* Wed C&C No Theme Thread #315 14 05 07 *

19andrew47

Forum Pro
Messages
51,930
Solutions
9
Reaction score
3,119
Location
Southern Ontario, CA
Welcome to the Wednesday Comments and Critique (No Theme) thread!

We are continuing the great tradition of this C&C thread because we are convinced that looking at and talking about images is vital for better photography.

The idea is simple: you post an image and get critique on it, and in return give other people your opinion of their images, or vice versa.

Generally, you should post only one single image for C&C. As an exception, you may post two pictures resulting from one shutter release but with different treatment (for example a color and a black & white version, or a different crop) for us to choose from and comment on.

TWO RULES:

1.If you post an image, you should critique at least one other image.

2.Keep your comments honest but polite. If you don’t care for an image try to explain why. This is neither a “Good shot!” nor an image-bashing thread.

Any style, any camera. It is a peer-to-peer photography workshop!

Feedback is guaranteed (for up to 48 h after the thread has started)! Though keep in mind that the thread tends to be busiest during the first 24 hours or so, so later image posts may get little feedback.

HOW TO PLAY:

1.Turn on "Threaded view" and reply to this post with a web-sized image. Change the title so we can sort different images out easily!

2.Get back to this thread in a minute, an hour or a day or so, and…

3.…still in threaded view, look at one or more pictures of your choice, click reply and critique it.

4.Remember to add the EXIF if your image doesn't embed it as this may help

5.Image posters: please consider telling us what your own opinion on your image is. What prompted you to click that shutter button? What did you see? Why do you like the result? You don't have to explain, but it might be interesting.

6.You are very welcome to post a group reply to the feedback you have received. This could include a new version of your image modified in response to the comments.

IF THIS IS YOUR FIRST TIME, WELCOME! AND BE SURE TO READ THIS:

•The critique you give (point 3 from the above list) is vital. What was your first impression? What catches your eye about an image? Why? What do you like, and what distracts you? What would you change?

•Fiddle with the image in your head - composition, perspective, color balance, exposure.
  • It is understood that unless the original poster specifically states that they do not want an altered image posted that you are free to alter the posted image and repost it in a reply for C&C purposes. That reposted image may remain permanently or you may remove it after a short period of time if you prefer.
•More general feedback is also welcome. Do you know something about taking the same sort of image that would make matters easier - share your own as an example in your reply. Encourage - it is a scary business putting your work up for other people to judge!

•Finally what is the verdict? Waste-bin? Snapshot? Could be better? Family Album? Frame on wall? Poster-size frame on wall? Billboard? Reuters? World Press Photo? National Geographic? Museum? (pick your own superlative here)

One of the first replies is “The Related Post”. This is the place to post your general musings about the C&C Thread.

Another of the first replies includes a link to all previous threads. This is called "Archives".

Andrew (19andrew47)
 
Last edited:
Thanks to all who commented. I don't usually do these simple compositions so I didn't have a lot of faith in it. The museum guide where I took the photo was a man in his 70's who'd grown up in a farm family, and he was wearing clogs that he had made. I don't know the provenance of the pile of clogs I found behind the door, but they were scuffed up as if they'd been worn. Thanks to Zin for the video clip. My favorite parts of the trip were in the rural areas. I nearly got killed every time I set foot into Amsterdam - those bicycles!!
 
My preference for #1 is for it rendered in a deeper, darker, more weighty-looking stone. In this rendition the subject seems ceramic, almost papery. My thought is that I'd want the figure looking more part of the environment than apart from the environment. This is purely personal preference; everyone sees the Buddha in his/her own light.

#2 is a pleasing detail, doesn't seem contrived. Who cannot like Hen & Chicks? We have a flock in our garden; they need an overseer too.

--
Zin
.....and made it a bit darker, and a trifle softer. And, I think I like it better. You make a good point about the Buddha and how he fits into the environment, and though I appreciate your comment that this is personal preference, I don't think it entirely is a matter of preference. Although of course the Buddha can be seen as representative of light, in this context the lightness was an obvious addition, and not natural to the surroundings. This darker version also brings out the weathering and staining more, which I think is appropriate, and allows the background rocks to look more like themselves.

Thanks once again for your insight, and always thoughtful critique!









--
Nate
"There's only one rule in photography - never develop colour film in chicken noodle soup." - Freeman Patterson
 

Attachments

  • 2916819.jpg
    2916819.jpg
    694.9 KB · Views: 0
[No message]
 
You know Lou, when I looked at this one, my first reaction was "love the fence, hate the flowers, I'm going to stay out of this one". Then I went back and looked again, and later again. I think I was trying to figure out what it was that disturbed me about the flowers......and then it hit me. It wasn't the flowers, it was the way I was looking at them; trying to make them conform to a literal representation of flowers, instead of seeing them as part of the whole image. And then it hit me. It was because I couldn't see this image properly (at 100%) as a whole. I can only see a section of it, then scroll around to see another section. To really be appreciated, I think this needs to be viewed on large paper (or at least a really big screen). My 26" monitor just isn't enough. But I still find myself going back and looking again, and again. So I've changed my opinion completely on this one, Lou. Nice work!
 
Chairs, Chairs everywhere and not a place to sit...



(Apologies to Samuel Taylor Coleridge).



0e63023d9bb541b29602c634a4dac0f4.jpg



--
If, in my lifetime, I will have produced just one image that makes a real difference in the life of another, I will have achieved my highest goal as a photographer.
 
Well Roel, you know I can not help myself when it comes to having a go, so true to form a slightly modified image is below. I think this benefits from the removal of the wires and a lifting of the shadows (as presented here anyway). The shadows were lifted primarily to show some detail in the black robes (+31 in LR 4.4). Also I used the local adjustment brush to lift the deep shadow in the entrances on the far side (not necessary but adds to the context of the locale for me) and adjusted the sky a bit, maybe not quite the right colour though. A slight use of the LAB also on the upper torso/head of your seated wife. Nicely framed and composed. As a side note I looked through your gallery again. I really like the image you took in the mirror of the two of you. Very nice!

Andrew

Original by Roel Hendrickx adjusted for C&C purposes only
Original by Roel Hendrickx adjusted for C&C purposes only

12-40 lens on E-M5

12-40 lens on E-M5
Also interesting to me is that both the Iranian women and the foreigner just go about their business; there's no apparent "culture shock" either way. Nice.
In truth, there was very little if any culture shock.

The only adjustment we really needed to make in our brain, was when we moved from Yazd (unicolour serenity in desert-form) to Isfahan (brightly coloured and exuberant lavishness). But that were the cities having to adapt to each other, not us...
Roel Hendrickx
lots of images: www.roelh.zenfolio.com
my Olympus user field report from Tunisian Sahara: http://www.biofos.com/ukpsg/roel.html
This is interesting. I see this quite differently, more as though there is such a culture clash that they (the Iranian women) have made the decision not to look, not to see. Its as though the cultures exist on separate planes. I'm not proud of my interpretation here, and actually hope that I'm very wrong.

--
Nate
"There's only one rule in photography - never develop colour film in chicken noodle soup." - Freeman Patterson
 
6c90057db6574731b3a22de7d7eab8d3.jpg

As usual, better in original view.

--
Zin
Andrew wrote:

Who put the orange watering can in there? An interesting image from the point of view of examining the written descriptions under the watering cans. I am not sure what the NaCl is for though. I didn't think that would be applied to plants. I like the light and shadow play in the image. I think I would try to change the orange in the corner to fit better with the green, maybe blacken it with the local adjustment brush.

Lou wrote:

Zin, you often come with something surprising and this is no exception. Love this shot and graduated colours. Did you wrote those chemical formulas on that shelf ?

Richard wrote:

A really nice contemporary image that you have composed so well with shape, color and text elements.......like it a lot.....

Scott wrote:

"Barkeep, I'll take a pint of ammonium phosphate, please. And a glass of magnesium nitrate for my friend, here."

I like this composition, with the parallel spouts leading in from the top. Nice colors too.

Nate wrote:

Nice composition and colors, Zin. Is this some sort of hydroponic facility? Way too scientific for my gardening style.....I'm more the throw it in the ground and see what happens type.

Roel wrote:

I waited a long time with expressing my thoughts, because I had a hard time deciding what bothered me here.

And it is nothing photographic.

But the image makes me sad, because I don't like to associate nature and environment with chemistry (I am hopelessly naive, I know, thanks for reminding me).

We see a symphony of greens here, and that should make me happy, but the REAL green is oppressed in this image : a vivid plant clinging on for dear life in the lower left corner.

All the other greens are tools of the trade : watering cans that would seem cute to me if it were not for those chemical formulas written under them. This looks like Walter White's garden.

(In reality, those formulas are probably all very innocent concoctions - I would not know, I am not a gardener in any sense (although I do sympathize with the "Constant Gardener", BTW - great book and even better movie : IMHO one of the most tragic ever love stories...)

In that context, the solo orange watering can looks almost menacing, as if (contrary to its green siblings) this contains the lethal poison for the execution. Orange makes me think of the orange overalls worn by convicts - my subconscious is really derailing here.

At best, it still seems that the little green plant needs artificial life support in order to survive, with the tube exiting from the tap, resembling the drip-drop of an intravenous baxter.

So what do you conclude now?

Probably nothing, except that my mind moves in mysterious ways.

Stephen wrote:

Hi mate, great tones and shades in this one.

Was the orange patch also a watering can? If so it could make for a contrasting image.

Group Response:

Thank you all. I greatly enjoyed reading your comments.

The scene is at a stainless-steel workbench in the Botany Greenhouse of University of Washington in Seattle. Although I visit the greenhouse fairly often, I haven't yet asked about the potions -- one day I will. For now I just savor the mystery, which for some reason is more intriguing than the greenhouse's bins of various soils. In legend, elixirs are magic; soils are just dirt.

My photo included only about half the array of vessels; some are other colors. I chose the section to shoot because it was without intrusions of unrelated stuff, and for its color spread. I also liked the limited number of elements and their discrete arrangement, including a vacant quarter. But the clincher for me was the the line of chemical notation and its dual role of separation/connection.

I also liked the potential for viewers' further speculation about, e.g., agricultural practices and our food production system.

I visited the greenhouse again yesterday. Below is another shot of the area, in which the "orange" container is seen to be yellow when an oblique angle on its receding side isn't the only part visible.



dab60ad959fc42b7bd56057ef1e89a9a.jpg



--
Zin
 
My preference for #1 is for it rendered in a deeper, darker, more weighty-looking stone. In this rendition the subject seems ceramic, almost papery. My thought is that I'd want the figure looking more part of the environment than apart from the environment. This is purely personal preference; everyone sees the Buddha in his/her own light.

#2 is a pleasing detail, doesn't seem contrived. Who cannot like Hen & Chicks? We have a flock in our garden; they need an overseer too.

--
Zin
.....and made it a bit darker, and a trifle softer. And, I think I like it better. You make a good point about the Buddha and how he fits into the environment, and though I appreciate your comment that this is personal preference, I don't think it entirely is a matter of preference. Although of course the Buddha can be seen as representative of light, in this context the lightness was an obvious addition, and not natural to the surroundings. This darker version also brings out the weathering and staining more, which I think is appropriate, and allows the background rocks to look more like themselves.

Thanks once again for your insight, and always thoughtful critique!



--
Nate
"There's only one rule in photography - never develop colour film in chicken noodle soup." - Freeman Patterson
I appreciate seeing the alternative version; more visibility for the accretions from exposure to weather, etc., impart an earthy presence nicely in tune with the background appearance.

Mostly I use a laptop online, which I fear doesn't show photos' technical qualities all that well, so my observations in that line are not always confident. Just by moving the computer's brightness control up and down yields quite different looks -- sometimes hard to know what is the "real" image.



--
Zin
 
Well Roel, you know I can not help myself when it comes to having a go, so true to form a slightly modified image is below. I think this benefits from the removal of the wires and a lifting of the shadows (as presented here anyway). The shadows were lifted primarily to show some detail in the black robes (+31 in LR 4.4). Also I used the local adjustment brush to lift the deep shadow in the entrances on the far side (not necessary but adds to the context of the locale for me) and adjusted the sky a bit, maybe not quite the right colour though. A slight use of the LAB also on the upper torso/head of your seated wife. Nicely framed and composed. As a side note I looked through your gallery again. I really like the image you took in the mirror of the two of you. Very nice!

Andrew

Original by Roel Hendrickx adjusted for C&C purposes only
Original by Roel Hendrickx adjusted for C&C purposes only

12-40 lens on E-M5

12-40 lens on E-M5
Also interesting to me is that both the Iranian women and the foreigner just go about their business; there's no apparent "culture shock" either way. Nice.
In truth, there was very little if any culture shock.

The only adjustment we really needed to make in our brain, was when we moved from Yazd (unicolour serenity in desert-form) to Isfahan (brightly coloured and exuberant lavishness). But that were the cities having to adapt to each other, not us...

Roel Hendrickx
lots of images: www.roelh.zenfolio.com
my Olympus user field report from Tunisian Sahara: http://www.biofos.com/ukpsg/roel.html
This is interesting. I see this quite differently, more as though there is such a culture clash that they (the Iranian women) have made the decision not to look, not to see. Its as though the cultures exist on separate planes. I'm not proud of my interpretation here, and actually hope that I'm very wrong.
Reactions by Iranian women to my wife's appearance were (generally speaking) threefold:

* just the same reaction as to any other woman who chooses not to wear the chador (literally : "tent") but a more "stylish" dress that covers the necessary body parts

* by some women : a slight "looking down" attitude (but this was not directed at my wife being a foreigner - those women, who consider the chador to be the only suitable dress when walking in public, also look down on other iranian women with a more relaxed appearance)

* enthusiastic approach (not so much because of the dress, but mostly because of me walking beside her : my wife can pass for a local in many countries, but I stand out as a clear western guy) - many many many iranians love approaching foreigners, asking them about their country and how they experience Iran, and if such a conversation continues for more than three minutes, invitations for lunch or dinner almost certainly follow... Never mistake a people for its nation : the iranians are by and large a very very hospitable people...



--
Roel Hendrickx
lots of images: www.roelh.zenfolio.com
my Olympus user field report from Tunisian Sahara: http://www.biofos.com/ukpsg/roel.html
 
I always try something to see if that is possible and that often produces strange results.

And though it's nice that others appreciate and find beautiful (or ugly), for me it is first important because it offers opportunities that I can use in other compilations later. So Nate it's good that you say what you think and the way you travel to come to your thoughts, and if you find something horrible you can also tell, but preferably with reasons as you did now the other way.

Lou
Painting the landscape

Thanks for looking & commenting

Lou

best seen enlarged

best seen enlarged
 
I've just returned from two weeks in Holland and Belgium and though most of my photos are family snaps, I will have to post a bunch of stuff here just because these things are so novel to me, so be prepared to endure them. Tulips and Windmills will follow.

I found this pile of shoes while peeping behind a door in a nicely cluttered museum (yes I am nosy) about farming in north Holland.

69166c2a003a4fe690a510583b52b4af.jpg
I think I like the patch of light here, as an element that makes the shot.

The wooden shoes are probably exotic for many, but quite an ordinary view for me.

They have a robust elegance of shape (you should see one of those guys shaping them from a block of wood : impressive work).
And here's the video. My Dutch family member thinks the usual wood might be poplar or willow. Doesn't split in use, yet tough.

Exactly the kind of video I was thinking of.

I once saw someone do this for real. It went incredibly fast.
The tones in your image are subdued and pleasing.

But the patch of light introduces life in what would otherwise be a still life.

--
Roel Hendrickx
lots of images: www.roelh.zenfolio.com
my Olympus user field report from Tunisian Sahara: http://www.biofos.com/ukpsg/roel.html
--
Zin


--
Roel Hendrickx
lots of images: www.roelh.zenfolio.com
my Olympus user field report from Tunisian Sahara: http://www.biofos.com/ukpsg/roel.html
 
Striking photo. The story behind it reminds me of Elizabeth Kolbert's book "The Sixth Extinction" that describes how mankind's lasting legacy is likely to be the mass extinctions left behind in our specie's wake. Something that will take nature millions of years to repair.
 
These chairs are obviously for sale as customizable items with the bin of swapable parts in the image. I think this would benefit greatly from a crop from the top to about the level of the top of the large overhead door. This gives the chairs a greater presence in the image while removing an area lacking interest. Also, here I would straighten the verticals that are visible in the metal work of the walls. It appears that in your processing choices here you have introduced some halos around the people. This is most visible around the woman with the white top and dark 'baseball' cap.

I could use a couple of those chairs Charles, but maintenance free!

Andrew
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top