-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
My co-trainee told me this is a bad photo... please comment
- Thread starter Liquidvamp
- Start date
Yeah, don't get too worked up over one person's opinion.
This was my thought, looking at the original photo. A lot of times, shooting straight-on like this looks a bit flat. But as for "balance", I think it would look more boring if it were "balanced", say, just the grader and everything else cropped out. Maybe like others have suggested, trim some of the bottom, might have been nice to get more sky, but I don't think the photo is so bad; perhaps the subject matter is not as engaging. But I just can't help the feeling that if you really wanted to make this a subject, getting in closer (or, if you were not able to get close, more zoom?) and using different angles could make it more interesting.
Yeah, now if I could come up with ideas like those while walking around.
webrunner5
Senior Member
To the OP. That picture is a snapshot not a photograph. It looks like a drive by shooting with a camera instead of a gun. A photograph is a shot you put some or a lot of thought into. Check different camera angles, F setting, maybe a different lens etc. It just looks to me like you where in a hurry, saw it, and shot from the hip.
And on a object as big as that Trackhoe is you never take a picture of it straight at its side. Like one commenter said it comes out flat looking. Shoot it at a angle from the front and it will have tons of depth to it and a lot more interest.
And on a object as big as that Trackhoe is you never take a picture of it straight at its side. Like one commenter said it comes out flat looking. Shoot it at a angle from the front and it will have tons of depth to it and a lot more interest.
Last edited:
Michael Everett
Senior Member
I think the way you have saturated further the colors works very well. You have brought the sky and the blue box into conformity, so that the two complement each other, and add to the structure of the composition. The digger is better positioned as it is more to the right and lower, with some of the gravel cropped out, and the orange of the machine stands out well against the green and blue, while the gravel has a neutral color, serving mainly as a platform -- both literally and figuratively -- for the main interest of the photograph.to keep the 4 elemnt you wanted to include in the picture, a proposition
perspective+crop+WB+contrast+resize
Let me comment on the earlier comment about this being a snapshot or a documentary, not art. I'm not sure art can be segregated so. I'm not going to try to delineate what makes a photograph art, but I'm not sure it is defined by photographer's intention. It's more ineffable, but I believe it begins in the stomach -- when a photograph hits you in the gut, moves you somehow, and has staying power, then we are getting close to art. Of course not all photographs that do that are art, but to me that's a start.
Finally let me say this version of the photograph reminds me of William Eggleston, vibrant colors of mundane objects.
Michael
Liquidvamp
Active member
Thank youI think the way you have saturated further the colors works very well. You have brought the sky and the blue box into conformity, so that the two complement each other, and add to the structure of the composition. The digger is better positioned as it is more to the right and lower, with some of the gravel cropped out, and the orange of the machine stands out well against the green and blue, while the gravel has a neutral color, serving mainly as a platform -- both literally and figuratively -- for the main interest of the photograph.to keep the 4 elemnt you wanted to include in the picture, a proposition
perspective+crop+WB+contrast+resize
Let me comment on the earlier comment about this being a snapshot or a documentary, not art. I'm not sure art can be segregated so. I'm not going to try to delineate what makes a photograph art, but I'm not sure it is defined by photographer's intention. It's more ineffable, but I believe it begins in the stomach -- when a photograph hits you in the gut, moves you somehow, and has staying power, then we are getting close to art. Of course not all photographs that do that are art, but to me that's a start.
Finally let me say this version of the photograph reminds me of William Eggleston, vibrant colors of mundane objects.
Michael
--
Please see my Gallery: http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/2596250586
My Humble Flicker page: https://www.flickr.com/photos/123412529@N05/
antoineb
Veteran Member
Hi Liquidvamp,
is this a "bad" photo? I wouldn't go as far.
But I find it very "duh", very boring.
Some suggestions:
- what is the story? I'm not seeing any.
- what is the message? Not seeing any.
- what did you feel that made you want to take the shot? Feels like you just photographed whatever was there, as if you had been a robot. Where's the "art"?
- what are you trying to convey with this shot? Not sure.
As far as I'm concerned this is at best a descriptive shot, showing a Hyundai excavator, some gravel, some trees. The trees and the sky seem the most interesting bit but they're behind
If you liked the orange excavator then why not focus on it? If the trees and sky then why not make a composition just with them?
So bottom-line, I wouldn't say "bad", but really what is the point?
P.S. Don't go to those seminars. The key things in photography, i.e. artistic things such as subject, telling a story, colour, composition, light, one just "has them" or not, and one can train them a bit. But not while walking around with a group.
is this a "bad" photo? I wouldn't go as far.
But I find it very "duh", very boring.
Some suggestions:
- what is the story? I'm not seeing any.
- what is the message? Not seeing any.
- what did you feel that made you want to take the shot? Feels like you just photographed whatever was there, as if you had been a robot. Where's the "art"?
- what are you trying to convey with this shot? Not sure.
As far as I'm concerned this is at best a descriptive shot, showing a Hyundai excavator, some gravel, some trees. The trees and the sky seem the most interesting bit but they're behind
If you liked the orange excavator then why not focus on it? If the trees and sky then why not make a composition just with them?
So bottom-line, I wouldn't say "bad", but really what is the point?
P.S. Don't go to those seminars. The key things in photography, i.e. artistic things such as subject, telling a story, colour, composition, light, one just "has them" or not, and one can train them a bit. But not while walking around with a group.
Hi Guys I'm currently honing my skills and recently attended a seminar on photography. One of the guys commented that this is a bad photo and has bad composition. I wonder what is wrong with it. Your feedback will be highly appreciated. Thanks.
--
Please see my Gallery: http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/2596250586
My Humble Flicker page: https://www.flickr.com/photos/123412529@N05/
E
Erik Magnuson
Guest
Be very careful in assuming method and motivation for a photograph. You may think the subject is uninteresting or that it's not well done (and it's OK to say so as it tells the artist his message is not universal), but you have no idea how much or how little time was taken. A lot of very famous and well respected work is what you might call a snapshot if you did not know who took it and how they work. Even if it is a snapshot there is an art to being in the right place, right time, and capturing something interesting there.
This is more appropriate and constructive criticism.
E
Erik Magnuson
Guest
A quote from Henri Cartier-Bresson
E
Erik Magnuson
Guest
Um, yes. The quote was in the subject line.
This really isn't a bad photo. I actually like it. I think your classmate is jealous.
Having said that, the photo can still be improved a little by cropping, reducing saturation, and some sharpening.
Notice... I didn't change your image very much, I just tweaked it a little.
One more trick... if you absolutely hate the colors you get on a photo, try taking it to black and white. Sometimes a photo that doesn't work well in color can work better in monochrome.
--
Marty
my blog: Decent Exposures
Having said that, the photo can still be improved a little by cropping, reducing saturation, and some sharpening.
Notice... I didn't change your image very much, I just tweaked it a little.
One more trick... if you absolutely hate the colors you get on a photo, try taking it to black and white. Sometimes a photo that doesn't work well in color can work better in monochrome.
--
Marty
...and the very best do not even need a title or a caption !! It is obvious from the picture alone 
so, the bottom line is... WHY did you take it??
jpr2
--
~
Nex-7 classic:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157629823874033/
street candids (non-interactive):
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157609618638319/
music and dance:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341265280/
B&W:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157623306407882/
wildlife & macro:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341377106/
interactive street:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157623181919323/
Comments and critique are always welcome!
~
!! It is obvious from the picture alone so, the bottom line is... WHY did you take it??
jpr2
--
~
Nex-7 classic:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157629823874033/
street candids (non-interactive):
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157609618638319/
music and dance:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341265280/
B&W:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157623306407882/
wildlife & macro:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341377106/
interactive street:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157623181919323/
Comments and critique are always welcome!
~
Last edited:
If I can offer my .02, this photo is okay but it really doesn't have any content that appeals to me. The colors are nice, it's not annoying to view, but what is it about?...and the very best do not even need a title or a caption
so, the bottom line is... WHY did you take it??
It's just a view someone might see, it doesn't do anything much for me. It's not a bad picture, but it's not a 'good' one either, for me. Maybe it goes back to jpr2's question, why did you take it?
Last edited:
Ambulater
Leading Member
You know what story I would find interesting: "The Little Sad Shed with the Backhoe Coming After It"
Run shed, run!
--
Chris Lee
Run shed, run!
--
Chris Lee
Spunky8
Senior Member
While cropping definitely improved the original, I join others in asking what motivated the photographer to take the image in the first place.You know what story I would find interesting: "The Little Sad Shed with the Backhoe Coming After It"
Run shed, run!
--
Chris Lee
The above crop definitely improves the photo---in a big way.
Liquidvamp
Active member
^ Cool, I'll try to spend a little more time to think about what to shoot. I guess patience is a big factor
LifeIsAVerb
Senior Member
.
People have asked, repeatedly, what you were responding to, or what attracted you to this scene, and what decisions you made to render it this way. You don't seem to have answered. Unless you can answer the question for yourself, "Why am i taking this picture?" your images are not likely to be as successful as they could be.
And, really, it's not about whether an image is "good" so much as whether it successfully conveys the intent of the photographer. If you're not sure what your intent is, or what you're trying to convey, your not likely to make the right photographic decisions that will support your intent.
What i see in this image is primarily the interplay between the machine and the shed. Even though they are industrial object of steel and other materials, and there' not even an operator in the loader, they seem animated. They have a relationship. Are they greeting? Challenging each other? It's ambiguous, and that's part of the appeal.
Compositionally, it's pretty well put together. The curved edge of the trees mimics the arch of the loader, as do the piles of loose material. The lighter tones of the shed and loader play well against the darker trees.
For me, the color detracts from what i take as the intent, and also from the structural aspects of the image. Earlier, someone offered a black-and-white conversion, but it seemed a bit flat and lifeless to me. I'd also suggest some minor cropping to bring down the area of the sky a bit and emphasize the loader/shed dynamic.
My suggestion below. I normally don't edit someone's work without asking first, but others have made a few suggestions and you haven't objected. I didn't spend a lot of time with this, and perhaps a bit more could be coaxed out of the tones.
.
People have asked, repeatedly, what you were responding to, or what attracted you to this scene, and what decisions you made to render it this way. You don't seem to have answered. Unless you can answer the question for yourself, "Why am i taking this picture?" your images are not likely to be as successful as they could be.
And, really, it's not about whether an image is "good" so much as whether it successfully conveys the intent of the photographer. If you're not sure what your intent is, or what you're trying to convey, your not likely to make the right photographic decisions that will support your intent.
What i see in this image is primarily the interplay between the machine and the shed. Even though they are industrial object of steel and other materials, and there' not even an operator in the loader, they seem animated. They have a relationship. Are they greeting? Challenging each other? It's ambiguous, and that's part of the appeal.
Compositionally, it's pretty well put together. The curved edge of the trees mimics the arch of the loader, as do the piles of loose material. The lighter tones of the shed and loader play well against the darker trees.
For me, the color detracts from what i take as the intent, and also from the structural aspects of the image. Earlier, someone offered a black-and-white conversion, but it seemed a bit flat and lifeless to me. I'd also suggest some minor cropping to bring down the area of the sky a bit and emphasize the loader/shed dynamic.
My suggestion below. I normally don't edit someone's work without asking first, but others have made a few suggestions and you haven't objected. I didn't spend a lot of time with this, and perhaps a bit more could be coaxed out of the tones.
.
flyfisher99
Forum Enthusiast
its not a bad photo, from where you were standing taking this image with the lens used, this is how it looked. I think he means it a bad photo because the photo doesn't really have a main focus, i mean, what is the main thing about this snap, the machine? the forest? the shed? the shy? the gravel in the foreground?
maybe if you were level with the escavator, then you would have more balance? just thinking
maybe if you were level with the escavator, then you would have more balance? just thinking
Last edited:
Liquidvamp
Active member
Well my intent for this photo is to take a landscape shot basically including the sky. I included the dirt because I feel it should be part of the composition... At first I really liked the position of the excavator and the shed so I included it in the whole scene... but basically I wanted this to be a landscape shot. because if not I would have not included the sky... Sorry for the delayed answer.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum