An Older Photo...

Going back through some older photos last night and came across this one... I like it for various reasons, but I wonder what everybody else thinks of it?

 

Back story is I was driving around back streets of Harrisburg, our capitol city some time ago, just shooting photos of stuff I found- and came across this old Pontiac sitting outside a small automobile repair shop back in some neighborhood. The row homes in the background are typical of this area, and this car's chrome is substantial! No idea what model this is but wow what a hood ornament!

 

Thanks in advance,

Tom

 

If it were mine, I'd try to de-emphasize the busy background a little, although I'm pretty tolerant of 'noisy' backgrounds as a rule.

 

You could vignette, blur, etc., if you like

I remember those (G)!!!!!

 

Think JD's idea of de-emphasizing the background might be a good idea but without the darkening of that chrome-work and hood.

If it were mine

It's not.

 

Check out Ricochet's work to see that it's generally if not always much more straightforward, rarely employing such drastic measures as the severe vignetting treatment you've given it.

 

Even on an objective basis, not geared to Ricochet in particular, you've managed to vignette away the head of the ornament, which seems to be the focal point of the photo.

 

The harmony of the car and the buildings, color-wise and even style-wise, seems to me the foundation of the photo. Especially given the buildings are out of focus, I see no need to de-emphasize them via such obviously imposed lighting maneuvers. They are not really just "the background." They are the context and a counterpoint and accompaniment to the hood, not a throwaway or distraction. The buildings are part of the photographer's point.

 

All that being said, I find it a clumsy composition, but not because of the lighting, just because of the closeness of the foreground and the somewhat haphazard feeling of the background. I generally find your compositions more refined and suspect you might have missed an opportunity here.

It's not.

No -- but this is the critique forum, and I was only demonstrating one method without doing or trying to do a complete workover.

Jeez...

 

I'm pretty tolerant of 'noisy' backgrounds as a rule

 

I said, moreover

Thanks guys, just to put it out there, I’m open to all suggestions, musings, statements, criticisms- and whatever comes my way.

 

Sam to your point, I went back to this spot sometime after I took this shot and the car was gone otherwise I would have shot more pix of it.

 

I like the symmetry of the background and as mentioned the general color palette but yeah I agree the close up is pretty severe.

 

this was shot in 2018 btw, fwiw

Jeez?

this is the critique forum

Critiques that are of benefit to the photographer involve considering the body of work and general direction, outlook, and tendencies of the photographer being critiqued, instead of coming from the point of view of what another photographer would do.

 

And even if one is going to have the audacity to rework another photographer's photo instead of critiquing it, why do such a hack job? What is an over-the-top and just plain lousy job of unsightly vignetting supposed to illustrate to anyone?

I’m open to all suggestions, musings, statements, criticisms- and whatever comes my way.

You are more gracious than I, and I appreciate that. I'm not so much posting my reaction to JDM in order to defend you or your photo but more as an advocate of helpful and non-self-centered critiquing, especially by someone as lacking in post-processing skills as JDM. This can be an opportunity to critique the reworking done, in as stark terms as the reworking itself.

Sam, you not obliged to like my images and what I do with them, and I am certainly not prepared to cede the high ground to you on your own post processing skills or lack thereof.

It's incredible to hear you, of all people, talk about "non self-centered" comments.:rolleyes:

Critiques that are of benefit to the photographer involve considering the body of work and general direction, outlook, and tendencies of the photographer being critiqued, instead of coming from the point of view of what another photographer would do.

 

Is this really so? ??? I know, you've asserted it, so you think it's true, so no more discussion eh?

 

It's one approach, but sometimes it's useful to consider what others might or might not do.

"I like the symmetry of the background and as mentioned the general color palette but yeah I agree the close up is pretty severe."

 

Ricochet, it seems your self critique is very good. Some minor tweaking may be a way to accentuate/enhance the unique color palette .

Edited May 24, 2021 by inoneeye

It's incredible to hear you, of all people, talk about "non self-centered" comments.

I wasn't talking about self-centered comments, of which I've made plenty. I was talking about self-centered critiques, which I try not to indulge in because I think that benefits photographers more than telling them and, even worse, showing them what I would have done.

 

Now that you've been alerted, let's get back to the substance and away from personalities. Are you able to see how over-the-top and destructive the vignetting you applied to this photo is? That would be at least a visual starting point.

Are you able to see how over-the-top and destructive the vignetting you applied to this photo is? That would be at least a visual starting point.

Actually, of course I see, but it was only an illustration of a point, not meant to be a finished reworking.

 

Are you willing to see how over-the-top and destructive to good manners in the critique forum your own approach here has been? That would be a "manners" starting point.

That would be a "manners" starting point.

Were this an etiquette forum, I might indulge you, but it's not. It's a critique forum.

 

The one bit of etiquette I'll perform, however, is to bow out at this point, as I've said all about the photo and the reworking I care to.

Ricochet, have you tried a tighter crop? The ornament seems crowded to the left edge. A tighter crop could help alleviate that.... working with what you have without sacrificing too much of the background.

The ornament seems crowded to the left edge.

That's been my first impression too. There were two more. Firstly, I would have tried to avoid getting my own reflection onto the chrome - by shooting more at an angle from the left. That would also have avoided my other "niggle": the white sky in the background as the background would have been just the row of houses. None of this can be remedied after the fact though.

 

De-emphasing the background - if indeed desired - could look like this:

Dieter,

 

I've learned by now to make some effort to avoid my reflection in the chrome, and Imo it makes an appreciable difference. I agree that just the four houses against the ornament, more from the left could have been better.

Lately I've also been thinking about stepping back away from some of the things I'm shooting... with whatever degree of success (or failure as the case may be ha ha) in that endeavor!

Ricochet, have you tried a tighter crop? The ornament seems crowded to the left edge. A tighter crop could help alleviate that.... working with what you have without sacrificing too much of the background.

 

Hmmm! Don't know about the crop (kind of a mixed bag I guess). Still crowded to the left (don't think there's much you can do about it though). Aside from that. Old Chief Pontiac's looking good.

Hey Ricochet, did you try changing the ratio.... ? The hood color and weight worked well before. I think it may seem less closed in as a vertical.

Hey Ricochet, did you try changing the ratio.... ? The hood color and weight worked well before. I think it may seem less closed in as a vertical.

 

that was a free form crop. Here it is cropped to square. Brings it back somewhat, I think?

In case anyone is interested, that's a Pontiac hood ornament. The General Motors division had several interpretations of Pontiac Indian profiles. This was on some of their higher end models in the 1950s. The ornament is a collectors' item, in and of itself.

In case anyone is interested, that's a Pontiac hood ornament. The General Motors division had several interpretations of Pontiac Indian profiles. This was on some of their higher end models in the 1950s. The ornament is a collectors' item, in and of itself.

 

http://ricochetridersmotomojo.zenfolio.com/img/s/v-10/p2530574148-4.jpg

For me, the background is the problem. Reminds a little of this photo by John Gutmann

Masters of Photography: John Gutmann

I like it ! The color of the car matches with the background which gives it that "I belong here" look. I would blur-out the reflection on the ornament and decrease exposure by about 1/2 stop to darken the clouds, but that's about it..