you have to say and it would be an injustice if you did not respond to a request for a critique.

Now rip these pics to shreds, (not a slur on your pics by the way P), how are we going to learn otherwise.

Kindest,

Stevekin.

Stevekin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 18, 2005, 3:06 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
RodneyBlair's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 966
Default

Stevekin wrote:
Quote:
RodneyBlair wrote:
Quote:
Hmmm...two weeks ago I would have had a lot to say about your question. I realized that I'll "fit-in" if I keep it simple and agreeable.
Come now Rodney, this forum was set up for you. Well not in the sense, "let's set up this forum for Rodney", but you know what I mean .

I for one do not have the talent or vision to give Peripatetic the kind of constructive criticism that he requests and that I have seen you give others. But I darn well enjoy seeing what you have to say and it would be an injustice if you did not respond to a request for a critique.

Now rip these pics to shreds, (not a slur on your pics by the way P), how are we going to learn otherwise.

Kindest,

Stevekin.
LOL...Unfortunately, many share your thoughts, though I know you are only teasing.

I look at photographs differently than most of the participants here. It is either visually effective or it isn't. It doesn't matter if the subject is pretty or not...I'm strictly about the technique and the visual effectiveness.

Here, we have no visual clues to show us why the subjects are lighted they way they are. Why does the boy have unsual lighting patterns on his face and why does his mother have a highlight on her ear and no sparkle in her eyes? Possibly a wider angle would have providedthese clues for the viewer.

Rodney
RodneyBlair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 18, 2005, 3:22 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Stevekin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,611
Default

Yes I was teasing about ripping them to shreds, of course. I simply meant for you to analyze and critique in your straightforward way and as you have now responded,I offer my apologies to Peripatetic and say, the floor is yours (again) sir.

Stevekin.
Stevekin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 18, 2005, 3:36 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Mealers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 169
Default

I think this is a great effort in poor lighting conditions. Candid photography is an art in itself and although i dont think you got THE shot this time i'm pretty sure it will come soon for you.
Mealers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 18, 2005, 4:43 PM   #8
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

RodneyBlair wrote:
Quote:
I look at photographs differently than most of the participants here. It is either visually effective or it isn't. It doesn't matter if the subject is pretty or not...I'm strictly about the technique and the visual effectiveness.

Here, we have no visual clues to show us why the subjects are lighted they way they are. Why does the boy have unsual lighting patterns on his face and why does his mother have a highlight on her ear and no sparkle in her eyes? Possibly a wider angle would have providedthese clues for the viewer.

Rodney
Thanks Rodney, I appreciate the comments and they match exactly what I was thinking.

I noticed the highlight on the ear and the odd lighting on the boy's face, the fact that you picked up on them too is encouraging; I'm at least seeing the problems after the fact.

Actually the crop I did of my friend cut out a large area of bright background which probably would have dominated the frame and made it even less visually effective. (See I do listen to you :-) )

The next stage is for me to see those things before I take the shot. Sometimes it's really not possible to do any better; the lighting was as it was in the house and there are some limits to where one can stand or sit.

However I'm completely sure that if you had been there with my camera you would have come away with better pictures.

I was using a 50mm f1.8 lens which is the only lens I have which is fast enough for nighttime indoor use without a flash and on the 1.6 crop it's an 80mm equivalent. I couldn't get much background in the frame. But your comment is useful in that I see I have probably cropped too tightly nevertheless - with a tight crop we expect to see better lighting.

I was somewhat disappointed that those were just about the two best pictures I came away with. I don't post pictures here that I think are really good or ones that I think are really bad. I put the ones here where I feel they almost made it but not quite and look for help and feedback which will hopefully mean that I need to post fewer here in future.

P.S. I have never objected to your comments, and only once objected to your tone, and that was after I believe you completely misunderstood my meaning. Anyway I hope you're not still mad at me.


P.P.S. I don't mind people commenting about how beautiful a model is, but this forum is about technique. I know how beautiful this woman is, and to my disappointment this picture doesn't do her justice at all. That's why I want to learn to take better pictures.
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 18, 2005, 5:31 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
RodneyBlair's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 966
Default

peripatetic wrote:
Quote:
RodneyBlair wrote:

I look at photographs differently than most of the participants here. It is either visually effective or it isn't. It doesn't matter if the subject is pretty or not...I'm strictly about the technique and the visual effectiveness.

Here, we have no visual clues to show us why the subjects are lighted they way they are. Why does the boy have unsual lighting patterns on his face and why does his mother have a highlight on her ear and no sparkle in her eyes? Possibly a wider angle would have providedthese clues for the viewer.

Rodney
Quote:
Thanks Rodney, I appreciate the comments and they match exactly what I was thinking.

I noticed the highlight on the ear and the odd lighting on the boy's face, the fact that you picked up on them too is encouraging; I'm at least seeing the problems after the fact.

Actually the crop I did of my friend cut out a large area of bright background which probably would have dominated the frame and made it even less visually effective. (See I do listen to you :-) )

The next stage is for me to see those things before I take the shot. Sometimes it's really not possible to do any better; the lighting was as it was in the house and there are some limits to where one can stand or sit.

However I'm completely sure that if you had been there with my camera you would have come away with better pictures.

I was using a 50mm f1.8 lens which is the only lens I have which is fast enough for nighttime indoor use without a flash and on the 1.6 crop it's an 80mm equivalent. I couldn't get much background in the frame. But your comment is useful in that I see I have probably cropped too tightly nevertheless - with a tight crop we expect to see better lighting.

I was somewhat disappointed that those were just about the two best pictures I came away with. I don't post pictures here that I think are really good or ones that I think are really bad. I put the ones here where I feel they almost made it but not quite and look for help and feedback which will hopefully mean that I need to post fewer here in future.

P.S. I have never objected to your comments, and only once objected to your tone, and that was after I believe you completely misunderstood my meaning. Anyway I hope you're not still mad at me.


P.P.S. I don't mind people commenting about how beautiful a model is, but this forum is about technique. I know how beautiful this woman is, and to my disappointment this picture doesn't do her justice at all. That's why I want to learn to take better pictures.
I suspect the picture of the mother will be more visually effective with the brighter area you've cropped away. Since she is wearing a white top, the viewer will be drawn to the darkest area of the image making her face the center of interest. If the background and clothing are light tones, then the subject should be the darkest. You follow?

You can fix a little sparkele in her eye.

Rodney
RodneyBlair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 18, 2005, 6:05 PM   #10
Member
 
ThreeTikis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 32
Default

RodneyBlair wrote:
Quote:
Hmmm...two weeks ago I would have had a lot to say about your question. I realized that I'll "fit-in" if I keep it simple and agreeable. Maybe other participants can better answer your question.

It looks like you had fun.

Rodney
Rodney,

Please don't lighten up the way you critique the photos posted here. After all, the name of the forum says it all. I (and I suspect many others) have learned a great deal from your comments and I really do appreciate that you take the time to make them. You havemade this the most interesting and valuable forum by far and I'd like to say thank you.

Brady
ThreeTikis 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 10:25 PM.