Critics Corner

[deep diver]

Snippy snippy? No that just makes me feel bad !

Some of my stout will definitely help you get over those bad feelings. It will be ready to drink in about 4 weeks. That gives you enough time to schedule vacation and get your tickets. I have other brews that we're drinking now if you want to come sooner. I know there's no place in your part of the world to find a good stout.

 

[deep diver]

Cleveland, OH saw a massive influx of Jewish immigrants in the later 19th and early 20th centuries. Dozens of synagogues were built during that time. Many of the building were torn down because of urban infrastructure needs. 25 or 30 of the remaining buildings were sold to churches in the early to mid-20th century, as the Jewish population moved east. My photo group gave itself the project of photographing a few of these buildings. These images are from Tifereth Israel (Glory of Israel). It was built in 1894 and sold to Friendship Baptist Church in 1924.

This was Tifereth Israel’s second building. Many of the design features were replicated in their third building and then incorporated into a major expansion of their 4th building a couple of years ago.

This project lent itself to B&W images, but the color of the pipes is so rich that I was not sure which version I prefer. Sadly, the organ no longer works and is prohibitively expensive to rebuild.

.

 

[anotherscotsman]

I don't want to be a critic and not put up one of my own. I'll post something later today after I brew a batch of beer. Today it's an Irish stout.

In the meantime.......



What is that heavy black area about?

I am generally not a big fan of really dark shadows. When I hear "San Francisco", I think bright and vibrant. This image conflicts with that expectation. Creating a conflict like that can be a powerful artistic tool. I just don't think it works here.

Here also, I'm not sure what you are trying to convey. What would this be like if it were shot at street level and looking up the sidewalk?

-----------

I would love to see each of us reprocess our images based on the feedback, and then repost them.

.

I take your point about the conflict between the cheerfulness of SF and the dark-shadow treatment but I was trying to use the dark shadows to bring extra contrast to the woodwork of the building, the bit that gives the SF look for me at least. As you say, perhaps it doesn't work well in this case. I think you hit the nail on the head when you point out that it doesn't really convey any particular point or theme. Great feedback and much appreciated.

 

[Mark0]

Sometimes, I take a shot I love (whether it's technically good or has the right 'feel' or 'look' to it that I want) - but feel other people would be all "wtf is this?" sort of thing. Generally, I don't care because if I like it, I like it However, I'd like to know what folk think of this....

Shot info: Fuji X-T2 with XF 16-55mm f2.8 lens using LEE Filters 0.6 Neutral Density soft graduated filter and Formatt Hitech 0.9 Firecrest solid Neutral Density filter.
10s / f16 / ISO 200

 

[Apple fanboy]

Sometimes, I take a shot I love (whether it's technically good or has the right 'feel' or 'look' to it that I want) - but feel others would be all "wtf is this?" sort of thing. Generally, I don't care because if I like it, I like it However, I'd like to know what folk think of this....

Shot info: Fuji X-T2 with XF 16-55mm f2.8 lens using LEE Filters 0.6 Neutral Density soft graduated filter and Formatt Hitech 0.9 Firecrest solid Neutral Density filter.
10s / f16 / ISO 200

View attachment 761661

I think it's beautiful. Just the slither of light on the water makes the image. Take that away and it would be dull. Also you could take the same photo there a 100 times and never replicate this again. Good work. I wouldn't change a thing.
[doublepost=1526247031][/doublepost]

Cleveland, OH saw a massive influx of Jewish immigrants in the later 19th and early 20th centuries. Dozens of synagogues were built during that time. Many of the building were torn down because of urban infrastructure needs. 25 or 30 of the remaining buildings were sold to churches in the early to mid-20th century, as the Jewish population moved east. My photo group gave itself the project of photographing a few of these buildings. These images are from Tifereth Israel (Glory of Israel). It was built in 1894 and sold to Friendship Baptist Church in 1924.

This was Tifereth Israel’s second building. Many of the design features were replicated in their third building and then incorporated into a major expansion of their 4th building a couple of years ago.

This project lent itself to B&W images, but the color of the pipes is so rich that I was not sure which version I prefer. Sadly, the organ no longer works and is prohibitively expensive to rebuild.

View attachment 761552 View attachment 761553

.

B&W verses colour? That perennial photographer conundrum! In this instance I think there is more interest in the colour.

 

[kenoh]

Mod's, is it possible to make this a sticky thread?

*-*-* WARNING: Expect to be critiqued heavily - ask and ye shall receive. Do not post unless you accept that others will be brutally honest *-*-*

Critics Corner is a place for in-depth photographic discussions. Posters to this thread should use their photographic knowledge and perception fully to evaluate the given photograph. Also the information provided by the shooter should be taken into account to understand the shooting moment, for its limitations, opportunities, and how well the shooter performed under those circumstances.


For Requesters:

Firsly and most importantly, try to tell us what you set out to achieve when taking the shot; what were your thoughts and hopes about the scene being captured. In other words you, the topic starter, have to start the discussion yourself by providing your own evaluation of the picture and the points you want to discuss. There is a crucial point in the taking of a photo, and much that is done before the shutter is pressed can only be slightly improved with later PP. Describing the situation, surroundings, available shooting positions, available lighting possibilities can all enable the critiquers to come up with much more meaningful evaluations of your photo.

If you think you did the best possible job you could with a given scene and are just wondering if the end result is good in the eyes of others, say that. While you may feel like you should thank people for taking the time to critique your photo, please wait, at least initially when replies are likely to be posted quickly, and reply to several at once. This avoids your thread being bumped twice for every critique you receive. Finally, remember it goes without saying that all comments you receive are "IMO"; they're just somebody's opinion. And your own opinion is what matters most.

Be aware that when you post an image to this forum, you're not asking for a pat on the back. The assumption made by everyone who reads this forum is that you're looking for honest commentary and criticism. Members will tend to critique based on their own skill level so if you're nervous about commentary you might receive, take a few minutes to explain where you think you are, photographically, and what you hope to get out of the critique. If you think that you 'almost' nailed an image, but you're not quite happy with it - say that.


For Critiquers:

You should be honest, but be constructive. You can discuss aspects of a photograph without being judgemental toward the picture or the photographer. The difference between "harsh" and "constructive" lies in the wording and the intent to be helpful. Similarly, if you think a photograph is great and don't really have suggestions for improvement, it can still be helpful to the photographer to explain what you think is right about it. Perhaps the most important issue to comment on is the photographer's motivation for taking the shot; which we are now asking them to outline. Don't assume that every photograph "needs" improvement. If you can see obvious ways that an image could have been improved, either in capture or in post-processing, please feel free to suggest your ideas. Or simply comment on the pros & cons of an image. Remember, images are posted here for critiques, not "attaboys."

Need to contact the mods to ask if it can be made sticky. Email them from the contact us page...
[doublepost=1526288192][/doublepost]

Sometimes, I take a shot I love (whether it's technically good or has the right 'feel' or 'look' to it that I want) - but feel other people would be all "wtf is this?" sort of thing. Generally, I don't care because if I like it, I like it However, I'd like to know what folk think of this....

Shot info: Fuji X-T2 with XF 16-55mm f2.8 lens using LEE Filters 0.6 Neutral Density soft graduated filter and Formatt Hitech 0.9 Firecrest solid Neutral Density filter.
10s / f16 / ISO 200

View attachment 761661

I love this image. If I was being super critical and some of this is a reflection on my display calibration so sorry if that comes through.

I would like maybe half a bawhair more visible detail in the distant shore line. Just to make it stand out a tad more. Also, there seems to be a bit of pink trying to shine through centre highlight of image. Maybe consider removing it or enhancing it.

but...

I love it... I love the colour tone, it is a style of image - like I have said many times before - that I am desperate to take. I love this style of image.

 

[someoldguy]

Something for people to waste work time on when the boss isn't around.....

Taken with my M9 , 15 3.5 CV LTM , f9.5@1/250 , ISO 400 , hand held . Verticals referenced from the left side of the far right column .

 

[Cheese&Apple]

I'll also put-up...

This shot was taken hand-held in harsh, mid-day sunlight with not a cloud in the sky (iso100 1/125s f8 at 22mm with CP filter on EOSM). Trying to capture something instantly recognisable as San Fransisco without being a traditional tourist hot-spot. Not a bad picture overall but just seems to be lacking something. I'd also guess that rather than purely technical aspects, this corner might usefully help with the 'I don't know what' aspects.


Streets of SF 6 by another scotsman, on Flickr

As deep diver mentioned...the black band from top left (graduated filter added in post?) seems out of place anotherscotsman.

Honestly, I'm not sure what you could do with this. I'm left wondering if the better perspective may have been a wider angle, in landscape and looking up the street with the buildings on both side of the street included.

The street sign is cool and always like to see them included in this type of image.

Sometimes, I take a shot I love (whether it's technically good or has the right 'feel' or 'look' to it that I want) - but feel other people would be all "wtf is this?" sort of thing. Generally, I don't care because if I like it, I like it However, I'd like to know what folk think of this....

Shot info: Fuji X-T2 with XF 16-55mm f2.8 lens using LEE Filters 0.6 Neutral Density soft graduated filter and Formatt Hitech 0.9 Firecrest solid Neutral Density filter.
10s / f16 / ISO 200

View attachment 761661

Love it! Wish it was mine. Don't change a thing.

~ Peter

 

[Mark0]

I love this image. If I was being super critical and some of this is a reflection on my display calibration so sorry if that comes through.

I would like maybe half a bawhair more visible detail in the distant shore line. Just to make it stand out a tad more. Also, there seems to be a bit of pink trying to shine through centre highlight of image. Maybe consider removing it or enhancing it.

but...

I love it... I love the colour tone, it is a style of image - like I have said many times before - that I am desperate to take. I love this style of image.

Yeah, I hoped I’d see more gradual “layering” of the landscape but the fog didn’t play ball.

I’ve not noticed the pink hue but then again, my monitor isn’t calibrated. I just use my rMBP screen as it came out the box.

The pink might be explained by post sunset glow behind all that heavy fog, as that was around the time it was taken, within 30 minutes of the sun going down. Seems possible.

Thanks for the feedback.

 

[kenoh]

Something for people to waste work time on when the boss isn't around.....

View attachment 761701

Taken with my M9 , 15 3.5 CV LTM , f9.5@1/250 , ISO 400 , hand held . Verticals referenced from the left side of the far right column .

Been pondering this one for a day or so.

Only criticisms are maybe I would have timewarped and taken a step to the left to get the shrubs in more symmetrical alignment. I would also have tried to drop the highlight in the sky.

Beyond that its is nice warm temperature looking inviting space. I suppose the question is what is it telling us? Since the first feedback on this thread I am now obsessed with "the story"... I am struggling to see the story in my own images. So I am looking for examples to help me.

Edit: I love that lens on FF btw.

 

[someoldguy]

Been pondering this one for a day or so.

Only criticisms are maybe I would have timewarped and taken a step to the left to get the shrubs in more symmetrical alignment. I would also have tried to drop the highlight in the sky.

Beyond that its is nice warm temperature looking inviting space. I suppose the question is what is it telling us? Since the first feedback on this thread I am now obsessed with "the story"... I am struggling to see the story in my own images. So I am looking for examples to help me.

Edit: I love that lens on FF btw.

Thanks , yeah I would have liked to take that step to the left , too . But there's a minor problem in that the other wisteria was literally at my left shoulder .

So I had to deal with what I had , and do some cropping , which probably was needed anyway. Shoulda bumped up the blue saturation and luminosity some to cut back the highlights in the sky areas . So I did here ,

and it looks a lot better . Thanks for seeing that .
There's no real story behind the image , it's just a view that I liked . Think I'm past the stage of trying to extract some artsy-fartsy deep inner meaning from my shots , if I was ever at that stage . Though I suppose I could crank up the old bllsht machine and come up with something that would impress the gullible .Sure don't want to start taking myself too seriously , though .

Does your 15/3.5 have wicked red/green CA? Mine's an old screw mount one and it sure does .

If you REALLY need a story , here's info about the location :https://vanvleck.org/?page_id=1075

 

[kenoh]

Thanks , yeah I would have liked to take that step to the left , too . But there's a minor problem in that the other wisteria was literally at my left shoulder .
View attachment 761857
So I had to deal with what I had , and do some cropping , which probably was needed anyway. Shoulda bumped up the blue saturation and luminosity some to cut back the highlights in the sky areas . So I did here ,

View attachment 761859

and it looks a lot better . Thanks for seeing that .
There's no real story behind the image , it's just a view that I liked . Think I'm past the stage of trying to extract some artsy-fartsy deep inner meaning from my shots , if I was ever at that stage . Though I suppose I could crank up the old bllsht machine and come up with something that would impress the gullible .Sure don't want to start taking myself too seriously , though .

Does your 15/3.5 have wicked red/green CA? Mine's an old screw mount one and it sure does .

If you REALLY need a story , here's info about the location :https://vanvleck.org/?page_id=1075

Ah yes the dreaded smearing. So yes, my v1 did do that and I so loved the tiny size but as I love using it, i got a v3 which works perfectly. It is bigger but means I can shoot colour.

EDIT: there is the Adobe flat field plug in that could be used but I was never very happy with the results. The Version 3 is in a word... Sublime. So if you enjoy the 15mm FoV, I would recommend getting one. the V2 is same optical formula as the V1 just native M mount so has same issues as V1.

 

[Nathan King]

Cleveland, OH saw a massive influx of Jewish immigrants in the later 19th and early 20th centuries. Dozens of synagogues were built during that time. Many of the building were torn down because of urban infrastructure needs. 25 or 30 of the remaining buildings were sold to churches in the early to mid-20th century, as the Jewish population moved east. My photo group gave itself the project of photographing a few of these buildings. These images are from Tifereth Israel (Glory of Israel). It was built in 1894 and sold to Friendship Baptist Church in 1924.

This was Tifereth Israel’s second building. Many of the design features were replicated in their third building and then incorporated into a major expansion of their 4th building a couple of years ago.

This project lent itself to B&W images, but the color of the pipes is so rich that I was not sure which version I prefer. Sadly, the organ no longer works and is prohibitively expensive to rebuild.

View attachment 761552 View attachment 761553

.

Most of my own work is monochrome. While I typically prefer it I find this particular image to work better in color. It's certainly a worthy subject, and I like how carefully you have framed it for symmetry. The pipes stand out nicely from the dark background, but the pipes themselves are rather evenly illuminated. There just isn't enough play of light and shadow across the pipes themselves to make a compelling monochrome for me. I also find color to work well with a restricted palette, which you have with the gold and brown.

Out of curiosity, have you cropped this image at all? If so, I'd be interested in seeing the entire frame.

 

[mollyc]

I think storytelling is an important part of photography, and generally my main goal, but, as evidenced by my vast macro shooting, sometimes the story is literally just a pretty photo or vignette. It’s okay to have that as the whole story.

 

[Alexander.Of.Oz]

I think storytelling is an important part of photography, and generally my main goal, but, as evidenced by my vast macro shooting, sometimes the story is literally just a pretty photo or vignette. It’s okay to have that as the whole story.

Have to agree with that sentiment, @mollyc ! Sometimes an image is just a celebration or exploration of a thing, or a bit of a thing, sometimes, like @Mark0 's image above it is more a mood or a mystery, which his is both, and not so much of a story as such.

 

[deep diver]

Most of my own work is monochrome. While I typically prefer it I find this particular image to work better in color. It's certainly a worthy subject, and I like how carefully you have framed it for symmetry. The pipes stand out nicely from the dark background, but the pipes themselves are rather evenly illuminated. There just isn't enough play of light and shadow across the pipes themselves to make a compelling monochrome for me. I also find color to work well with a restricted palette, which you have with the gold and brown.

Out of curiosity, have you cropped this image at all? If so, I'd be interested in seeing the entire frame.

Thank you, Nathan. I appreciate the feedback. This is a picture right out of the camera from the back of the sanctuary. It is not the image I used for the other but this shows the entire context.

 

[Cheese&Apple]

I think storytelling is an important part of photography, and generally my main goal, but, as evidenced by my vast macro shooting, sometimes the story is literally just a pretty photo or vignette. It’s okay to have that as the whole story.

This is an interesting comment @mollyc and I absolutely agree. It seems to me that some people, especially judges in competitions and camera clubs, are obsessed with the story that an image tells. While it's true that in photo journalism the story is everything, I think it's ok to create images for no other reason than you enjoy them.

I am now obsessed with "the story"... I am struggling to see the story in my own images. So I am looking for examples to help me.

@kenoh - see my comment above. Don't obsess - just enjoy doing what you're doing. If you do, maybe that's the story you're looking for.

 

[kenoh]

This is an interesting comment @mollyc and I absolutely agree. It seems to me that some people, especially judges in competitions and camera clubs, are obsessed with the story that an image tells. While it's true that in photo journalism the story is everything, I think it's ok to create images for no other reason than you enjoy them.


@kenoh - see my comment above. Don't obsess - just enjoy doing what you're doing. If you do, maybe that's the story you're looking for.

I was on your site again last night.... still loving the Hawaii images...

Yep, I think I am getting too caught up in it all again... need to relax a bit. Asked one of the pro's I know how to improve and they said "smoke pot".... yeah thanks for that, not really compatible with my career now is it!?! ha ha ha....

 

[Cheese&Apple]

I was on your site again last night.... still loving the Hawaii images...

Yep, I think I am getting too caught up in it all again... need to relax a bit. Asked one of the pro's I know how to improve and they said "smoke pot".... yeah thanks for that, not really compatible with my career now is it!?! ha ha ha....

Thanks Ken, yeah...I'm itching to get back to Kauai - it's paradise on earth.

Btw, given that:

1. I'm retired, and
2. Pot will be legal in Canada this coming July,

I'll let you know how it goes.

~ Peter

 

[kenoh]

Thanks Ken, yeah...I'm itching to get back to Kauai - it's paradise on earth.

Btw, given that:

1. I'm retired, and
2. Pot will be legal in Canada this coming July,

I'll let you know how it goes.

~ Peter

Or you might just see me in late July! ha ha ha... looking forward to some inspiring creation of vision.

 

[keyrex]

I was trying to get the light shining through the Oak tree leaves and get a shallow dof at the same time, i am not sure if it has ended up too bright. I like the framing and the way the eye is drawn to the central part of the tree which it what i intended but there is something i am not happy about, maybe it is the dark branch under them, i dont know.
Anyway, I am going to lie down in a dark room now and get ready for your comments, thanks in advance.

 

[kenoh]

I was trying to get the light shining through the Oak tree leaves and get a shallow dof at the same time, i am not sure if it has ended up too bright. I like the framing and the way the eye is drawn to the central part of the tree which it what i intended but there is something i am not happy about, maybe it is the dark branch under them, i dont know.
Anyway, I am going to lie down in a dark room now and get ready for your comments, thanks in advance.
View attachment 762210

So my brother in law took some amazing shots similar in theme to this a few years back and I have been trying to capture a similar mood ever since.

It isnt easy. I think the main challenge is to make the bit in focus stand out, to give the tree depth.

The way he did it was instead of trying to get the front bit in sharp relief, he took a shot through the tree branches and focussed on a subject towards the middle/back thus getting depth. By placing the in focus bit behind the bokeh bit rather than in front, it seemed to make the image work.

I wonder if this would have been a plan for this image? The image as it is just doesnt have the subject stand out enough, the sharp branches get lost in the bokeh. Exposure wise it is well done but I think you are struggling with the same challenge as wrecks my head. Vivid green on green, how do you make it pop.

Dont know, that sounded plausible in my head before I typed it. Thoughts?

 

[keyrex]

So my brother in law took some amazing shots similar in theme to this a few years back and I have been trying to capture a similar mood ever since.

It isnt easy. I think the main challenge is to make the bit in focus stand out, to give the tree depth.

The way he did it was instead of trying to get the front bit in sharp relief, he took a shot through the tree branches and focussed on a subject towards the middle/back thus getting depth. By placing the in focus bit behind the bokeh bit rather than in front, it seemed to make the image work.

I wonder if this would have been a plan for this image? The image as it is just doesnt have the subject stand out enough, the sharp branches get lost in the bokeh. Exposure wise it is well done but I think you are struggling with the same challenge as wrecks my head. Vivid green on green, how do you make it pop.

Dont know, that sounded plausible in my head before I typed it. Thoughts?

You are absolutely right, thank you. I tried to get the dof to make the leaf and erm, the dangly bit (thats the technical term) stand out and like you said 'pop' but how?
That was taken at 400mm f5.6 from only 20ft away, i cant get any more dof than that with my lens, i could though with a better technique and that idea sounds like a plan to me. Weather permitting i'll give it a go as soon as i can and post it for comparison.

 

[deep diver]

400mm f5.6 from only 20ft away,

That's a really long lens for what you want to do. Can you get in any closer with a wide angle lens?

 

[keyrex]

That's a really long lens for what you want to do. Can you get in any closer with a wide angle lens?

Unfortunately not, the tree is in the neighbours garden so i have zoom over my fence. I used the long lens because i thought that would create better dof - it didn't!
How would it make a difference with a wider lens? I thought the closer we could zoom the better, I guess thats not the case though, would a wider lens enable the subject to 'pop' out? and then crop the photo?