Music is my life - C&C Welcome

[baillie117]

I recently took this photo while on a photo walk. I tried different angles but I liked this one the best. Comments and criticisms welcome. Always looking to improve. Thanks.

[Andrew76]

I like it. I think you've done a good job with the conversion, and I love the focus point. Also, technically it's a strong image, with leading lines, and a good composition. BUT, for some reason, it's just not holding my attention, and I'm not sure why that is.

Maybe someone else will chime in, and my little light bulb will light up!

Nice photo!

[Shadowman]

Very nice, different angles usually work and it did here.

[jcuknz]

I moved the whole page across until the left edge was a bit to the left of his ear ... immediately I wanted to crop some off the right to balance ... can be summed up as ''Big Head" or 'Too Big a Head" ... can live with the softness of less head but dissapointed by the softness at the far end of the violin.

OK OK I KNOW! centre of interest dead centre ... but sometimes the RoT can go jump in the lake and this is one of those situations


So I did a loose 'Freehand selection' around the end of the violin and got this by sharpening ....


I think perhaps that was wrong and I should have blurred it a bit as 'as is' is neither sharp nor blurred .... shades of USM .. it seems to get sharper the more blurr I add ... unless it is my eyes playing up.

[Mike Buckley]

The first one is nearly perfect for me. The composition and depth of field tell a story that this person is probably alone, making music for himself and that he is concentrating on where and how the bow goes across the strings. Even if he is not literally alone, the image conveys that he is lost in his music, so he is figuratively alone. (The suggested crops eliminate the feeling of being alone or at least provide the possibility that he is not alone.)

The one suggestion you might want to consider is making the brightest part of the violin the area immediately underneath where the bow meets the strings. That might not be possible, and if not, try making the brightest area the bridge and the body of the violin at the bridge. The idea is that the eye is generally attracted to the brightest area, and that's the area that you probably want the viewer to see first.

[baillie117]

Thanks everyone for the help. The original photo, of course, is in color and much sharper. You can actually read the name of the violin and also "Made in France" underneath. I kind of hated losing that but when I ran it through Perfect Black & White, it became somewhat grungy in appearance. But I also felt the gritty feel gave the musician more of an alone look. I couldn't make up my mind if I wanted to lose the sharpness on his hand. I have another photo with just the violin and his hand which definitely lends to keeping it sharp. I think, Mike, you know what I'm going for in brightening up the violin under the bow and strings. I can look at doing that. I basically ran it through the B&W process without any tweaking. So I believe that would still be possible. I edit through LR or CS6 so I always have the possibility of starting over. Thanks so much for the thoughts and advice.

[baillie117]

If you come up with why it's not holding your attention, I'm all ears. :-)

[jcuknz]

. I edit through LR or CS6 so I always have the possibility of starting over. Thanks so much for the thoughts and advice.

You can start over with any editor if you follow the practice of saving and protecting the original camera file, the precious negative in film terms, and saving whatever you work on with a slightly different name so that the 'save' does not overwrite the camera original.
So you don't need LR or PS to do this, just a good way of working with whatever programme you use. Last night I was working on files from 2005 and reducing them for web use and at each 'save as' I added the letter W which is my way of indicating the file is a reduced sized web-file ... Your photo went into 'My Pictures' folder, which contains none of my files , and my adjustment had Z added to your title and second adjustment ZZ. I'm sure others have their personal solutions

[Stagecoach]

It's the original for me and the DoF is just fine and drawing my attention into the significant part, the bow making music.

[jcuknz]

If you come up with why it's not holding your attention, I'm all ears. :-)

Original is too loose ... what came out of the camera although you took care in positioning the camera, the camera format doesn't always suit the final image.

[Mike Buckley]

Original is too loose

What does that mean? I've never seen that term used in the context of photography or visual art.

[AB26]

Hi Cindy,

An interesting image that is almost photography journal material.

Interesting comment from John “the original is to loose”. I think what he means is the empty space behind the head of the violinist makes him “loose” from the object of the image.
The man in the image is detached from the violin by not showing the arm and hand holding the bow. If portrait mode was used it would have showed the arm and hand and it would have made the journal.

The bow is “hanging” in the image, who is holding it? The crop John did makes more sense of the image. Losing the dark line in the right hand upper corner will further enhance the image.

The focal point is perfect imho and the B&W is stunning for this shot.

[Mike Buckley]

I don't need the musician's arm or hand that is holding the bow to be included in the photo, perhaps because I have seen thousands of musicians over decades of going to concerts. As an example, I'm not missing that from this photo being sold at Shutterstock. Similarly, though not exactly the same, despite that this famous photo of Pablo Casals made by Yousuf Karsh provides so little connection between the instrument and the musician, I know instantly that he is playing a cello. Just my opinion.

[baillie117]

Thank you for helping with the "loose" comment. I would have been googling like crazy. Often times I take a landscape and a portrait shot. I don't do it in all circumstances but it usually pays to do both for just this reason. I didn't like the darkness in the upper right hand corner. This became more prominent after the B&W processing.

[baillie117]

Thanks, again, everyone. This is exactly why I love being a part of the CIC forums. You have all made me think harder about my composition. I took at least 6 or 8 photos of this gentleman that day. I made a donation for his music and then asked if he minded my taking his picture. He was quite nice. I even caught one of him tapping his foot in time to the music. A bit more blur on that one might have been nice to show movement. I like the photos with his face but I kept being drawn to the ones that focused more on his violin and hands. And oddly, Andre, I have almost an identical photo of the one you referred to at Shutterstock. I have a hard time believing I have a good "eye" for a photo but thanks to you guys, I'm not going to give up any time soon.

[AB26]

And oddly, Andre, I have almost an identical photo of the one you referred to at Shutterstock.

Cindy it was Mike, not me. Thanks to Mike.

There is no shame in surfing the WEB to see what others do and then do the "Monkey see, Monkey do" thing. You develop your own style and own ideas, learning from others.
Never give up, it only gets better and better.

[baillie117]

Cindy it was Mike, not me. Thanks to Mike.

There is no shame in surfing the WEB to see what others do and then do the "Monkey see, Monkey do" thing. You develop your own style and own ideas, learning from others.
Never give up, it only gets better and better.

Oops, my bad. Sorry Andre and thank you, Mike. One of my favorite photographers is Vivian Cherry, who I believe is in her 90's. Nice to know I have many more years to improve!

[jcuknz]

Loose or tight is an approach to photography which some learn and appreciate but many do not. I frequently believe that images originating from DSLRs by the very nature of their ability to record fine detail seem to encourage photographers to remain loose, as did LF shooters in film days. Whereas with my background and interest in motion picture work in the past where cropping is not an option, along with working with smaller gauges, I developed the inclination to shoot tight, concentrating on the essentials. The film-maker also normally takes more than one shot to tell a story whereas the still photographer tends to 'get it all in'.

Cropping is a still photographers luxury and need becuase the 3:2 or 5:4 format often simply doesn't suit the subject material .... then there is a reluctance to change the camera from 'landscape' to 'portrait'. Less needed with the 5:4 camera but an essential part of shooting with 3:2. But against that is focus/ depth of field problems in coming in close. The professional photographer not knowing how his client will use the image might also deliberately shoot 'loose'.
But after a lifetime of shooting with smaller equipment where to maintain image quality it is essential to shoot what you want in the camera I am continually looking for the essentials in any image.

[jcuknz]

I am sure that if the Karsh photo came up for a crit without it being known who shot it the window would be questioned.... also the apauling presentation of it on the website ... to see the whole image I had to reduce to 50% and the huge amount of white surrounding the dark image was dreadful. Some people simply do not appreciate presentation in the electronic age.