Critique chain - post one comment two

[ScoutR]

Hi Jack, What can I say, I love this shot. You caught it at the perfect time with the contradictory expressions of the man and woman. I just love that grin on his face, it makes me wonder what he is thinking.

This looks great in B&W and the noise is not a problem at all in this shot. I might try to clone the bright spots on the ceiling and perhaps crop the sitting and kicking student to the right. The context is good, but in this case I think I would rather have just the subjects visible.

Great shot

Wendy

[ScoutR]

I can't stop myself from taking shots like this and I'd love to get some feedback on both the shot and the post processing.


Nikon D3000: 18-200mm: 1/100s: f16: ISO 200: 130mm

Wendy

[carregwen]

Thanks, Wendy. Next one does post #35 and #43.

[purplehaze]

I'm sorry to deprive Wendy of more informed commentary, but I cannot resist commenting on Jack's image. What strikes me most about it is the angles of the limbs. I see triangles everywhere--the three main figures, the spread legs, the line from the woman's head to the seated man's arm to the kicking man's leg and head and then back to the woman, and within that triangle, the one formed by the three limbs in motion (the woman's fist, the man's hand, the other man's foot). I also like how the seated man's head and torso are framed by the left side of the woman's body and his right shoulder by the other man's legs. So, for me, the third figure is integral to the shot and part of why it works. It is unfortunate that there is that other body cluttering up the shot, and maybe we could do without the group of men at the back--or maybe not. The whole shot might look posed without them. I agree with Wendy that the lights are a bit of distraction and I do not mind the noise. I am curious to know Jack, whether it was this triad that you saw in your mind's eye. I think it must be, because I just saw now that are two triangles forming a perfect square, tilted on an angle. It is quite wonderful! Congratulations.

Janis

[Donald]

Janis

That's fine, but as you can see from Rob's post (#44) the next person (you) has to crit on #35 AND 43 ... and then add one of their own for others to crit.

So, good on you for the above.... but another two posts to go.

[purplehaze]

Drat. I had just finished my critique on Wendy's post and it appears I lost it. I will post my shot and then rewrite my critique on Wendy's. Sorry to be such a slowpoke.

Janis

[purplehaze]

This image was shot a day or two after I purchased my Canon S95, before I found CiC, when I knew even less than I know now. It was taken from the third floor of the parking lot behind the building where I work. I did not shoot it in RAW, so my edits were to the JPEG. Fire away.


Janis

[purplehaze]

I can't stop myself from taking shots like this and I'd love to get some feedback on both the shot and the post processing.


Nikon D3000: 18-200mm: 1/100s: f16: ISO 200: 130mm

Wendy

Hi Wendy,

I had written a fairly coherent critique, I think, but fumbled the posting, so will have to try to retrieve it from memory.

I love the subtlety of this shot. I like the line that you have captured by your framing and perspective, the way you have placed it low to emphasize the negative space of the sky, and the fact that the horizon is barely perceptible, and fades into nothingness. Did you see a bird in flight in the line of that fence? You have nicely captured the texture of the snow drifts. The tree anchors the scene well on the right and provides a counterbalance for the emptiness of the left. Unless it is an aberration of my monitor, I see very subtle banding of colour in the sky that I like very much, suggesting something beyond the curtain of grey. The colour does not strike me as all that odd as I am sure I have seen something like it during dust storms on the prairies (we have them even in winter). The only thing I don't like is the clump of snow and mud in the righthand corner. I think that there needs to be something in that corner to counterbalance the emptiness of the left, otherwise I would feel I was just moorless, but what is there is perhaps too cluttered.

But for that one flaw, I think this is a very successful shot.

Janis

[carregwen]

Thanks, Janis, well done.

The next is comment on post #43 and #48. Janis' shot was taken with a compact Canon S95, and I think the image quality is pretty good for a compact - whoever is next might want to comment on the image quality.

[Peter Ryan]

City Reflection. This was taken through the office window when I worked in the city.
Nikon D70, f4 + 0.33EV, IS0 800 @ 1000sec.

[Peter Ryan]

I can't stop myself from taking shots like this and I'd love to get some feedback on both the shot and the post processing.


Nikon D3000: 18-200mm: 1/100s: f16: ISO 200: 130mm

Wendy

I did notice your interest in these shots lately. I gather you have left the pond.

I normally like this minimalist style of shot and you have posted some really good ones but I do not like the colour in this one. I am not sure if it is the light but as you asked for comments on PP I wonder if you played with the colour. But that is what PP is all about trying new things.

I am one who likes leading lines very much; particularly when they do not touch the sides and lead you out of the frame and the tree on the left keeps me in on that side. Having said that you got me to follow the line of the fence (and a nice twisted fence too) but I feel stranded out here not quiet knowing where to look next.

The composition and structure ticks the boxes but I am not sure there is enough in this image for me.

[Peter Ryan]

This image was shot a day or two after I purchased my Canon S95, before I found CiC, when I knew even less than I know now. It was taken from the third floor of the parking lot behind the building where I work. I did not shoot it in RAW, so my edits were to the JPEG. Fire away.


Janis

Hi Janis,

I like the look and feel of this. The exposure and colour look good. I am not sure what affect you did on post production but it has an old worldly feel to it. The angle of the shot and placement of the buildings gives some great depth and draws me down the street. The trees on the right and at the end of the street keep my eye from wondering out of the frame and allow me to wonder and explore the scene further.

The subject matter hold my attention but a real pet hate of mine is when you let the top of a building or pole, etc reach out of the frame at the top. This takes me out of the shot and loses me.

The only other thing I would do is try to straighten the buildings. The wide angle lens and angle of the shot has caused linear perspective (builgings are learning over) that needs correcting in post production. When you do this it will force the top of the building even further upwards. When you take a shot like this and know you will need to correct for linear perspective later on you need to allow at least 15% more room all around for the correction.

[carregwen]

Thanks, Peter. Well done.

Next commentator is on post #47 and #50.

[purplehaze]

...a real pet hate of mine is when you let the top of a building or pole, etc reach out of the frame at the top.

I hate when I do that too. Thanks for the tip about the 15% margin, Peter. We should compile a list of photography's magic numbers and put that one in it.

I do want to say that if anyone is hesitating about jumping into this thread, don't. Not only do you get the benefit of valuable commentary from others, but I found doing the actual critiquing to be an--it is not too much to say--exhilarating exercise. Go for it.

Janis

[carregwen]

I do want to say that if anyone is hesitating about jumping into this thread, don't. Not only do you get the benefit of valuable commentary from others, but I found doing the actual critiquing to be an--it is not too much to say--exhilarating exercise. Go for it.

Janis

Good point, Janis. Thanks.

Next commentator is on post #47 and #50.

[MiniChris]

This image was shot a day or two after I purchased my Canon S95, before I found CiC, when I knew even less than I know now. It was taken from the third floor of the parking lot behind the building where I work. I did not shoot it in RAW, so my edits were to the JPEG. Fire away.


Janis

Eastern side of Glacier National Park, Montana, USA

I took this with a point and shoot Nikon Coolpix 5700 several years ago at an Al Weber workshop at the Photographer's Formulary in Condon, MT. It really was more of a stop and shoot snapshot rather than a well planned and thought out shot. What compelled me to revisit it was my new immersion into processing in RAW...even though this was not a RAW file, CS5 allows you to open it as such and use most of the editing tools. The original shot had badly blowout highlights in the rapids and the darks in the forest areas was clipped so far to the left, when I turned on the clipping map, it glowed blue. Given what I had to work with, I think the shot has a much more acceptable quality to it now.



Though we are going back a bit in time, I've chosen not to look at the other comments so we can get this thread back on track. I think in order for it to work the way Rob intended it to, we need to stay the course without other deviations...in other words, Post one, critique two.
My first critique is for Albert Street which I find intriguing because of the seemingly upward angle, yet it is obviously shot from an upper floor looking down. It reminds me of the "optical illusion" houses.
I don't like the top cropped out and I think the sky is a bit blownout and perhaps a little less foreground would help to draw the eye closer to a more centered point. I probably wouldhave cropped or cloned out the back end of the red car.
All in all, however, the unusual angle really makes this photograph an eye catcher.

My second critique is Peter Ryan's Reflection shot. I have always been a real fan of reflections and this one is no exception though I think it is slightly blowout in the "regular" area while the reflection is quite perfect. Perhaps a better blending of the two would keep the eye more focused or directed. The fore and background buildings do a great job of framing and holding the reflection in place.

Next critique should be for mine and Peter Ryan's.

[Klickit]

City Reflection. This was taken through the office window when I worked in the city.
Nikon D70, f4 + 0.33EV, IS0 800 @ 1000sec.

Peter, I like this a lot. You have framed the older, more complex building beautifully between the two more modern and simple structures, giving us a nice time-frame feel. The top area reflecting the sky and the bottom showing some tree tops and tree reflections grounds the image nicely. The colour looks good and natural to me and the exposure too. My only slight hesitation is in the choice of the white frame, as I feel it is a little too close to the white of the buildings and doesn't offer a good contrast. I think for this image I'd prefer to see a grey or black outer frame. But that is purely a personal reflection.

P.S. Like Wendy, I don't feel very qualified to critique other's images, but this is a good opportunity to practise.

[Klickit]

Eastern side of Glacier National Park, Montana, USA

I took this with a point and shoot Nikon Coolpix 5700 several years ago at an Al Weber workshop at the Photographer's Formulary in Condon, MT. It really was more of a stop and shoot snapshot rather than a well planned and thought out shot. What compelled me to revisit it was my new immersion into processing in RAW...even though this was not a RAW file, CS5 allows you to open it as such and use most of the editing tools. The original shot had badly blowout highlights in the rapids and the darks in the forest areas was clipped so far to the left, when I turned on the clipping map, it glowed blue. Given what I had to work with, I think the shot has a much more acceptable quality to it now.

This one is a bit tricky to critique. Given that it is a snapshot, rather than a carefully thought out image, I'm guessing that you'd like comment on the post work, rather than the composition? If this was blown out in the rapids, you have done a very good job of dragging detail back into the light shot as there are no blown out areas at all. Likewise the wooded areas - there is very little black clipping and what is there is confined to some very small dots in amongst the trees to the left (as we viewit). What would improve this pp would be some more work on the area to the right at the top, where there are trees and rocks behind. Although not clipped, this area is very dark overall and lacking detail. Some selection and brightening or judicious dodge work might bring more detail out to make a more balanced and satisfying image.

P.S. Like Wendy, I don't feel very qualified to critique other's images, but this is a good opportunity to practise.

[Klickit]

Still Life.

This is my entry for critique. It is a textured image, rather than a straight out photo. I aimed for a sort of classic old painting look/feel in a modern context.

[rob marshall]

Please do not use this thread any more - it has been replaced by this one Comment one - post one. A practice thread for comment and criticism.