Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Flowing Ice  (Read 5210 times)
Boti
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 11



WWW
« on: December 05, 2011, 11:43:42 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,



Critiques welcomed, as always.

Thanks
Boti
Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #1 on: December 06, 2011, 03:23:29 AM »
ReplyReply

For some reason that I can't fathom, this picture reminds me of written music on a sheet - as, I suppose, were it written it would have to be. Not music, understand, but the musical notation.

I see exactly the same thing in guitar format every time that I look up at the six power lines runnning diagonally across the field in front of my home. These are now vanishing rapidly under the onslaught of pine trees growing wild after the chap who farmed that field gave up in disgust when the European Union paid him money to kill off his animals and stop growing cereals so that France could continue unchallenged to corner the market and do just that...

I believe those chickens are coming home to roost.

Rob C
Logged

luxborealis
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1166



WWW
« Reply #2 on: December 06, 2011, 07:48:22 AM »
ReplyReply

I'm firmly in the camp of those who believe "a photograph should stand on its own without a title to support it". So, for me, the photo does't do much without the title to "explain" its significance. If the ice is significant, it should have played a more significant role in the photo. Getting down even closer with details of the ice more dominant could have contributed even more to the concept.

The other point to remember is that a viewer's eye is always drawn tot he brightest part of the photo, in this case the lit trees, which pulls the viewer away from the main point of the photo. Getting down closer, eliminating the lit trees and concentrating on the patterns in the ice with the bottom of the unlit trees along the top would allow th ice then to become the brightest part of the image, the trees would be a supporting role to the composition and you would perhaps have conveyed your message more clearly.

Just some thoughts.
Logged

Terry McDonald
Revealing the art inherent in nature
- visit luxBorealis.com.
Have a read of my PhotoBlog and subscribe!
popnfresh
Guest
« Reply #3 on: December 06, 2011, 10:57:43 AM »
ReplyReply

Apart from the lighting, the composition is rather good. But the lighting is the real issue here. The trees and sky in the background are brightly lit, which caused your camera to underexpose the foreground. HDR would have helped, but then you'd have a photo with garish HDR color and bland lighting. The best solution would have been to shoot at a different time of day when the light was more advantageous.
« Last Edit: December 06, 2011, 11:00:05 AM by popnfresh » Logged
Peter McLennan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1695


« Reply #4 on: December 06, 2011, 11:22:25 AM »
ReplyReply

However, absent the brightly-lit (and possibly distracting) trees, you'd lose the golden reflection on the ice.

For me, the image doesn't quite hit the mark.  It shows too much.  It might have been more successful if you'd tightened the view to include just ice and reflection.

I love shooting ice.  If you still have access to that river, I'd be tempted to try some macro work there.
Logged
popnfresh
Guest
« Reply #5 on: December 06, 2011, 12:19:43 PM »
ReplyReply

However, absent the brightly-lit (and possibly distracting) trees, you'd lose the golden reflection on the ice.

For me, the image doesn't quite hit the mark.  It shows too much.  It might have been more successful if you'd tightened the view to include just ice and reflection.

I love shooting ice.  If you still have access to that river, I'd be tempted to try some macro work there.

The golden reflection in the ice only makes visual sense in the larger context that includes the trees. Without them, it just looks like dirty ice.
Logged
Boti
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 11



WWW
« Reply #6 on: December 06, 2011, 11:52:55 PM »
ReplyReply

Thank you all for your critiques.

I can draw my conclusions from here. There's too much in the image, no clear subject. Ice and light is competing with each other.
The golden reflection in the ice was what caught my eye, instantly I thought I need to show what was reflected. Clearly I was wrong.

Thanks again, your comments were really helpful.

Boti
Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #7 on: December 07, 2011, 08:14:06 AM »
ReplyReply

Thank you all for your critiques.

I can draw my conclusions from here. There's too much in the image, no clear subject. Ice and light is competing with each other.
The golden reflection in the ice was what caught my eye, instantly I thought I need to show what was reflected. Clearly I was wrong.
Thanks again, your comments were really helpful.

Boti


I've said this before, too often : do what pleases you; the hell with other opinions, even is you ask for them.

;-)

Rob C
Logged

luxborealis
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1166



WWW
« Reply #8 on: December 07, 2011, 08:30:00 AM »
ReplyReply

Boti: You were not wrong in what you did. In fact, the best thing you could be doing is photographing and sharing. I look upon much of what we do as photographers as "sketching" - working with ideas, practicing technique and developing our ability to see - much like painters do with their sketchbooks. Sharing the work you do isn't about validation; it's about learning.

Rob: You are correct, to a point. One shouldn't bend and mould their style to suit the opinions of others.

However, if someone posts here in the "User Critique" section, it's an indication that they are open to feedback. Being open to feedback is how we grow as photographers, crafts people and artists. Being open to other points of view, even if you disagree with them, is a broadening experience.

During the photo classes and workshops I conduct, students always look forward to the Critique Sessions where we all share our ideas of how to improve. We certainly do not accept everything everyone says, but we always walk away with a few nuggets that help us to become better photographers.
Logged

Terry McDonald
Revealing the art inherent in nature
- visit luxBorealis.com.
Have a read of my PhotoBlog and subscribe!
Boti
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 11



WWW
« Reply #9 on: December 08, 2011, 12:07:36 AM »
ReplyReply

Maybe my statement wasn't clear enough, I am doing what pleases me, It's not the doing, it's the outcome that's not exactly the thing that makes jump and shout of joy.
Terry, I know I wasn't wrong in what I did, if photography were a wrong thing to do, I wouldn't be doing it Smiley, I was wrong in what I thought was the best thing to do. As I said,
Quote
I thought I need to show what was reflected
but this raised a new problem (the brightly lit tree-tops and sky) that I was not aware of. Now I am, and this is exactly why I shared the picture - to learn through others opinions. You are so right about "sketching". I am practicing, I am trying to develop my ability to see photographically. And at this point I feel I need the help of others, that's why I'm sharing.

So thanks again
Boti
Logged

popnfresh
Guest
« Reply #10 on: December 08, 2011, 10:26:58 AM »
ReplyReply

I am practicing, I am trying to develop my ability to see photographically. And at this point I feel I need the help of others, that's why I'm sharing.

And that's exactly why this forum exists. I hope we can offer impartial critiques and helpful suggestions to you.
Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #11 on: December 08, 2011, 12:27:39 PM »
ReplyReply

And that's exactly why this forum exists. I hope we can offer impartial critiques and helpful suggestions to you.





Oh Pop! How do you manage to create impartial critiques?

That's the whole problem with this concept; to claim what you suggest is as unlikely as any guy's opinion being objective rather than, inevitably, subjective: I don't believe it's possble.

One's opinions, if offered in genuine mode, are moulded by one's personality which, itself, is conditioned by life experiences and genes.

Can't be done. So, inevitably, the neophyte gets, at the very least, a mild dose of brainwashing. That's why I think it's a bad idea. Sure, teach equipment and computer or film and developing, but don't mess with design/ideas. Not saying you are guillty of this, of course, just that it's a perilous path for anyone to travel.

Rob C
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 6034


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #12 on: December 08, 2011, 01:28:02 PM »
ReplyReply

... Sure, teach equipment and computer or film and developing, but don't mess with design/ideas...

Rob, this sounds incredibly extreme. So, teach someone layers in post-processing, or developing times in film, but teach them nothing about design, composition, perception, symbols, etc.!?

Sure, there are probably a couple of individuals in this world capable of picking up a camera and, without knowing any of this, being capable of producing unique artistic results, but they belong to a genius category. Or, in painting, it would be classified as naive art (at least at its origins). Us, mere mortals, can still improve our skills and yes, vision, by learning and doing. Most of us first need to learn certain rules in order to forget them or transcend them into our unique vision. Not knowing the rules is not going to get you there.

As Pop once noted:

Quote
"... People like to say that rules are meant to be broken, but I say that rules are meant to keep the clueless from looking like idiots. Only break a rule when you're good enough to know what you're doing."
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #13 on: December 08, 2011, 01:51:14 PM »
ReplyReply

Rob, this sounds incredibly extreme. So, teach someone layers in post-processing, or developing times in film, but teach them nothing about design, composition, perception, symbols, etc.!?

Sure, there are probably a couple of individuals in this world capable of picking up a camera and, without knowing any of this, being capable of producing unique artistic results, but they belong to a genius category. Or, in painting, it would be classified as naive art (at least at its origins). Us, mere mortals, can still improve our skills and yes, vision, by learning and doing. Most of us first need to learn certain rules in order to forget them or transcend them into our unique vision. Not knowing the rules is not going to get you there.

As Pop once noted:




Don't make me blush, Slobodan: nobody ever taught me anything other than how to load a reel. And how to bulk process thirty prints at a time in a dish. Except in colour processing, where I had the good fortune to have another Rob, in the industrial photo unit where I worked, teach me all I ever needed to know (in the 60s) about the colour neg/pos system. But that was nothing to do with aesthetics, unless you want to include using CC filters as that...?

If anybody taught me anything about seeing, it was the guys published in Popular Photography Annuals many long years ago, along with those in Vogue, Harpers, Playboy and so forth. That's not the same as listening to guys on a forum; it's about absorbing what you like and sussing out how it's done. You do it with your own eyes. Very different to listening to critiques.

If I may roughly paraphrase John Ruskin: thereís nothing in this world that some man canít offer to teach, and those who believe him are that manís lawful prey.

But then, you know me: Iím that radical guy who doesnít believe in fairies, just in miracles.

Rob C
 
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 6034


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #14 on: December 08, 2011, 02:06:38 PM »
ReplyReply

Rob, when girls with big boobs are the center of attention in a photo, who could blame the viewer for not noticing that you never learned, say, the rule of thirds? Grin

Alternatively, I'd be happy to accept you belong to the genius category Wink
« Last Edit: December 08, 2011, 02:25:32 PM by Slobodan Blagojevic » Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 6034


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #15 on: December 08, 2011, 02:17:58 PM »
ReplyReply

And, in the spirit of "brainwashing" our neophyte, I offer the following suggestion:

Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
popnfresh
Guest
« Reply #16 on: December 08, 2011, 03:47:09 PM »
ReplyReply

Oh Pop! How do you manage to create impartial critiques?

That's the whole problem with this concept; to claim what you suggest is as unlikely as any guy's opinion being objective rather than, inevitably, subjective: I don't believe it's possble.

One's opinions, if offered in genuine mode, are moulded by one's personality which, itself, is conditioned by life experiences and genes


Rob, there is absolutely no problem with this concept. People make impartial critiques and judgements all the time. In a court of law, for example, judges are presumed to be impartial and can get their rulings overturned if they're not. When critiquing a a photograph, giving an opinion based solely on the visual merits of the image is being impartial. Judging with your ego, or to belittle, bully or for self aggrandizement, is not being impartial. An impartial critique is not a put-down or a personal insult and is delivered without "prejudice", despite what you seem to think.
« Last Edit: December 08, 2011, 03:48:49 PM by popnfresh » Logged
wolfnowl
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5791



WWW
« Reply #17 on: December 08, 2011, 08:15:56 PM »
ReplyReply

And, in the spirit of "brainwashing" our neophyte, I offer the following suggestion:



Nicely done.

Mike.
Logged

If your mind is attuned to beauty, you find beauty in everything.
~ Jean Cooke ~


My Flickr site / Random Thoughts and Other Meanderings at M&M's Musings
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #18 on: December 09, 2011, 07:45:37 AM »
ReplyReply

Rob, when girls with big boobs are the center of attention in a photo, who could blame the viewer for not noticing that you never learned, say, the rule of thirds? GrinAlternatively, I'd be happy to accept you belong to the genius category Wink



Slobodan, the only time I saw a chick with a third boob was in, I think, a Hans Solo moment, or it might have been in Total Recall instead, I can't remember. She was propping up a bar. Wonderful set of options.

Slobodan, you mean you wouldn't know to use the 'rule' from instinct unless it had an official name hung onto it?

Rob C
« Last Edit: December 09, 2011, 07:51:06 AM by Rob C » Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #19 on: December 09, 2011, 07:59:59 AM »
ReplyReply

Rob, there is absolutely no problem with this concept. People make impartial critiques and judgements all the time. In a court of law, for example, judges are presumed to be impartial and can get their rulings overturned if they're not. When critiquing a a photograph, giving an opinion based solely on the visual merits of the image is being impartial. Judging with your ego, or to belittle, bully or for self aggrandizement, is not being impartial. An impartial critique is not a put-down or a personal insult and is delivered without "prejudice", despite what you seem to think.


There I agree, but then the alternative doesn't, in my mind, seem possible.

To use Law as an example is almost a laugh: dear God, it's all about money and whom you can afford to hire, and then retain, and for how long. Look at all of those high-profile cases that hit tv and the evidence screams at you. Law's just another ass for hire. I hired a lawyer to fight for me once; never again.

Rob C

Logged

Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad