snubbr.com

Show a pic and I'll critique!
You probably noticed that there is no real critique in these fora. Either an image gets unnoticed, or it gets a lot of "nice". Does not really help a beginner with the true thing he bought a camera for: pictures..

I decided to donate some time for that purpose. So, post your images and you'll get a honest opinion, not unlikely what you'll get in a photoclub..

Rules:.

1. All images posted must comply with the DPReview policies;2. Images MUST be posted in the message. I won't click links;3. Image size must be decent. Not to big, not to small;4.

I said I wanted to donate SOME time;.

5. Understand you'll receive an honest critique. If you can't cope with it, don't request it..

6. Try to post images in reply to THIS message - the original post. It's easier to follow..

Go ahead, make my day!..

Comments (145)

Who died and made you the resident expert?.

Johnny.

Http://www.flickr.com/photos/latitudes/..

Comment #1

JohnnyBlood wrote:.

Who died and made you the resident expert?.

Your submission is intriguing. It tries to combine irony with offence. I suggest black and white would yield better results in wittyness...

Comment #2

Devnull,.

Have a go with this one - don't know if it's my best side + no wise cracks about my tail end missing!.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Regards....Caster.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #3

Caster the Dog wrote:.

Devnull,.

Have a go with this one - don't know if it's my best side + no wisecracks about my tail end missing!.

Caster,.

I believe you are cheating a bit - it ain't exactly a beginner's photo. .

The panning is very good, maybe a bit shorter exposure time would have helped..

As you said, the composition might have been beter - first, the tail, second, MAYBE giving it a bit more space to run into. Considering the panning, it's good..

Overall, there is a good feel of speed and dynamics..

It looks as a bland day. I think I would have tries to bring the colors back a bit, that would have echoed nicely the dynamic feeling. I feel it would improve the image quite a bit..

Another two other suggestions:- shooting from a lower point - but I don't know how the background was;.

- shooting from another angle, frontal for eye contact or slanted to get more of the dog..

Anyhow, it's a good image overall. Sorry about the tail .

/d/n.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Regards....Caster.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #4

Who do you class as a beginner?..I've had my D40 for 4 months now and am still learning. Critique is always fun so I'll give it a go. No need to be gentle ^^..

#1. /f13 1/5s ISO200.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

I took this pic on a very windy day by the sea, my 20euro tripod could barely hold up my camera so most of my shots were quite bad, I do like this one tho. It is cropped quite a bit from the original. I know you sed no links but heres one for the original if you get interested.http://www.flickr.com/.../photos/aldor88/2158964616/in/set-72157603198157687/.

#2 /f11 1/250s ISO 200.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Im pretty happy with the colours on this one, just not totally sure about the composition..

Hope you enjoy the pictures, have fun ..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Http://www.flickr.com/photos/14807929@N05..

Comment #5

Devnull,.

Thanks for time + interesting to hear your comments..

Photo was a single shot taken whilst panning - so another good learning point for photoing fast moving objects (if you've got the time to adjust camera) is to use continuous shutter release - might have actually got one of shots with all tail in that way!.

Good luck with critiqueing of others - could be busy!.

Regards....Caster.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #6

Aldor wrote:.

Who do you class as a beginner?..I've had my D40 for 4 months now andam still learning. Critique is always fun so I'll give it a go. Noneed to be gentle ^^..

I have a feeling that the sensitive people are those to whom I have nasty things to say about their images .

#1. /f13 1/5s ISO200.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

I took this pic on a very windy day by the sea, my 20euro tripodcould barely hold up my camera so most of my shots were quite bad, ido like this one tho. It is cropped quite a bit from the original. Iknow you sed no links but heres one for the original if you get.

Interested.http://www.flickr.com/.../photos/aldor88/2158964616/in/set-72157603198157687/.

There is little fuss around here, so I did click the link..

Original: good, except for the lower left stone which kind of breaks the composition. Difficult lighting, probably a good candidate for HDR, but that's a different story..

Posted image: I like the conversion, I like the strong diagonal, I like the crop. What I don't like is that the horizon SEEMS tilted. I did check, and Photoshop suggest 0.23-0.26 rotation correction... which should not be visible. The bad part is that now I am obsessed with the horizon, and I am not very happy with my rotation either..

So, a strong iimage, good ideea to make it BW in order to avoid the dynamic range problems (which appear in the original)..

Impressive..

#2 /f11 1/250s ISO 200.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Im pretty happy with the colours on this one, just not totally sureabout the composition..

Agree about the colors. However the image is not as strong as the other. The pier is cut a bit to short, it just protrudes in the image. The other side of the pond does not add to the image, there is a haggle between the vertical pillar in the foreground and the slanted ones in the lake. I do like the reflections though..

It gets a bit busy where the timber overlaps the lake pillars and also the far shore. A good snap, but I wouldn't frame it on my wall. The other one is quite a strong image..

Hope you enjoy the pictures, have fun ..

Yep. Actually I am pleasantly surprised, I kind of expected flash pictures of dogs and cats ..

Comment #7

... as I would be interested for some opinion on this shot..

I'm not a beginner either (had my K100D for nearly a year, and various 35mm film SLRs for about 30 years before that)... BUT this is the first time I have attempted any significant PP-ing of a picture to get the specific effect I wanted. A whole new (and potentially very interesting) ballgame. As will be obvious I darkened the distracting background to extinction, and reduced everything to monochrome except the sax, after a lot of cursing and fiddling with the magnetic lassoo tool. It was lit with a single flash bounced off the ceiling. Do you think it works?.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Mike..

Comment #8

Mike703 wrote:.

... as I would be interested for some opinion on this shot..

You asked for it .

I'm not a beginner either (had my K100D for nearly a year, andvarious 35mm film SLRs for about 30 years before that)... BUT this isthe first time I have attempted any significant PP-ing of a pictureto get the specific effect I wanted. A whole new (and potentiallyvery interesting) ballgame. As will be obvious I darkened thedistracting background to extinction, and reduced everything tomonochrome except the sax, after a lot of cursing and fiddling withthe magnetic lassoo tool. It was lit with a single flash bounced offthe ceiling. Do you think it works?.

I am afraid it does not work for me. But let's take it apart..

Technically, the sax isolation is quite good - except I believe I see some monchrome bleeding into the sax near the thumb. I have a feeling you only used the lasso type selection tools, not masks and brushes or feathering - just by looking at that monochrome band..

Now, aestethically. First, I don't see what the photo is about. Cropping is to tight to the left and up. I am not at all interested in the strap or the texture on the sweater. I would have also touched up the skin.The sax appears to be pasted..

So, to resume: cropping to tight, photo does not speak to me, can't see the logic of the color/monochrome effect, too many unneeded details, pasted appearance. Nope..

Suggestions to improve that picture:.

Don't exaggerate with the background burning. I am not sure if it was like that or if it was you, but the sweater fades quite nicely in the background. Use this kind of fading. Don't darken the background to black. Leave it a bit gray. If necessary blur it..

Remove the details. Strap, sweater. I'd add as well the skin to the fade list. I think the best impression would be a silhouetted player emergng from the background with only a few details on the face. Vignette a bit the lower left corner..

It's not very empathic, either. Probably because the eyes are completely masked.Of course, that would completely change the composition..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Mike..

Comment #9

Witty.  .

Tim'Be the change you wish to see in the world.' -Mahatma Gandhihttp://www.flickr.com/photos/timskis6/..

Comment #10

How do you post an image in the message box?..

Comment #11

I don't know how to post the image into this message box, so here's the link..

Http://www.flickr.com/photos/sheldont/2258833800/.

Thank you for your comments. I was trying out the technique brought to my attention on dpreview about highlights using spot metering and this got my attention..

Let me try this to see if this will bring the picture in..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #12

I hope this works. This started out as a 23mb file and was reduced to 3mb to satisfy flickr rules..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #13

Sheldon Teicher wrote:.

I don't know how to post the image into this message box, so here'sthe link..

It seems you know .

Http://www.flickr.com/photos/sheldont/2258833800/.

Thank you for your comments. I was trying out the technique broughtto my attention on dpreview about highlights using spot metering andthis got my attention..

Well, you did find a colorfull subject and good light. And used the spot metering quite good..

Unfortunately, the rest of the image is not impressive at all. Way too cluttered. You need the isolate the subject much better - using either composition or depth of field..

You did control the exposure quite nicely. Do the same with the composition  On this image you can't tell a flower from another - and I did look at the large image..

Let me try this to see if this will bring the picture in..

It did .

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #14

Thank you for your comments. I really appreciate that you took the time to look at the photo. I agree that the composition is lacking, but my objective was to see if I could prevent blown Highlights and as such was interested in getting the most brightness in the picture...

Comment #15

A couple for me...I've had my K10d for over a year now but still think there's alot to learn. These are a couple I took two days ago. Not sure exactly what doesn't work with them but I think they're missing something..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Http://picasaweb.google.com/chrswgglhttp://www.dreamstime.com/resp514474..

Comment #16

I usually don't have to go to Europe for folks to critique my shots but I read some of your comments and agreed with most of them. So here goes, I'll give you 2 to comment on..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Olympus E-510 and a bunch of stuff to hang on it...

Comment #17

Chrswggl wrote:.

A couple for me...I've had my K10d for over a year now but stillthink there's alot to learn. These are a couple I took two days ago.Not sure exactly what doesn't work with them but I think they'remissing something..

Let's give it a try .

First, I don't like the frames. Too dark. And the fact that the black looks proportional to the image dimension does not help. I am not a very good frame creator myself... so maybe it's a matter of taste..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Hmmm. I believe here some of the problem is due to the out of focus portions in front of the focusing plane - lower left mostly. I am not very experienced in detail photography (a bit short of macro), but I think the way to go is identify an interesting structure, keep it in the depth of field, and don't obscure it things in front. Maybe some lateral light would have helped - natural or flash. Another suggestion would be try a warmer white balance..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

This is way to dar, due to the frame and to the image itself. Then, I am not sure if what I see in some of the twigs is bad bokeh or motion blur, but I don't like it. You have much better subject isolation in this one, but there are twigs and branches and stuff growing in and out of the frame..

First one is better, and I think if there were no objects out of focus in front of the focus plane it would have been at least a wallpaper candidate...

Comment #18

Maddogmd11 wrote:.

I usually don't have to go to Europe for folks to critique my shotsbut I read some of your comments and agreed with most of them. Sohere goes, I'll give you 2 to comment on..

Okay, here it goes!.

The fortress by the lake. Mixed feelings. The place is nice, but it appear difficult to photograph - at least looking at the picture. A "good" picture I imagine would have been closer and wider, to emphasize the building and get rid of the plants in the left, which aren't really helping. However, hard to do without a boat.  So, let's focus on the image..

The shoreline and forestline create a strong curve, which leads the eye. Unfortunately, the line is lost, and the eye stops and looks around. The image is not very sharp, and could use some contrast. Also, I'd crop most of the sky, even if that means loosing the gap in the clouds..

I don't know the reason, but the building does not look vertical, and that makes the picture a bit tilted. Could be the wide angle, could be the fortress itself... Maybe you should give the eye a vertical or horizontal to cling to..

The grass in the left looks too vivid to me (yes, calibrated monitor). Probably a polarizer or graduated ND filter on the sky would have allowed for a better sky. Or a bit of postprocessing..

The hills. It's a totally diferent story. Magnificent place and perspective. There are two things which I don't like here, but the rest is good..

I feel that you should have included a bit more scenery to the left. And, second, the colors are a bit hard to follow..

If I was to guess, I'd blame the usage of film without a skylight or UV filter. Or a hazy day without a polarizer on digital - but I am not sure. I see warmth in the foreground, some sun in the middle and haze in the background. I'd also add a bit of sharpen..

Except for the colors (which are not really far off) and my composition preference (more to the left) I'd rate this as a very good. It's definitely print material, as it is..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Olympus E-510 and a bunch of stuff to hang on it...

Comment #19

Boy. The idea of picking only two images is a good exercise in and of itself! You have to do a lot of reflection just to come up with two you think are worthwhile..

In my case, I'm planning to save the second critique for later, if that's ok. Looking through my computer I see many that I like but no more that I want an outside opinion on, yet..

Sadly I don't know of a free image hosting service that will let me do full-resolution, or I would have put it up..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #20

Look forward to your comments.Richard.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/richardspencer..

Comment #21

Thanks for the comments. I don't disagree with much that you said. I couldn't do much with the first pic "The Ruins". I actually took it through a window of a moving bus in Ireland. Sometimes you just take what you get. Given the "technical approach" to the shot I was actually very pleased..

The second shot is one of my favorites. Its in Germany. It actually was very hazy that day and I wish I had a polarizing filter which I didn't with me. That will teach me a lesson..

I have actually printed both shots and they look better printed then on a monitor. The first I did with a "metalic" finish and the second on canvas..

Thanks for the comments. I would really like a "critique" forum as well except some folks at DPreview believe it is necessary to slam anything that isn't their idea of perfection..

I found your comments very constructive and helpful, particularly to beginners. I have already learned that I need to be honest with what I am looking at, particularly if I took it so I had already thought of much of what you suggested but I very much appreciate the manner in which you said it..

Thanks.

Maddog.

Olympus E-510 and a bunch of stuff to hang on it...

Comment #22

I hope this is a better composition. Thanks for your input..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #23

I took another shot, trying to undo the clutter and make a better composition. I hope I'm getting it. Here it is..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #24

This was taken with a Canon S400 (4MP). Not too much post processing on it. What do you think?.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Coolpix 950, 4500, P5000, D50, Canon 250D, 500D, 50mm/1.8, 105VR, 18-200VR, 70-300VR, Sigma 10-20.CATS member>^..^<#31WSSA member#40 ( Head Squirrel)PAS Charter member #5MAA memberhttp://www.pbase.com/thegaber.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #25

These are two of my first attempts at a bike race..

The first one I was trying to get an image with a more interesting back ground. It probably could use some cropping..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

For this one I realize there is a harsh shadow on the riders face. But I don't know how well a flash would have worked from across the street where I was..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

If anyone is interested a few are posted on our teams website..

Http://www.auburn.edu/auburn_flyers/Pictures.html..

Comment #26

Not unless you have a Ph.D. in photo criticism...

Comment #27

Here you go....thanks.

I have a Canon 40d, 50mm f1.4.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #28

My turn ....

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #29

This is the best shot I've seen here on DPReview in months!!!.

The crop is wonderful. I love everything about this picture. There's so much drama here. If I weren't a photographer myself, I would want this framed and printed as large as possible to put on my living room wall so I could see it every day. I'm being totally honest. Most of the stuff posted here (especially the annoying here's my dog, here's my kid, shots) are just so *YAWN*....

This is the real deal man. This is AWESOME! I love this picture and I'm going to be studying it so that when I get to the ocean I can try to look for the elements that I think make this such a powerful, dramatic shot..

You seriously need to find a way to publish this photo. It really is incredible and challenges me to do better. And frankly, I don't know that I can..

WELL DONE!!!!.

Aldor wrote:.

#1. /f13 1/5s ISO200.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

I took this pic on a very windy day by the sea, my 20euro tripodcould barely hold up my camera so most of my shots were quite bad, ido like this one tho. It is cropped quite a bit from the original. Iknow you sed no links but heres one for the original if you get.

Interested.http://www.flickr.com/.../photos/aldor88/2158964616/in/set-72157603198157687/..

Comment #30

I think this is the 2nd best shot so far on the thread. You have an incredible eye and positioning yourself where you did was really a satisfying look at this scene. I love it. It wouldn't go up in the livingroom, but it would go up. WELL DONE!.

Gaber wrote:.

This was taken with a Canon S400 (4MP). Not too much postprocessing on it. What do you think?.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #31

Czeglin wrote:.

Boy. The idea of picking only two images is a good exercise in and ofitself! You have to do a lot of reflection just to come up with twoyou think are worthwhile..

Yep. That's part of the idea. Another part is that I'll have maximum 150 images to comment on... and it's hard work... .

In my case, I'm planning to save the second critique for later, ifthat's ok. Looking through my computer I see many that I like but nomore that I want an outside opinion on, yet..

Sadly I don't know of a free image hosting service that will let medo full-resolution, or I would have put it up..

It's better to keep it smaller. I believe that some images indeed look much better when printed poster size, but in most cases, the small version should look good enough, too..

To your image..

Abstract. Ok. Good diagonal composition, without being a perfect diagonal or a 45 degree. The texture is interesting, indeed..

However, if it's not AdobeRBG, it lacks impact. First, there are no shadows. It's not necessarily bad, because shadows might have deranged the pattern. But they would have also added contrast. It can be easily fixed by adding some contrast one or other way and/or by making it black and white. I am not sure which will do better, probably depending on the bw conversion.

Also some sharpening might do..

I am also thinking about depth of field. It's nice. I would also try two other possibilites: deeper DOF with the same compositon, or quite a lot shallower at a sharper angle..

Verdict: good eye, good composition, but needs some touching up to make it stand up..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #32

Richard the picture man wrote:.

Look forward to your comments..

Sure. Overall I don't like any of the two pictures posted. Let's analyze them and see why, ok?.

Richard.

The glass. Well, the good thing here is that the glass is not horrizontally alligned to the middle of the image. Vertically... it is. Compositionally, I'd say that it has no air to breathe. It also has a very over-cropped look around it.

I'd suggest the best angle to photograph a glass is the best angle to look at it. And that would be the angle you look at a glass when a high-class waiter produces it on a tray. A bit more from above..

The background is too dark and does not flatter the subject. I believe you choose the black in order to enhance the light effects. It did not work. I'd go for white or light gray..

Ligthing problems are also magnified by the dark background. Actually, it looks like a bad flash job. And a flare from the glass leg. For this kind of shots I'd use either a continous light or the flash modeling light, to see how it looks..

The wine/brandy in the glass does not shine, due both to the dark background and flash reflections..

The glass image edges looks soft - and that's precisely what you want to look sharp..

So, no..

The horsey. (Is that a horse? where's his mane?).

Here you do have better light. But the composition is not very good. The angle is quite bad. The head is straight in the middle of the image. The angles make me want to hang my coat on it - see the resemblance with a coat hanger? The background is cluttered. There is no eye contact, and due to the composition, the horse does not look _somewhere_..

Horsewise, I'd try two things. Either the kind of profile portrait you attepted - but, please, be level with the horse. Or, from a lower, near ground point, but get the horse interested. An apple or carrot or some sugar will get you eye contact and a very keen model. And check your background..

For both images, think of what gives your subject it's personality. Glass of drink, I'd say warmth, cozyness. Horse, it could be the noble beast, dynamic animal, friend of man, etc..

Http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/richardspencer..

Comment #33

Gaber wrote:.

This was taken with a Canon S400 (4MP). Not too much postprocessing on it. What do you think?.

A good image with one or maybe two weak points. Decomposition:.

You identified a very promising image. The forest with some fog, one tree of different color. Very very good. Best mark in subject identification..

The colors are ok-good. I feel the grass in the right is too vivid and the red leaves a bit too muted, but that's easy to fix..

The perspective is also very good. What I am not happy with is the crop on the foremost trees, right and left. I feel I should either see more of them, or that the crop should be a bit lower. It's a bit like a person. You can cut/crop/compose at the knees, but not at the ankles..

Of course, I don't know what the situation was in the field or if you could get a bit wider..

On the touching up side, I'd fix the colors I was saying about and maybe sharpen the red tree a bit. The sharpening it's a matter of interpretation..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Coolpix 950, 4500, P5000, D50, Canon 250D, 500D, 50mm/1.8, 105VR,18-200VR, 70-300VR, Sigma 10-20.CATS member>^..^<#31WSSA member#40 ( Head Squirrel)PAS Charter member #5MAA memberhttp://www.pbase.com/thegaber..

Comment #34

Cianci66 wrote:.

These are two of my first attempts at a bike race..

My attempts on your attempts .

The first one I was trying to get an image with a more interestingback ground. It probably could use some cropping..

Good try at improving the background. Yep, you could crop off a bit of the left and bottom, but still leave the cyclist enough space to run into..

A clever trick you might try is flip the image - that is unless there is some readable text or logos on the rider. We are conditioned by our reading classes to "read" a image left to right. Here, the action goes the other way, so that might be a thing to consider..

Now, what I don't like is the way the second biker is cut. I don't think you can crop it off, the whole feeling of a race/more riders would be lost..

The image also does not feel level. It could be, but you could use something to indicate that - a horizontal or vertical..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

For this one I realize there is a harsh shadow on the riders face.But I don't know how well a flash would have worked from across thestreet where I was..

Nope, I think the light is ok. There are two things I don't like, one objective, one subjective. The obvious one is the cut off foot of the second rider..

The subjective one... is about what you consider the subject in this image. If it's the race, ok. But I believe that using a shallower DOF you could have made the first biker the subject, and make it stand out more. Also, the cut off foot might be less disturbing. Ditto for the helmets growing from the first rider's head..

The framing of the first biker is good, it has some space to go into, it goes left to right (remember?), and there is definitely a feeling of determination in the picture. The colors are very good. Maybe the background could be a bit less cluttered..

It's a better image than the first one..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

If anyone is interested a few are posted on our teams website..

Http://www.auburn.edu/auburn_flyers/Pictures.html..

Comment #35

Devnull wrote:.

I am afraid it does not work for me. But let's take it apart..

Thanks for the comments. You're a hard taskmaster .

Technically, the sax isolation is quite good - except I believe I seesome monchrome bleeding into the sax near the thumb. I have a feelingyou only used the lasso type selection tools, not masks and brushesor feathering - just by looking at that monochrome band..

Yes. Well spotted. Fortunately that is something I can easily fix. I don't think feathering would work here: I don't want a gradual transition in colour between monochrome and gold which would spoil the isolation of the sax..

Now, aestethically. First, I don't see what the photo is about.Cropping is to tight to the left and up. I am not at all interestedin the strap or the texture on the sweater. I would have also touchedup the skin..

We're stuck with the strap; young players are supposed to use one to prevent neck / back problems (tenor saxes are fairly heavy) and I doubt I could clone it out convincingly. Blurring the texture on the sweater is a good idea and easy to try..

The sax appears to be pasted..

It isn't... that REALLY would be beyond my PP skills.

So, to resume: cropping to tight, photo does not speak to me, can'tsee the logic of the color/monochrome effect..

The colour/monochrome effect works for me. In full colour the picture has much less impact: the young man has quite a highly coloured complexion and the bright pink skin clashes with, and diverts attention from, the colour of the sax. The player definitely looks better in mono... but then you lose the lovely gold colour of the instrument. The player is focussing all his attention on his instrument, and I want to bring that out by drawing the viewers attention to it as well..

Suggestions to improve that picture:Don't exaggerate with the background burning. I am not sure if it waslike that or if it was you, but the sweater fades quite nicely in thebackground. Use this kind of fading..

No it wasn't me, much as I would like to take the credit for it. But I did deliberately put him in a dark top so that his body would not stand out as much as his face and the instrument, and this is a consequence. Worth bearing in mind for future efforts..

Don't darken the background toblack. Leave it a bit gray. If necessary blur it.Remove the details. Strap, sweater. I'd add as well the skin to thefade list. I think the best impression would be a silhouetted playeremergng from the background with only a few details on the face.Vignette a bit the lower left corner..

The background is unfortunately a rather distracting geometric curtain pattern (difficult to get a plain background in a crowded house...) and needed obliterating. It didn't occur to me to blur it and leave it gray rather than black: good idea which I'll try. Also the vignetting..

It's not very empathic, either. Probably because the eyes arecompletely masked.Of course, that would completely change the composition..

Yup. This was the main problem. This young man ALWAYS blinks when a flash fires (I suspect it is the pre-flash on my P-TTL system), and having half-closed 'lazy' eyes spoils the shot completely. So I carefully positioned him so that the frames of his spectacles obscured his eyes: the lesser of two evils. I wanted him in profile to make the most of the shape of the instrument which is an important part of the composition. May be if his specs were off, and I asked him to close his eyes to start with, it would help...



Thanks again for the detailed comments and several useful suggestions..

Best wishesMike..

Comment #36

NCara wrote:.

Here you go....thanks.

Those look to me more like family pictures. Hard for a stranger to comment. But let's give it a try....

First, both picture look underexposed. That is, the kid looks underexposed. It's up to you if the exposure needs correction or not..

On both images I also see problems with focusing. Maybe it's a focus problem, due to thin depth of field, maybe it's just a sharpening problem. Usually in this kind of pictures I'd like to see sharp eyes..

I have a Canon 40d, 50mm f1.4.

First image. Underexposed. Focus issue. I don't like at all the blurry grass in the foreground - it distracts. Could be a white balance problem, but I think the pink reflects on the kid's face and creates strange skin tones. Eyes not sharp.Subject way too centered, blanket cut at sides..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

This one is better. Same problem with the eyes and exposure. Note how the lack of out of focus foreground adds to the image here, as oposed to the previous one. I'd prefer the right corner of the blanket not to be cut..

Both images could beenfit from some fill flash..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #37

With all due respect, can you please provide some detail of your background. Nothing wrong with your offer to assist beginners, but I think it's fair that if you are going to critique other peoples work you provide some detail of you expertise and maybe some work of your own. I think these people have a right to know a bit about the person critiquing their work. I am not having a go, just curious considering your offering your time to look and make comment. I can only assume you have a professional or semi professional background.Canon 40D24-105L17-40L70-200L..

Comment #38

Dave73 wrote:.

With all due respect, can you please provide some detail of yourbackground. Nothing wrong with your offer to assist beginners, but Ithink it's fair that if you are going to critique other peoples workyou provide some detail of you expertise and maybe some work of yourown. I think these people have a right to know a bit about the personcritiquing their work. I am not having a go, just curious consideringyour offering your time to look and make comment. I can only assumeyou have a professional or semi professional background.Canon 40D24-105L17-40L70-200L.

I don't see why the critique can't stand on it's own. Everyone posting went into it blind. I think this adds interest...

Comment #39

Actually he does have a link to his gallery listed in his profile.http://photo.net/photos/gsaramet..

Comment #40

Tgleex wrote:.

My turn ....

And now MY turn:.

This is a very difficult and stresfull part of photography. Weddings. That picture have to be appreciated now, and in the future..

Except for the "native" stress (one-time ocasion), there are some technical difficulties. You ran into one here: white dress/black suit. The choice to protect the highlights on the dress is ok to me, but the image is still underexposed..

I am thinking of a simple modification that could have improved a lot: make them switch places. I see more sun on the bride than on the groom. That magnifies the dynamic range problem. If they were sitting the other way, the light would have helped, not hindered..

A big no-no for me it's the bride's feet. It's not the most flattering position, and the white shoes stand out. They look like a child's shoes/feet,.

The color balance is not too good - they are too red. If you make it warmer, I guess it would add to the image..

The framing... so-so. One grate door is cut off, the other is not. The angle does not look perpendicular to the wall/door, although it could be an illusion..

I also don't think that composition is the most flattering in the world for the bride. Which is too bad, because the general feeling is a happy, warm, loving one..

So, I like the mood, but I don't like most of the rest: composition, framing, colors. But the mood saves a lot .

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #41

MaryGierth wrote:.

Dave73 wrote:.

With all due respect, can you please provide some detail of yourbackground..

Sure. I am basically an amateur went semipro. I ocasionally shoot weddings, events and products..

Nothing wrong with your offer to assist beginners, but Ithink it's fair that if you are going to critique other peoples workyou provide some detail of you expertise and maybe some work of yourown..

I think some of it is linked in my profile..

I think these people have a right to know a bit about the personcritiquing their work..

Well, it's not like it's compulsory  And now they can look at the other critiques and see what's about..

I am not having a go, just curious consideringyour offering your time to look and make comment..

That's a short story. I know from experience it's DIFFICULT to get critiques. Best way is to print the images and go to a club. These forums are an especially bad place to get a critique. I've just finished a long project, and I decided to donate some time for this. In fact, I gain quite a lot by critiqueing, because I get to think about images from different shooters.



I can only assumeyou have a professional or semi professional background..

Ok, how do you rate the critique? .

I don't see why the critique can't stand on it's own. Everyoneposting went into it blind. I think this adds interest..

Thank you for speaking up. ..

Comment #42

He's been practicing on Phot.NetJules.

JohnnyBlood wrote:.

Who died and made you the resident expert?.

Johnny.

Http://www.flickr.com/photos/latitudes/.

Why can't you blow bubbles with chewing gum?..

Comment #43

[IMG].

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

[/IMG].

Sorry if this is too big.Taken with a D40 with 18-200 afs...

Comment #44

Here is another. This was with the VR turned off..

Didn't know how to focus here. One of the first pics I took.[IMG].

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

[/IMG]..

Comment #45

Eclipse Optics wrote:.

I think this is the 2nd best shot so far on the thread. You have anincredible eye and positioning yourself where you did was really asatisfying look at this scene. I love it. It wouldn't go up in thelivingroom, but it would go up. WELL DONE!.

.Thanks for the lovely compliments. I'm glad you liked it..

Coolpix 950, 4500, P5000, D50, Canon 250D, 500D, 50mm/1.8, 105VR, 18-200VR, 70-300VR, Sigma 10-20.CATS member>^..^<#31WSSA member#40 ( Head Squirrel)PAS Charter member #5MAA memberhttp://www.pbase.com/thegaber..

Comment #46

Devnull wrote:..

A good image with one or maybe two weak points. Decomposition:.

You identified a very promising image. The forest with some fog, onetree of different color. Very very good. Best mark in subjectidentification.

It was, in fact, not a forest but a group of trees just off the parking area of a local girl's High School. If it were not so foggy that day you would be able to clearly see many houses in the backround and immediately to the left is a main road. Unfortunately, the red tree has been cut down and although I have returned many times since, it has never looked like this again...

The colors are ok-good. I feel the grass in the right is too vividand the red leaves a bit too muted, but that's easy to fix..

The perspective is also very good. What I am not happy with is thecrop on the foremost trees, right and left. I feel I should eithersee more of them, or that the crop should be a bit lower. It's a bitlike a person. You can cut/crop/compose at the knees, but not at theankles..

Of course, I don't know what the situation was in the field or if youcould get a bit wider.On the touching up side, I'd fix the colors I was saying about andmaybe sharpen the red tree a bit. The sharpening it's a matter ofinterpretation..

..

Thanks for the critique devnullI will try some sharpening and punch up the colors and see how it looks. Thanks for taking the time to look and I'm glad you liked it..

Coolpix 950, 4500, P5000, D50, Canon 250D, 500D, 50mm/1.8, 105VR, 18-200VR, 70-300VR, Sigma 10-20.CATS member>^..^<#31WSSA member#40 ( Head Squirrel)PAS Charter member #5MAA memberdevnullhttp://www.pbase.com/thegaber..

Comment #47

Taken with an SD870 in Cambodia, then converted to B&W. Not much/any post processing. Thoughts appreciated..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

This one was in Vietnam at a temple:.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #48

Hi:.

I took another picture, focusing more on composition, as you suggested. Your comments will be appreciated..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #49

Hello. Here are a few shots that I would like some critique on..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #50

Devnull wrote:.

MaryGierth wrote:.

Dave73 wrote:.

With all due respect, can you please provide some detail of yourbackground..

Sure. I am basically an amateur went semipro. I ocasionally shootweddings, events and products..

Nothing wrong with your offer to assist beginners, but Ithink it's fair that if you are going to critique other peoples workyou provide some detail of you expertise and maybe some work of yourown..

I think some of it is linked in my profile..

I think these people have a right to know a bit about the personcritiquing their work..

Well, it's not like it's compulsory  And now they can look at theother critiques and see what's about..

I am not having a go, just curious consideringyour offering your time to look and make comment..

That's a short story. I know from experience it's DIFFICULT to getcritiques. Best way is to print the images and go to a club. Theseforums are an especially bad place to get a critique. I've justfinished a long project, and I decided to donate some time for this.In fact, I gain quite a lot by critiqueing, because I get to thinkabout images from different shooters. As you can probably imagine, Iknow quite well my friends' shooting style, and it can get quitemonotonous..

I can only assumeyou have a professional or semi professional background..

Ok, how do you rate the critique? .

I don't see why the critique can't stand on it's own. Everyoneposting went into it blind. I think this adds interest..

Thank you for speaking up. .

This is the second such thread I've seen. As much as any other post, and much more than most, they've made me think about photos. Not cameras, lenses, processing ... but photos..

I'm gratified that you are able to do this with a light hand; criticism isn't hard to take if it isn't mean, and you aren't. Thus truly is valuable and as good a learning experience as I've seen here..

So, thank you - and do it some more..

I appreciate this forum.Say Hey..

Comment #51

Thank you very much for your critique, and your time..

So far I have zero PP experience. I am going to try to learn some when I get a chance. I also need to somehow calibrate my monitor =.

I have it printed in 8x10 (color) and I'm pretty happy with it as-is. I'm very curious to see what it looks like after I manage to do the PP work you suggested..

Thanks again!.

Devnull wrote:.

Czeglin wrote:.

Boy. The idea of picking only two images is a good exercise in and ofitself! You have to do a lot of reflection just to come up with twoyou think are worthwhile..

Yep. That's part of the idea. Another part is that I'll have maximum150 images to comment on... and it's hard work... .

In my case, I'm planning to save the second critique for later, ifthat's ok. Looking through my computer I see many that I like but nomore that I want an outside opinion on, yet..

Sadly I don't know of a free image hosting service that will let medo full-resolution, or I would have put it up..

It's better to keep it smaller. I believe that some images indeedlook much better when printed poster size, but in most cases, thesmall version should look good enough, too..

To your image..

Abstract. Ok. Good diagonal composition, without being a perfectdiagonal or a 45 degree. The texture is interesting, indeed.However, if it's not AdobeRBG, it lacks impact. First, there are noshadows. It's not necessarily bad, because shadows might havederanged the pattern.

It canbe easily fixed by adding some contrast one or other way and/or bymaking it black and white. I am not sure which will do better,probably depending on the bw conversion. If you like it in color, I'denhance a bit the color. Also some sharpening might do.I am also thinking about depth of field. It's nice.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #52

Gatedropper wrote:.

First image. I am afraid it's quite a typical beginner's image, exactly the type that does not get much critique..

The FIRST question an image should NOT raise is: "what is it about?". I am looking at the picture and the only thing I can think about is "things in unusual places". I'll get back to this later..

The subject is dead centerd. Don't do that. Try composing along the rule of the thirds, for a start..

There is very little tonal or color contrast in your image. Try a different light. The horizon is slanted. The blue on the boat does not fit, although it's faded. The background is too crowded. There is a zig-zag line structure that catches my eye in the background, but it's not enough to save the image.



Suggestion. What I would do on this ideea. Leave the ball on the stump. Change your angle, and come much closer. Shoot from above, but in a different light. Try around filling the viewfinder with the stump surface: all of it, some of it, some background.

Shoot in better light - near dawn or sunset. You might get a much better image, with more contrasts: unusual placement, handmade vs natura, shiny vs textured, marble vs wood. It might work, it might not, but it would be probably better..

[IMG].

[/IMG].

Sorry if this is too big.Taken with a D40 with 18-200 afs..

Here is another. This was with the VR turned off..

Didn't know how to focus here. One of the first pics I took..

Well, here you have different problems. Actually, at this size, I can't see the focus problems..

The plants in the foreground are seriously disturbing. Then, I barely see a part of a bridge - I missed it the first time. It's a bit late, the light changed too much, but 15-30 minutes before I bet it was better..

Again, you have the horizon centered. Compose a bit lower. The sky does not add much here, so I'd get rid of some..

If possible, get closer to the lake..

So: light, plants in the foreground, centered horizon. I'd also suggest a different composition, where the bridge is not superposing on the far shore line..

Good luck!.

[IMG].

[/IMG]..

Comment #53

Jasonmolinari wrote:.

Taken with an SD870 in Cambodia, then converted to B&W. Not much/anypost processing. Thoughts appreciated..

By looking at the first picture, let me start by saying I envy you for the trip .

I'll then comment on the BW conversion. It's not very bad, but it lacks a bit. Personally, I go BW in a few circumstances: when the color would disturb, or does not add to the image, to add some drama, to improve the digital noise or to get rid of a color channel (for example, in may portraits, blue channel is especially unflattering). Or to add timelessness to an image. What I look for in an BW image is a certain look (excuse the repetition), with pure black and white tones, smooth tranzitions to those tones and, necessarily, a harsher midtone tranzition. Yep, a film look..

Now, timelessness, there is in this image, and cartloads of it. But the film look described before is not. However, that's not the most important problem I see. The composition is..

It's not a bad photo per se. But looking at it I feel I want to see what happens to the trees, above. And to the roots and path, below. And the door tells no story. Usually a door can be easily made to tell it's own story, because it's a barrier of sorts, a passage, you get the ideea. So, I'd have moved to the right, to see a bit more of the inside of the temple.



I don't know the conditions there or your available equipment, but I would have either cropped a bit lower, and make the door the subject, as described above, or included more scene above and below and make the temple the subject and story..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

This one was in Vietnam at a temple:.

I am afraid this lacks more. First, I have a feeling that BW is not the best choice, the conditions seem nice for color. The image is tilted to the right. The base of the pillar(?) is cut off. The pond is cut off, and makes me look for water and fishes on my desk.And, very important, it does not tell a story to me..

The first image however it's almost there..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #54

This one is less cluttered. However, the subject is not really isolated. The green leaf near the middle distracts..

Now, it's a matter of equipment as well, of course. If your camera allows you to get close enough, I'd suggest filling the frame with a flower or group of flowers (are those cherry?), and rotate around the subject to see the influence of the background. For this kind of light I prefere the sky as background, because the flowers are pretty shiny and will make the sky blue.So, an improvement..

Sheldon Teicher wrote:.

Hi:.

I took another picture, focusing more on composition, as yousuggested. Your comments will be appreciated..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #55

Hey thanks. Will work on learning more technique. I have such a long way to go...

Comment #56

Bionic963 wrote:.

Hello. Here are a few shots that I would like some critique on..

Are you sure you are a beginner? I see competent lighting usage, and that's the kind of knowledge that comes with practice.The images:.

Note the very good lighting. Folks, placing the model against a wall and using the on-camera flash will never give you this. I see at least 2 lights here, but it might be 3 or 4. Also note the skin tones which are great..

The position is good, the attitude is very good, the vertical cropping is perfect. However, I don't like the cut off elbows. I feel that for this capture a square format, including the elbows would have been perfect..

The hair could have used some extra touching up, preferably there, but you can clone out the few offending strands in post..

Now, this is subjective, but most models want their chest area enhanced. For this pose (which I like) I feel that a different top, tighter towards the thighs, would have underlined the beforementioned chest area. I would also sharpened the eyes a bit more..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Again, very good usage of lights. Note the catchlights in the eye and the countour light..

Here, I see more problems. First, her right eye is a bit too centerd for my taste. Then, the eye seems slightly out of focus. Pour some sharpening fluid on  I guess it's out of focus, because the hair and coat yield very good detail..

I am not 100% happy with the composition. Two ideeas. Either give her a bit more space to breathe, or try and vignette the corners, for a classic look..

Postprocessing. Again, the hair. This time, I'd very faintly touch up the skin, especially around the chin area. Just a bit. Remove the gum reflection. There are some blood vessels in the white of the eye.



Good images, but see the observations. Does not look like beginner's work, if it is, congratulations!.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #57

Hey!!! Are there any beginners at dpreveiw at all? I'm way to embarresed to show any of my really beginner photos here....

But it is very useful to read what is said about the photos posted here...

Comment #58

Xti Tamron 70-300 4.0-5.6.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #59

First thing I see: it's not sharp. Second thing: the flash light is harsh. With the first two things being negative... you know .

The angle is good, maybe a bit too sharp. One might want more of the pizza. I like very much the _ideea_ of glass and bottle of wine in the background, but the implementation is not very good. They are not vertical, there is some bad bokeh on the glass, and _their_ background is uneven and busy. The bottle is cut off. The rest of the out of focus background is a bit too busy and distracts..

A better implementation: first, get a good, sharp focus on the pizza. I suggest a higher angle and maybe a wider lens. Open the bottle, pour some wine in the glass. Redo the shoot with the bottle and glass slightly out of focus and a cleaner background..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

I think that's quite a good candidate for BW. You don't have much color, don't have too much detail in the rocks in the middle, so monochorme would be nice. The image is nicely leveled. I see two problems:.

Compositionally, the frame is too tight on all sides. I feel it's cut too low AND the water falls down from the image. I'd prefer it to flow (and see where it falls)..

Second problem, vegetation. The twigs distract..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #60

Outstanding...

Thank you.. I've got lots of pizza shots, and more of the river as well...

Just picked those two to start...

Thanks again!!!.

Tyler..

Comment #61

I appreciate having had you comment already on one of my pictures and don't want to impose, but I would like to see what you think of this picture..

I was at Madison Square Garden taking pictures of the event, and this guy gets up just as I pressed the shutter. So the picture was a mistake but it seems interesting to me. What is your opinion?.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Thanks..

Coolpix 950, 4500, P5000, D50, Canon 250D, 500D, 50mm/1.8, 105VR, 18-200VR, 70-300VR, Sigma 10-20.CATS member>^..^<#31WSSA member#40 ( Head Squirrel)PAS Charter member #5MAA memberhttp://www.pbase.com/thegaber..

Comment #62

Thanks Devnull. I appreciate the input. I agree the 2nd picture might be better in color..

I'm not very good with composition...my artistic side clearly was eliminated at birth:) I've been trying to look at well composed pictures to learn how to shoot better..

I do wish I had had a wider angle lens, but being with a P&S camera didn't allow that..

Oh, the trip was amazing:)..

Comment #63

Gaber wrote:.

I appreciate having had you comment already on one of my picturesand don't want to impose, but I would like to see what you think ofthis picture..

I was at Madison Square Garden taking pictures of the event, and thisguy gets up just as I pressed the shutter. So the picture was amistake but it seems interesting to me. What is your opinion?.

I'd call it a miss. However, I see what you mean by interesting. Let's analyze..

The bad: the subject is cut, there is some other silhouette to the right (though you could clone it out). And you don't have a real subject for the image..

The good. It's a very interesting silhouette study. The front light creates a contour and brings up detail. I like also that you can see an ear. And the colors in the background add to the image..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Thanks..

Coolpix 950, 4500, P5000, D50, Canon 250D, 500D, 50mm/1.8, 105VR,18-200VR, 70-300VR, Sigma 10-20.CATS member>^..^<#31WSSA member#40 ( Head Squirrel)PAS Charter member #5MAA memberhttp://www.pbase.com/thegaber..

Comment #64

I'll bite. Zero PP, one of the very first ones I've taken with my new dSLR. It as late in the afternoon..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #65

Tibia wrote:.

Hey!!! Are there any beginners at dpreveiw at all?.

Yes..

I'm way toembarresed to show any of my really beginner photos here....

Me too but I'll post anyway..

But it is very useful to read what is said about the photos posted here..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #66

I also find the background that shows through on the left to be distracting - I would crop that out..

I have to say when I first saw this thread, I was skeptical, but I think your comments have been fair and spot on without being condescending. Haven't ready any comments that I've disagreed with and a couple made me say... 'yeah... I never thought of that'..

Devnull wrote:.

Gaber wrote:.

I appreciate having had you comment already on one of my picturesand don't want to impose, but I would like to see what you think ofthis picture..

I was at Madison Square Garden taking pictures of the event, and thisguy gets up just as I pressed the shutter. So the picture was amistake but it seems interesting to me. What is your opinion?.

I'd call it a miss. However, I see what you mean by interesting.Let's analyze..

The bad: the subject is cut, there is some other silhouette to theright (though you could clone it out). And you don't have a realsubject for the image..

The good. It's a very interesting silhouette study. The front lightcreates a contour and brings up detail. I like also that you can seean ear. And the colors in the background add to the image..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Thanks...

Comment #67

This is another picture that for some reason I personally really like. Not that that means much photographically speaking..but thoughts are appreciated..I know it might need some straightening...Thank you for the comments/criticism:.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #68

MaryGierth wrote:.

As you probably know and see, the colors are gorgeous. Same for the tonal detail. Personally, I prefer a bit more detail in the shadows in this kind of color images, but it's largely a matter of taste..

The horizon it's not straight. The subject is interesting, but I am afraid the composition lacks..

When I see a tree, I want to see the tree. Starting from the roots to the branch tips. Of course, sometimes it's not possible to capture the whole tree, but the framing should flatter the subject. Here the tree grows into the frame and leaves the frame by all the other 3 sides..

Try to get all the tree in the frame, or, if it's not possible, keep it to a side..

Another thought, this kind of picture should work very nicely in black and white, where the dark shadows add to the image. Try it..

The other elements in the picture are ok. I like the lower left bush, the horizon is nicely at about a third of image, the patch of greener grass somehow brings the eye to the trunk..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #69

This is a great thread so I'll have a go as well. Thanks for taking the time to do this..

I'm curious what you think of the lighting on this one, I think I fiddled with the contrast a bit..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

On the second one I didn't have a zoom on the camera and it didn't look like the moment would last. The lamps came out purple so I tried to desaturate that, and I used some noise reduction for the sky. I know it's dead center but I think that it works for this photo..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #70

Msquared08 wrote:.

I'll bite. Zero PP, one of the very first ones I've taken with my newdSLR. It as late in the afternoon..

That's quite a difficult picture to critique. Let's try..

First, technically. You have in this image a dynamic range exceeding your sensor's capabilities. I see you used manual mode, and exposed to keep the highlights. That resulted in quite an underexposed subject. And still you have burned one or two color channels where the sun shines on the buses. There are also some chromatic aberations on the electric wires..

Now, composition. I don't like it, for more than one reason. Your composition would have worked if: i. you included more of the right bus; ii. included more of the left bus; iii. cropped off some sky and cloned off some wires; iv.

The mirrors and antennas really mess the composition..

For this kind of detailed subjects, I guess that a simple row of busses would have worked better. It would have create a line to draw the eye in the picture, the mirrors etc would have been repetitive and disturbed less, and the cropping at the sides would have been less critical..

Like this, the buses form a line, the bus on the right creates another line, and at the place of intersection... there isn't much to see. Then the eye starts to wander around and sees cables, wires, exposure problems, part of a tree, maybe a cloud (or maybe not)....

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #71

Smog2187 wrote:.

This is a great thread so I'll have a go as well. Thanks for takingthe time to do this..

It's quite a hard work, but it's interesting for me, as well..

I'm curious what you think of the lighting on this one, I think Ifiddled with the contrast a bit..

I really can't tell why I don't like it as it is. Somehow, the shadow does not work. So, I'll cheat a bit. I don't know why I don't like it, but I'll tell you how to vastly improve it with about zero work. First, straighten the image. Now, the magic.

Crop out the left of the picture, close to the stone's edge. I'd leave about the same with as the stone is think. Also crop off some of the bottom. Voila! You can improve it even more by changing the color temperatre of the light on the stone towards yellow... you know, torch light .

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

On the second one I didn't have a zoom on the camera and it didn'tlook like the moment would last. The lamps came out purple so I triedto desaturate that, and I used some noise reduction for the sky. Iknow it's dead center but I think that it works for this photo..

Well, I didn't noticed it was dead center. In fact, because it IS dead centered, I failed to notice the "subject" people. So, I think dead center is not the best option here..

Again, first straighten the image. The buildings are tilted. Then go ahead and crop. The lower part of the image does not add much, so cut off some. And then cut off some of the right, to keep it about proportional. You can try more crops, until you like it best.

Clasic film aspect, letterbox, maybe square, so on. If you give up some of the right of the image, you'll be able to crop off some sky, as well..

Another trick. You have basically one color, isn't it? Why don't you convert to monochrome? And from there you have lots of other possibilities. BW, sepia, colorize, you can go duotone, you can play with some effects..

I like a lot the potential of this image. It's like an uncut diamond and it has countless possibilities. That makes choice very difficult, and it's a matter of personal taste..

Very good image in potentia, but needs some work..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #72

OK, let me have it. I'm a beginner and I'm not too good (yet). Good post BTW..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Mike..

Comment #73

Here I am again looking for your expertise. I tried to fill the frame but this was the best I could do. What do you think? Hand held..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #74

MJapper wrote:.

OK, let me have it. I'm a beginner and I'm not too good (yet). Goodpost BTW..

Another difficult image to critique. A lot of wildlife images are rated according to how spectacular they are. And, of course, technical perfection. I don't know enough about your picture to give it a good rating, so I'll draw a scale, and you'll place your effort on it..

First, the framing/composition is good. Diagonal wings position, it adds to the image.The exposure is also good, even if some highlights are burnt..

The colors are a bit too warm. Basically, when there is a choice, we prefer a warmer picture, which we associate with the sun light. This is a bit over the top for me - I can't see neutral whites anywhere..

Depth of field is too deep. Way too deep, the backgrounds distracts from the image. Could you have done better? I don't know, it depends on your settings and equipment. The background is noisy, but it's acceptable..

A bigger problem is that the bird does not seem sharp enough. It even looks oversharepened to me, but that could be a different monitor, LCDs do create a more sharpened look..

The rock, which should be about in the same focal plane is not sharp. Could be bad focus, movement, I don't know. It could be the lens, as well.The bird looks impressive, but the tags disturb quite a lot..

I can't comment on the angle, either. It's not the best, but sometimes you can't choose. Well, you can, if you are prepared to spend a few days in the wilderness just to try and get an image..

So I'd rate it as a good attempt, but with a lot of problems, that could be because of the shooter, the equipment, the location or just the luck..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Mike..

Comment #75

Thanks. I took the picture on the run. If I knew at the time that the tree had some potential for a nice photo I would have stopped and tried to do more with it. I'll straighten and experiment with B&W...

Comment #76

I hope you don't mind but I think I'll have another go, here's a pair of my favorite photos....

I made this one sepia and darkened the sky till all the noise was gone.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Next is a shot where I literally had just enough time to take my camera out, turn it on and press the shutter before the people were out of the tunnel. I used lightroom quite extensively to turn down the highlights and increase the lighting of the tunnel sides and entrance. I think it definitely would've been better had I squatted down for the shot..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #77

Can you appraise these two please:.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #78

I can see your improvement! You're getting to be a real pro..

Coolpix 950, 4500, P5000, D50, Canon 250D, 500D, 50mm/1.8, 105VR, 18-200VR, 70-300VR, Sigma 10-20.CATS member>^..^<#31WSSA member#40 ( Head Squirrel)PAS Charter member #5MAA memberhttp://www.pbase.com/thegaber..

Comment #79

I'm not sure if the original will still come up, because I replaced it in pbase, but what I did was I cropped and cloned out the distraction on the right. The picture is improved. I also made a B&W conversion which I think works better. Any comment on that?.

Thanks, BTW, for starting this thread. I am finding it vey interesting. It's like "Dear Abby" for photographers..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Coolpix 950, 4500, P5000, D50, Canon 250D, 500D, 50mm/1.8, 105VR, 18-200VR, 70-300VR, Sigma 10-20.CATS member>^..^<#31WSSA member#40 ( Head Squirrel)PAS Charter member #5MAA memberhttp://www.pbase.com/thegaber..

Comment #80

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Lenses I'm waiting for:AF-S 80-400mm f/4-5.6G VRIIAF-S 27-300mm f/3.5-5.6G VRIIAF-S 16-135mm f/3.5-4.5G VRIIAF-S 12-36mm f/4G.

We Can All Wish Can't We?.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #81

I totally agree that the purpose of posting a picture is to have someone who knows more than I (that's just about everyone) critique the shot, so that I can learn something. Thank you so much in advance for your willingness to do this..

I just got my FZ18 last month, and am just beginning to experiment with settings..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #82

Wrote:.

I liked the color version more, personally..

Rats! So did my wife. Thanks czeglin..

Coolpix 950, 4500, P5000, D50, Canon 250D, 500D, 50mm/1.8, 105VR, 18-200VR, 70-300VR, Sigma 10-20.CATS member>^..^<#31WSSA member#40 ( Head Squirrel)PAS Charter member #5MAA memberhttp://www.pbase.com/thegaber..

Comment #83

Barbmath wrote:.

I totally agree that the purpose of posting a picture is to havesomeone who knows more than I (that's just about everyone) critiquethe shot, so that I can learn something. Thank you so much in advancefor your willingness to do this..

No worries..

I just got my FZ18 last month, and am just beginning to experimentwith settings..

So, a beginner .

First picture. Scan this thread I find what I said about rating wildlife pictures. The image was a big bird (eagle or condor or something) on a rock. Everything about rating applies here. And there is more..

A photo of a eagle eating the carcass of a lion will be higher rated than a sparrow eating grain, even if artistically and technically they are even. That's because the first picture is much more difficult to get. Maybe it's not fair, but life it's not fair..

So, the picture is not spectacular, even if it captures the bird in what she considers a natural environment. There is chroma noise in the image. The water basin is tilted and cut off. So... nope..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Well, that one is a totally different story. Even if there is a bit of noise, it's ok. (I know, it's not you, it's the camera). The bird looks like it's playing see me, see me not. The background is nice and creamy. There is more ambient light..

Now, I'll also tell you what it lacks. You need to sharpen it a bit, to bring out the details in the eyes and feathers. A bit more dramatic light would have made a difference and add sparkle to the eyes. And also, even if it's a matter of personal taste, I'd prefer the beak not to appear in contact with the metal..

But, as I was saying, a very good capture, even if it's not an eagle in Serengetti! Print material..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #84

See my rule no. 4. TWO pictures per poster. I kind of stuck to the rules, if you noticed..

Gary0001 wrote:.

The canion..

First thing first. The horizon is not level. Easy to fix in post processing. Do so. I particullary like the cloud shadows on the canion. Very good, but they need more impact.



Then, there are some color problems, and not very easy to fix. You have too much reds in the sky. Basically, that's a big no-no. Look at the RGB values arond the sky. You'll find out pretty soon zones where the red excedes the blue..

I have pretty good experience with images in which there are different kinds of light on the landscape. I usually pick the color tone based on the feeling I want the image to give. It turns even more extreme when you have different kinds of weather in the image, like you do now. Sunshine and rain. This turns in a pretty stringy postprocessing problem..

What I usually do is process the raw for each light in the image, than blend the images. That leads to a lot of masking and trial and error process. And, worst, it's very easy to overdo it..

In your image, the sky/land separation line is pretty clear and simple to mask. However, your foreground color is ok, your background is not, due to haze and different light..

A good cheat here would be monochrome... but I like some of the colors too. Tough choice..

I don't like the trees growing into the frame. They distract. The lower one could be cloned out, but the corner one is more difficult, and it's got good light and contrast on it, which catches the eye..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Is that the Space Needle?Basically this is a good photo. I'll make some comments on it.It needs two things in my opinion..

First, you have some perspective distortion. Even if you leveled the camera perfectly this time, because of the angle, the building seem angled outwards. Does not work here, but it's very easy to correct in postprocessing..

The second thing is the haze. A polarizer might have helped a lot here... or not, depending on the light..

Some other minor observation is the detail. I don't know if it's because of soft focus or resizing, but the trees don't appear very sharp. Sharpen a bit more..

I'd also want to comment on the composition. The tower is nicely placed, the main road leads a bit out of the picture, but then there is another road in the farground that leads the eye back in, the other streets in the left angle back to the center of the image. There are no obviously cut off buildings.I am not sure about the plane, but I think I would have clone it out..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Just a few words. Way too centered, foreground leaves create an appropiate obscured feeling, but also distract. It's good you got the eye..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

I'd strongly suggest to remove your wishlist from your signature. Basically, anybody using the search function and looking for these lens will get hits for all your postings..

Lenses I'm waiting for:AF-S 80-400mm f/4-5.6G VRIIAF-S 27-300mm f/3.5-5.6G VRIIAF-S 16-135mm f/3.5-4.5G VRIIAF-S 12-36mm f/4G.

We Can All Wish Can't We?.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #85

Mqfords wrote:.

Can you appraise these two please:.

GREAT example!.

First, I'm not good about rating car picture. That is, the subject rarely interests me, therefore I tend to avoid those images..

I forced myself to look at the car creatively... didn't really work. So I rotated the image back to level, and WOW! I encourage everybody to try and look at that image leveled and then back to the posted image. A fantastic feat of composition. The way it is it makes me think of the Blues Brothers bridge jump..

Other things. Colors are ok, composition is very strong, but there are some disturbing elements. The rail shadows. The rusted iron. The twig. Clone them out..

I am still not fond of the image (probably because of my bias), but I really tip my hat to the diagonal composition. Another improvement would have been a moving car, with some rotation blur on the wheels. Maybe even a bit of motion blur, I don't know..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

The door is pretty bland, unfortunately. For this kinds of shots I'd prefer a symmetrical composition. I don't like the way the windows(?) are cut off. I don't like the shadows on the path. And I don't like I can't see through the door - it's basically a big black hole in the center of the image. It does not work.Monochorme is a good choice I think, but the conversion is not dramatic enough..

Suggestion: get much closer, shoot much wider, expose so we can see through. If you go for monochorme, add some drama from the composition. Not vertical, but diagonal lines, so shoot from a side and get the shadows to work for you..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #86

This is a shot I took in the Maldives, and will be there again in May for our 47th wedding anniversary. I get all the fun..

Having looked at it for a while, perhaps the yacht should have been more to the left of center and the island in the background more exposed..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Http://s185.photobucket.com/.../albums/x223/eirianfa2002/?mediafilter=imagesMichael Edward Rudge..

Comment #87

Michael Edward Rudge wrote:.

Having looked at it for a while, perhaps the yacht should have beenmore to the left of center and the island in the background moreexposed..

Yes, the yacht would be better to the left, leaving it some space to sail into. That also would get rid of the cut off boat in the left, which is a big no-no..

The exposure is fine. However, the island should not be masked by the yacht. I don't know how much space you had to move around, but if you changed the angle a bit, the island would have been more to the right and would have became a destination for the ship..

There is some haze, which makes the clouds blue. Not the natural color, you might want to desaturate or dodge a bit..

The reflections - I like that a lot, but the mast reflections come out of the frame. It's a matter of personal taste. The vertical framing works quite good as it is, except for the reflections. Maybe including the full reflections would have damaged the image, maybe it would have improved..

Another thing I don't like in this image are the mooring poles. They work in some images, but not here, to my eye. I'd clone them out..

I am not sure, but I believe I see some towels and tshirts and shorts hanging to dry. If it's not a documentary photo, clone them out, too. Not the most romantinc thing in the picture - and what's a yacht and an island and some warm waters if not pure romance? .

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Http://s185.photobucket.com/.../albums/x223/eirianfa2002/?mediafilter=imagesMichael Edward Rudge..

Comment #88

The Second one is from a helicopter so a level would of been impossible..

And the wish-list in my signature doesn't do anything to the search because anything under those two "" is not being looked at.Lenses I'm waiting for:AF-S 80-400mm f/4-5.6G VRIIAF-S 27-300mm f/3.5-5.6G VRIIAF-S 16-135mm f/3.5-4.5G VRIIAF-S 12-36mm f/4G.

We Can All Wish Can't We?.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #89

I think you might have made a rod for your own back by volunteering to do this, still I've seen some interesting comments so far!.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Regards,.

DeeJayBee.

Deejaybee.smugmug.com..

Comment #90

Devnull,.

Thanks for the response. I'm not sure why people got their dander in an uproar when you started this post. I think your C&C was right on with my pic. I knew going into it what some of the problems were. I wanted to see from your perspective what else..

Thanks for the good words!Mike..

Comment #91

Deejaybee wrote:.

I'd call this an abtractish macro. The only comment for you concerns DOF. Maybe deeper here might have been better. Now, for the benefit of my beginner readers:.

First thing one sees are the colors. Look how well they come together. Second, texture. See how nice the corrugated texture of rusted metal contrast the smooth background..

Composition. The normal rule is don't frame the subject dead center. Here dead center works perfectly. I'll underline that there are points of interest at horizontal thirds..

Focus and depth of field. See that the near limit begins where the knot is. The DOF is quite shallow and goes a bit back, keeping the background creamy. As I said, I would have preferred a slightly deeper DOF, so that the strands of wire that come into the foreground are also in focus. But it works very good as it is..

Subject identification. See how the author looked at an object in which I would have probably torn my coat, visualised the image, used the light (did you wait for it?), and got the image. Just look at those textures and twisted metal..

Very nicely done..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Regards,.

DeeJayBee.

Deejaybee.smugmug.com..

Comment #92

Olympus C-765UZ ISO 64 Fstop 3.7 Shutter 1/400.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

I would love a brutally honest opinion.F as in Frank Z as in ZebraFifty..

Comment #93

Devnull,.

First, let me tell you how much I appreciate your critiques of others. I actually am learning a lot from looking at others' photos and predicting what you will say!.

Second, thank you for keeping us all very humble..

Third, I realize that my photos are a very mundane setting. I am basically working on adjusting settings, so that when we head out to dog sled in wyoming next month, i'll have a little idea about what I am doing. your comments about my photos make sense. i'll be back!..

Comment #94

I really am a beginner and I'd love a critique. I'm a big boy and can take it, so please be honest..

I chose this photo because I had everything working against me. Taken in the early evening and it had just stopped snowing..

Thanks..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #95

I'm back...hopefully with more interesting subjects...from Jackson Hole..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Now that I look at the second photo, I'm thinking I should have cropped more of the bottom. Is that right?.

Thanks again from all the newbies on this site. Barb..

Comment #96

CathyB wrote:.

Olympus C-765UZ ISO 64 Fstop 3.7 Shutter 1/400.

I have problems identifying the "story" behind the picture. What I see is pretty much in your face, a car who skidded on a track. Not much of a story..

Technically, the car is dead centered. Not good. The image is tilted. Buildings and flag are not vertical. Exposure is quite ok, maybe a bit of extra contrast and saturation/vibrance might add to the image, but don't overdo..

Composition. Some things disturb. The cut off ambulance. The back of the building. There are other elements which disturb, but can't be easily removed, like the tower, poles, etc. Another problem is that the image is too busy.



If you crop off the bottom and the right, it will be an OK documentary photo, maybe titled "a day at the races"..

Now, for a sport/car/race photo it does not cope - and it's not your fault. You need a different point of view, somewhere close to the track, probably a press permit and so on..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

I would love a brutally honest opinion.F as in Frank Z as in ZebraFifty..

Comment #97

MaxxD3 wrote:.

I really am a beginner and I'd love a critique. I'm a big boy andcan take it, so please be honest..

No worries, I am .

I chose this photo because I had everything working against me.Taken in the early evening and it had just stopped snowing..

Splendid example of a beginner photo. Let's take it apart..

First, the image is not bad. However, it definitely lacks punch, kick and drama..

It's underexposed. Quite serious, 2/3 - 1 stop. Load it in a image editor and hit the auto something button. Voila!.

Colors. The white is very accurate, but it does not help the image. You said it was evening. Make it a bit redder..

Composition. Let's look at what adds to the image. If it does not add, it disturbs. To the bottom, I'd crop it closer to the boulder. To the top, you have quite a lot of uniform sky. Get rid of some.

Well, I don't know the place, but either add some more to the right, or, better, crop it off - I'd say a bit to the left where the main rock comes from the water. Now, to the right. That's where you should have included more. Look at all the lines. River, shore, rock, all form lines that lead the eye forward and to the right.

Now, you spotted a brilliant scene. Your image can be corrected to ok/good, but if you had included more scennery to the right, it might have been spectacular. The fog/cloud is especially effective in the background...

Comment #98

Barbmath wrote:.

I'm back...hopefully with more interesting subjects...from Jackson Hole..

I said 2 images per person. And I kind of stuck to that rule. So I won't deep comment these pictures, but both have some issues that haven't been present in this thread, which I believe will be usefull to other persons..

The mountain. Brilliant image. Can you identify the issues I said were not discussed yet and might be usefull? answer after the image.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Sensor dust! There is a huge gob in the sky to the left, and another in the water at the bottom, near middle. Clean the sensor or have it cleaned. Test for dust shooting at f22 and infinity against the blue sky - or any light surface..

This time, the centerd mountain works very nicely - note also the vertical framing and the reflections. I am not 100% happy with the lateral framing, especially to the right. I'd prefer the cut being in a descendant portion of the hill.There is haze in the background, a skylight or polarizer would have helped..

The bear. Again, can you identify the problem?.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Yep, missed focus. The camera focussed on the shrubbery in the foreground. The bear is very unfocussed. I thought I saw some motion blur as well, but at 1/640 it's not very likely, especially since the foreground is ok. I am not sure about the cause, but I'd bet it's haste..

Now that I look at the second photo, I'm thinking I should havecropped more of the bottom. Is that right?.

Thanks again from all the newbies on this site. Barb..

Comment #99

Awesome..

You are correct there is more rocks to the left, to the right there is nothing but more water. I was trying to get the back end of the lake into view because it curves a bit and looked interesting, but I understand what you're saying. Cropping it closer to the edge of the rock would have kept the eye in the center of the image and not wander off to the right..

The exposure is low on purpose to make the image darker and more erie, but I did what you said by adding some red and auto level (which is what I think you meant) and I like the effect as well. Although doing so causes the image to lose a bit of the (scooby-doo) mystery look..

Thank you very much...

Comment #100

This was taken for an adult ed class in town for an assignment on shutter speed..it is a picture of a rock falling into an icy pond...I can take critique well! LOL!.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

GailG9..

Comment #101

Devnull wrote:.

CathyB wrote:.

Olympus C-765UZ ISO 64 Fstop 3.7 Shutter 1/400.

I have problems identifying the "story" behind the picture. What Isee is pretty much in your face, a car who skidded on a track. Notmuch of a story..

It's a victory burnout which may help you identify the story..

Technically, the car is dead centered. Not good. The image is tilted.Buildings and flag are not vertical. Exposure is quite ok, maybe abit of extra contrast and saturation/vibrance might add to the image,but don't overdo..

I overlooked the straightness but at the time it was whatever I could get. When your in the stands with tens of thousands of other people your usually just happy to not have someones head in your shot..

Composition. Some things disturb. The cut off ambulance. The back ofthe building. There are other elements which disturb, but can't beeasily removed, like the tower, poles, etc. Another problem is thatthe image is too busy.



Now, for a sport/car/race photo it does not cope - and it's not yourfault. You need a different point of view, somewhere close to thetrack, probably a press permit and so on..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Does this help in general it looks over sharpened now though.....

Nascar Busch Series September 2007 Race Winner celebrating..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

I really do appreciate your opinion it's a lot harder atleast for me to see the faults in my own photo's..

F as in Frank Z as in ZebraFifty..

Comment #102

Thank you for you help, you have pointed out one or two things I overlooked, and I will try to take the same picture again in May if that boat is still about, it is a local yacht in the Maldives..

Once again many thanks for the C.Chttp://s185.photobucket.com/.../albums/x223/eirianfa2002/?mediafilter=imagesMichael Edward Rudge..

Comment #103

Thank you for your time and thoughtful critiques..

I have learned a lot from your methodology and logical approach to evaluating images..

The most valuable part is the fact that you give reasons for your evaluation and this helps to clarify your points..

Would like your opinion on the following two images. I would describe myself as possibly slightly past beginner, but struggling with the creative side of photography..

Thanks.

Roy Sletcher.

(first time linking pics - hoping it works!).

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #104

My, this post has grown. Most of my pics are not worth posting, but maybe a few are here and there. Hopefully this is one of them. Thanks for any info.http://www.flickr.com/photos/sptriple/2205667283/..

Comment #105

I am interested on your thoughts of these two photos. I hope the images aren't too small..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #106

Oliag wrote:.

This was taken for an adult ed class in town for an assignment onshutter speed..it is a picture of a rock falling into an icy pond...Ican take critique well! LOL!.

I'm afraid it's a no. There are way too many elements in the picture, and it's difficult to look at. It also feels undereposed..

However. I looked at the image before reading your description. And there is at least a good picture hidden in that framing, maybe two..

I'll let the falling rock drop. I didn't see it, I thought that it was a rock coming out of the pond, due to the dark bottom. And it looks so..

Basically, you photographed a flat surface, the pond. You can use that creatively, like a canvas. You can "put" on it anything interesting, by means of reflection. Even more, your canvas has these very interesting beveled regions - the floating ice. You can use those in the composition..

Basically, I'd go for less is more. The left side itself it's a picture. Try to avoid the tree reflection in the crop. It's distracting..

For example, you can use the left top quarter of the image as a picture. Clone out any tree reflection. That's basically it.You can use the left bottom, as well..

Another option would be an image with tree reflections. There's a secret: the eye does not like trees growing down or to the side. So, if you have such a reflection, rotate the image!.

Be carefull. If the trees reflection becomes the subject, then the pieces of ice can become distractions. Compose in such a way they are in significant parts of the picture - let's say thirds..

I don't know what the white blob is, it looks to me as either air caught under ice, or as a flash reflection. Probably the first..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

GailG9..

Comment #107

Roy Sletcher wrote:.

Thank you for your time and thoughtful critiques..

I have learned a lot from your methodology and logical approach toevaluating images..

The most valuable part is the fact that you give reasons for yourevaluation and this helps to clarify your points..

Would like your opinion on the following two images. I would describemyself as possibly slightly past beginner, but struggling with thecreative side of photography..

Thanks.

Roy Sletcher.

(first time linking pics - hoping it works!).

You'll hate me for this one  I wanted to say that there is nothing wrong compositionally here, but then I saw a few things.I'll start however with the technical part..

I see noise in the sky. You helpfully left the EXIF info here. How did you manage to get noise in the sky with the Rebel at ISO100? Did you pushed the exposure in post?.

I don't really see the horizon, but the image feels tilted to the right. I know from experience that's perfectly possible to take an extremely horizontal shot that will look tilted. Here's nothing to help the eye see the horizontal, so I'd suggest "straightening" the image perceptually, even if it's perfectly level..

Also I see you shot at f22. That's seriously past the diffraction limit, I am afraid..

Now, composition. It's unbalanced. Everything that's interesting/eye catching it's to the right. I was going to say that the rock in the bottom left will balance, but it does not. Less is more, crop in the image, loose some of the bottom and left..

Do I see some sharpening in the upper right corner? If so, good. Add it also to the boat. Congrats for the "contour" lights..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

That's simpler. Too tight framed. Note for the other readers: observe the exposure. Dark/black subject on light/white background. However, the exposure is nailed down excelently. I believe you had some exposure compensation, but the exif viewers disagree one with the other on this..

The exposure time is maybe a bit long, but it's ok. What I am interested in are the eyes, and those appear expressive enough. Note how the motion blur adds to the image, creating the feeling of dynamics and speed..

Compositionally, it's cropped too tight. I would have preffered her to have some space to skate into, especially considering the speed theme. And also she shouldn't be compressed between the lower and upper borders..

So, I'd say it's a good portrait of this person, the skater will probably hang it on her wall, but it needs a bit more to become a good image for the casual viewer..

F18 is still a bit much here. You could have lowered both the f number and the iso..

Conclusion: first image is very close to brilliance, and can get there by a simple rotation and crop. Second is good, but a different crop would have done wonders..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #108

Bubblzzz wrote:.

I am interested on your thoughts of these two photos. I hope theimages aren't too small..

I am afraid both are "no"s. But let's generally comment a bit..

I am more than familiar with this kind of photography, I am doing a fair share of it myself. Basically, it goes like this: I climb a day or two to get "there", then I am finally up in the hills, panting from air, with 2-3 kg of photo gear in my back, did I mention the panting for air part? And the destination is FAR, FAR away, you need to hurry, you do take some pictures, but not necessarily when you want them or from where you would like. You have to keep up with the group, and there's rarely an opportunity to ask them to blo__y move away from your picture. You have not time to screw on or off your polarizer, and sometimes you want it off, because you are generally shooting a wide angle and the light changes a lot. Also you wear gloves, and maybe overgloves, or whatever they are called. You can't think too well about the photography, you have lots of other things on your mind.

You also shoot through altitude sunglasses, and those are DARK (you are not allowed to drive a car using them), and tinted. So, I end bringing home lots of images, maybe one or two decent..

Your first image. I am pretty sure you shot that way because light was better in that direction. However, the composition lacks. A human going into the landscape would have told a story. Like this, it's only quite an impersonal landscape - and not very spectacular. The diagonal ideea is ok, but the eye finds no direction in the image.



The image is quite unbalanced, half sky, half mountain. And there's no easy fix. Maybe adding a foreground or background? But it can't be done in post..

One option for this kind of images is to print BIG. Then, sometimes, the landscape becomes the story..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

That's worse. The ice formation fills the frame and is cut off. You should have went back and give it some perspective. See, that intersting ice formation on that plateau. And look at the scenery in the background. By the way, it IS interesting, it makes me think of the limestone formations in caves.



Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

So, I know where you are coming from. It's difficult, but that's no excuse, unfortunately. Bring home some of those magnificent landscapes - and do them justice...

Comment #109

Thank you for your kind words..

This thread has been a breath of fresh air on the DPR forums and the effort you've put in answering everyone's posts is very commendable..

Regards,.

DeeJayBee.

Deejaybee.smugmug.com..

Comment #110

Great Idea, thanks for giving so much of your time to this project.http://www.royaldigitalimages.comhttp://www.flickr.com/photos/one_eyed_shooter/..

Comment #111

Devnull,.

I'll 2nd Roy Bruckno's message - 100+ posts in 4 days - a remarkable result which reflects the amount of effort you've put in and the interest it's stimulated..

I guess we all have our own ideas as to what makes us like a picture but your views/comments have been very informative re seeing things from "another pair of eyes" and your suggestions to improve things have been very useful. It's also been nice to see the kind of photos others like to take - sure is some nice scenery out there. Shame there weren't any more pictures of dogs though!.

Keep up the good work + looking forward to reading another 100 posts!.

Regards.....Caster.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #112

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #113

Hmmm - DP Review gave me this response when I tried to post.

There were the following problems with your message:.

* Please enter a sensible message.

Guess they know me here!!..

Comment #114

I won't post another image, even though you said we are allowed two, but I did want to jump on the "thank you" bandwagon..

I've been reading and learning. Thanks for your time and careful attention to all the photos that have been submitted...

Comment #115

Still critiquing? heres one from a beginner as well.fire away.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #116

Thanks for the great critique, the stone in the image was the reason I cropped it, and B&W just seemed to work better with the crop. The horizon is tricky tho, might be distortion showing, dunno.The second image never really was a fav of mine, now I know why ..

A bit late with my answer, been busy..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Http://www.flickr.com/photos/14807929@N05..

Comment #117

Thanks for the kind words, I'm glad you like it. I was plesently suprised with the image as well and am planning on having it printed soon. Just not sure how big I can go as it's a 6mp image thats cropped quite a bit..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Http://www.flickr.com/photos/14807929@N05..

Comment #118

Bknight1973 wrote:.

Still critiquing? heres one from a beginner as well..

Sure! Until the thread is full. Then I'll probably post (in another thread) my conclusions/feelings..

Fire away.

Two obvious mistakes. The verticals aren't vertical and the building is cut off at the top..

The exposure is quite ok, brings out the facade nicely. Probably I'd try also a shorter time, to see if the highlights in the central small building can be saved..

On the bright side, there are no ghosting lights, and those are very common - and disturbing - in a night view..

I want to see more to the left and to the right - a shorter focal lenght would have been better..

So, straighten the image, and try a wider angle next time. Good mood, decent colors (considering there are 2 types of light)..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #119

There is a good little free ware program for correcting architectural photographs vertial presentation...

Its called Shif-N.

Here is the link..

Http://www.marcus-hebel.de/foto/index.htmlOlympus E-510 and a bunch of stuff to hang on it...

Comment #120

Good thread, something rare in this forum, indeed. Looked at your landscapes, I quite like them; reminds me that you actually have to get out to take some interesting photographs ).

Good luck,AdrianThere is no spoon.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Http://www.flickr.com/photos/p_adr..

Comment #121

How about a portrait of the wife..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

RegardsJohnhttp://www.flickr.com/photos/17149496@N00/..

Comment #122

It's Black & White. You can stretch that thing to insane proportions. If the noise starts to come through, you can apply some noise-ninja to the sky..

Even if it's just a 2mp image now, I wouldn't mind having that thing as a 20"x30" on my wall..

There's an intensity to this picture that you've captured by placing yourself in the right spot before pressing the shutter release. Then your crop was just genius. I see all kinds of pictures here and after awhile I get a sense of what's available here. If I didn't have my own pictures and I saw this one at a mall or something, I would stop looking, because I would've stopped and looked for longer than I had paused at the rest. It pulls you in, it relaxes you and focuses you all at once..

Also, just so you know, I usually hate black & white and find it a gimmick. But it really works here. It really, really works. I bet if you put Ansel Adams at the bottom and asked people what they thought of it, all you would get would be glowing praises. Alot of what people see in art is a name. But first the art has to be in the same league as the name. So good work my friend...

Comment #123

Rob.

Everyone, everywhere, has to do everything for a first time. There is no shame in failure, only in failure to try...

Comment #124

He's trying to dedicate some time to help people out.. if he is willing to do that, that is fantastic. There's beginners out there like me who actually appreciate that. That being said, keep it up! ..and if you don't agree with him, just stay out of here.....

Comment #125

Johnboy wrote:.

How about a portrait of the wife..

Let's see....

Exposure is very good. Lighting is a bit flat. You usually want to use also a lateral light so the facial features get a bit of shadow and become more evident..

Some problems with the framing. A portrait should flatter and characterize the subject. Now, your framing is much too tight. Sometimes cutting off the top of the head work, emphasizing the face. In this particular composition, it does not. In fact it's quite bad.



Then, it's simply too tight. No air to breathe. It feels centered, too. If you check it against the rule of the thirds (well, more of a guideline), you'll find out that there is something significant in only one of the interesection points - and that's the far eye..

A much better compositon would have been framing more to your right, including more of her shoulder and giving her some space to look in..

Model pose. I have a problem with dpreview after a system upgrade, I can't look into people's profiles. So, take this with a grain of salt, because it can be both a cultural problem and a personal matter of taste. Have you guessed it yet?.

It's the smile. Your model saved it from being a 100% american smile, but it's quite close. I see this a lot in images from the US, but the trend is coming in the Europe, too..

Personally, I have a difficult time reading the face. Lower face says "I am REALLY glad to meet you", upper face says "I don't really give a /photos/17149496@N00/..

Comment #126

Moodish, but it looks seriously underexposed.The eye is too horizontally centered and way too close to the edge..

The framing is way, way too tight. To the top and right, you need more cat. To the left and bottom, you need more space for the animal to look into..

You could try flipping the image, that way the "look" would be left to right, our reading direction..

I feel that in this image the complete whiskers would have added to the image, as well..

Exposure looks as if you used a flash quite directly, and then darkened the image to hide the fact .

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #127

Oh, my!.

I really don't know where to start.I don't know where the image was shot, but I bet it was an interesting night..

The flash light kills any mood it might have been present. The harsh flash reflections in the face suggest a "stolen" paparazzo shot. The model expression does not suit at all the paraphernalia used. The eyelashes strongly add (or should I say substract?)..

The makeup is totally strong and totally red. It looks as a stage makeup. The thing with stage makeup is that it is supposed to be looked at from quite a distance and under the yellow stage light, not shot from quite close (or with a very long lens) and flash.The teeth are yellow. The up-your-nostrils perspeective is not ok at all..

Heh, now I see the title is halloween. What it looks to me is an attempt at a burlesque makeup/performace which got way out of the hand..

When I started this thread I said I would be honest - and I have always been. The most honest and representative thing for this picture is that when I saw it, it hit me like a truck - I've been laughing like mad for a few minutes. Such strong is the contrast between the model's expression and the paraphernalia used. Now, your lighting adds a few wagons of "in your face" ingredient in that mix..

Interestingly enough, without the harsh light, it might have been quite an interesting study in make-believe, tragedy and burlesque..

I don't think that was the intention, so I'd rate the image quite low..

Sztajmes wrote:.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #128

_valera wrote:.

Good thread, something rare in this forum, indeed. Looked at yourlandscapes, I quite like them; reminds me that you actually have toget out to take some interesting photographs ).

For some reason, after a computer upgrade, I can't see people's profile. I keep getting this message:.

Forbidden.

This page is protected by proprietary privacy software (to protect users email addresses)..

Your web browser did not pass the correct credentials to our server.

You may receive this message if you are blocking certain HTTP headers.

However, looking at your images, I see some grafitti which makes me say "Bucharest". Am I right? .

Good luck,AdrianThere is no spoon.

Http://www.flickr.com/photos/p_adr..

Comment #129

Ok, here's my first post and actually one of the first picture I took with a SLR (borrowed from a friend for an afternoon). All auto, no post processing..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #130

Regarding those errors you're getting, I suspect Internet Explorer 7 or some firewall software which may be blocking http referrals (just a guess). You may try Mozilla Firefox, might solve those problems..

Best regards,AdrianThere is no spoon.

Http://www.flickr.com/photos/p_adr..

Comment #131

Thanks for the feedback. When looking back at original thinking I cropped too much, I find that it was original frame. Also, I lightened it, not darkened it. I was "moodier" by a full stop. No flash. Thanks again, very helpful...

Comment #132

Tsx wrote:.

Ok, here's my first post and actually one of the first picture I tookwith a SLR (borrowed from a friend for an afternoon). All auto, nopost processing..

Well. The first view is very favourable, but that's quickly eclipsed by a lot of problems..

"All auto and no PP" it's NOT a good thing to do or say, it's not a motivation, it's like saying "officer, I was drunk when breaking those windows, it's not my fault". One does not care how you got that image - read the comment I gave to another mountain picture..

Now, the composition and lighting create an impression of space and vastness, and that's the great good thing. The bad things are little, but many, and add up..

I am guilty of that myself, and I keep on doing it; the sun in a landscape is rarely a good thing. It burns the highlights badly on digital, but fortunately that's not a problem here. But flare and glare are. And flare is terribly difficult to process out..

DOF control is bad, which is to be expected from auto. A good rule of the thumb is not to have out of focus things in the foreground, unless you use those as a framing..

Your friend has a dirty sensor, and it shows up in the sky. On the other side, you could have easily cloned out the dust..

The composition... it almost works. But you are breaking too many rules at a time. Tree dead center. Horizon centered. Sun in a bad place (a third).



However, the sky is interesting, so is the ice flakes texture. Maybe the effort is worth. You could crop off the entire left side - cut off all the flare. Clone out (that's a bit of a delicate job) the canopy appearing from nowhere. I see two compositions which might work, a square, and a classical rectangle, where you crop off some top and bottom from the square. Add some contrast control to enhance the snow and...

I'd reccomend the rectangle..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #133

Longtime point-and-shoot enthusiast...this is from my first walkaround with a DSLR. (Canon EOS-40D, Sigma 105mm Macro.) Thanks!.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #134

Hi.

This shot is from last Halloween parade in New York..

You know, 10 000 people, small street, no time for proper exposure no time for nothing:)Thank you for C&C Somehow I like this picture:).

Sztajmes.

Devnull wrote:.

Oh, my!.

I really don't know where to start.I don't know where the image was shot, but I bet it was aninteresting night..

The flash light kills any mood it might have been present. The harshflash reflections in the face suggest a "stolen" paparazzo shot. Themodel expression does not suit at all the paraphernalia used. Theeyelashes strongly add (or should I say substract?).The makeup is totally strong and totally red. It looks as a stagemakeup. The thing with stage makeup is that it is supposed to belooked at from quite a distance and under the yellow stage light, notshot from quite close (or with a very long lens) and flash.The teeth are yellow.



Heh, now I see the title is halloween. What it looks to me is anattempt at a burlesque makeup/performace which got way out of thehand..

When I started this thread I said I would be honest - and I havealways been. The most honest and representative thing for thispicture is that when I saw it, it hit me like a truck - I've beenlaughing like mad for a few minutes. Such strong is the contrastbetween the model's expression and the paraphernalia used. Now, yourlighting adds a few wagons of "in your face" ingredient in that mix..

Interestingly enough, without the harsh light, it might have beenquite an interesting study in make-believe, tragedy and burlesque..

I don't think that was the intention, so I'd rate the image quite low..

Sztajmes wrote:.

Ww.sztajmes.com/halloween.jpg..

Comment #135

Hi:.

I would appreciate your comments on this picture. It was taken in response to your review of a previous picture..

Thank you..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #136

Devnull wrote:.

You probably noticed that there is no real critique in these fora.Either an image gets unnoticed, or it gets a lot of "nice". Does notreally help a beginner with the true thing he bought a camera for:pictures..

I decided to donate some time for that purpose. So, post your imagesand you'll get a honest opinion, not unlikely what you'll get in aphotoclub..

I'm just starting out and using a Panasonic FZ7 and doing basic jpeg PP... I'd like a sense of whether I'm at the point I should move up to a DSLR or keep working with the P&S. Thanks....

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Brian..

Comment #137

Taken with a pany fz7,my first camera, just go all out on me!!!.

Full size can be found here:http://outdoors.webshots.com/album/560371400hbFmuT?start=0.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #138

Inverseroom wrote:.

Longtime point-and-shoot enthusiast...this is from my firstwalkaround with a DSLR. (Canon EOS-40D, Sigma 105mm Macro.) Thanks!.

I'll look at it as a macro. First thing I see... is nothing. There is a twig, probably splitting in two... and there is SOMETHING in the middle, but I can't figure what it is. The pattern is not interesting enough for the image to become an abstract..

The cause is twofold: i. bad DOF control; ii. poor composition. In macro, these two are usually interlocked..

One obvious thing is the twig in the left. Cut off for no reason. Then, it looks as if you shot along a central twig or something. But the DOF is THIN, so you can't see any details. So, poor choice of angle..

We usually want the subject in focus. If that's not possible, at least make it start in focus. And try not to put out of focus thing in front of the subject..

Look back this thread, there was an image of a barbed wire. Look how the DOF was made to help there, and how the composition is mostly confined in the depth of field..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #139

BLawson wrote:.

I'm just starting out and using a Panasonic FZ7 and doing basicjpeg PP... I'd like a sense of whether I'm at the point I shouldmove up to a DSLR or keep working with the P&S. Thanks....

That's a bedtime story SLR users like to tell. Everybody willing to learn is born ready. It's just a camera with a different set of compromises. You carry more, it gets a bit more complicated (DOF becames part of composition), some things become more complicated (like exposure), others get easier (like framing or focusing)..

Still life. Good choice. First thing, the napkin is overexposed at the right of the image. Lighting does not add to the image - well, maybe, a bit on the garlic. I don't like the way the napkin is folded and masking the subject..

By the way, you placed the light garlic near the light source and the dark vegetables in the shadows. Not the best choice..

I am not happy with the corner in the background. It attracts the eye where's nothing to see..

I'd also sharpen the image..

About the colors. I'd definitely go for black and white in this one. Look, only the capsicums are colored. The imagine practically begs for monchrome..

Now, that looks like too harsh a critique. But... it's a still life. You basically control _every single_ detail. So, it should be much better..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Brian..

Comment #140

Steven Huang wrote:.

Taken with a pany fz7,my first camera, just go all out on me!!!.

Full size can be found here:http://outdoors.webshots.com/album/560371400hbFmuT?start=0.

I have a feeling you did your best not to burn the highlights. But I think it's over the top. Both images feel underexposed..

Good try to turn a weakness into a strenght. I hate powerlines messing up landscapes. So, good ideea.The diagonal composition is a good idea, as well, as is the polarizer..

However, it's underexposed. The pole is a bit too centered, and it's not straight. The top part is cut off..

I feel that the polarizer effect is a bit too strong here, but that's a matter of taste. You might try it in monochrome, as well..

The jpg quality is too low. No reason posting an image full of artifacts. Choose a bit higher quality..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Well, that one is even more underexposed than the first one. And still not straight. Same jpg quality problem. Hard to critique... some cut off things in the left and a tree in the middle of the image. And some cut of trees at the right..

It makes me wonder... why the foreground is decently lit and the tree is that dark? It does not look like a graduated neutral density....

I can't relate to the image because of those problems, so it does not get a high rating..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #141

THX. they was the jpeg fine setting on camera thu.ty for comment!..

Comment #142

The thread has reached 150..

Thank you all, and I'll soon post some "conclusions" I came across critiqueing..

/d/n..

Comment #143

Click Here to View All...

Sponsored Amazon Deals:

1. Get big savings on Amazon warehouse deals.
2. Save up to 70% on Amazon Products.


This question was taken from a support group/message board and re-posted here so others can learn from it.

 

Categories: Home | Diet & Weight Management | Vitamins & Supplements | Herbs & Cleansing |

Sexual Health | Medifast Support | Nutrisystem Support | Medifast Questions |

Web Hosting | Web Hosts | Website Hosting | Hosting |

Web Hosting | GoDaddy | Digital Cameras | Best WebHosts |

Web Hosting FAQ | Web Hosts FAQ | Hosting FAQ | Hosting Group |

Hosting Questions | Camera Tips | Best Cameras To Buy | Best Cameras This Year |

Camera Q-A | Digital Cameras Q-A | Camera Forum | Nov 2010 - Cameras |

Oct 2010 - Cameras | Oct 2010 - DSLRs | Oct 2010 - Camera Tips | Sep 2010 - Cameras |

Sep 2010 - DSLRS | Sep 2010 - Camera Tips | Aug 2010 - Cameras | Aug 2010 - DSLR Tips |

Aug 2010 - Camera Tips | July 2010 - Cameras | July 2010 - Nikon Cameras | July 2010 - Canon Cameras |

July 2010 - Pentax Cameras | Medifast Recipes | Medifast Recipes Tips | Medifast Recipes Strategies |

Medifast Recipes Experiences | Medifast Recipes Group | Medifast Recipes Forum | Medifast Support Strategies |

Medifast Support Experiences |

 

(C) Copyright 2010 All rights reserved.