Jump to content

Constructive critiques welcome; shot aboard a cruise ship.


michaellinder

Recommended Posts

My shooting location was close to a railing near the stern of a cruise ship. The original image's perspective was way, way off; the horizon was severely tilted, which I attributed to the curved railings. With a lot of effort using photoshop elements 15's camera distortion tools, I think I got the g=horizon pretty close to level. Critiquers, I'm obviously interested in whether I succeeded in that respect.

 

I'm also interested in whether the composition is at least decent, the color palette is composed of compatible colors, whether the exposure is suitable, and whether the image was sufficiently sharp.

 

Many thanks in advance.

 

michael

 

PS Please let me know if you'd like me to post the original for comparison.

 

 

fullsizeoutput_66d2copy.thumb.jpg.564dcdd1b6c8e88b7a4c302a182f9bb7.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael, my first impression is that this is an image that tells a story, but a story with a hint of mystery. It would be more complete, but less mysterious, if there were a tropical island or some other recognizable feature on the horizon, from whence the ship departed. From a technical standpoint I don't have any big gripes. The horizon is pretty close to horizontal, but the pipes in the background, in trade, are quite skewed, and there appears to be a slight dip in the horizon at the first stanchion. I find this reasonable for a shipboard image. I wish the shadows were a tiny bit lighter to show off the interesting grain in the chairs, and I could wish for more definition in the sky/clouds, as that is frequently a major point of interest in seascapes. Here it's a bit washed out.

 

None of the above are fatal flaws. This is, in fact, a very pleasant image that evokes pleasant memories of mild weather, vacations, and the joys associated with travel for pleasure. I quite like it. I can't show it to my wife because she'll be signing us up for another cruise within five minutes.;)

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The verticals (pipes) are not plumb. But that's what happens with wide angle lenses. Nice shot.

 

Add this to the rest of your trip's photos and make a slideshow, table top photo book, or album of your entire vacation. When you tell a story, no one will even notice those little deviances.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m reading this one as an abstract, Michael, and I like it a lot—to the point that I’m grinning every time I see it. What I find especially powerful is the contrast between the straight horizon line (yes—successfully done) and all the curved lines in places we’d expect them to be straight. I really like the way that contrast tweaks my assumptions about what reality should look like. I also really enjoy images—like this one—that reveal strong compositions in unlikely places.

 

Composition: much more than decent. The network of crossing lines keeps my eye moving throughout the image, while the converging lines give a strong sense of depth—I follow the wake to the horizon, and I follow the railings to the wall. Any time I wander off, the lines in the chairs bring me back.

 

Color palette: the colors are indeed compatible, but maybe a bit too much so, in that the image is very, very blue. I like the blue almost everywhere, but it might be interesting to warm up the chairs a bit. If the brown were to lean a bit toward the orange side rather than the purple side, that’d introduce a nice complement to the blues. It’d also increase the overall feeling of depth by reinforcing their foreground position

 

Exposure: difficult. Overall, you’re constrained by the whites in the wake, but it’d be interesting to see what an overall increase in brightness (and reduction in highlights) would do for the image. You’d need to play with the tone curve to bring down the wake brightness while upping it elsewhere (if I remember right, you have Elements and not Lightroom?)

 

Image sharpness: the 16mm lens gave you a surprisingly large depth of field, and the most important part (the foreground chair) is adequately sharp. The ocean isn’t, but that doesn’t really matter. You could make the railings look a bit sharper by putting in a correction for chromatic aberration. Overall, though, it’s sharp where it needs to be.

 

A couple of things that it might be fun to play with to reinforce the theme of swaths of curving lines: (1) it’d be interesting to increase the contrast on the chair seats by lightening the tops of the slats—that’d bring more attention to that family of lines, and would also bring out their beautiful texture; and (2)—be forewarned that this is a bit hare-brained—it’d be interesting to enlarge the canvas on the bottom and use one of the distortion tools to pull down the lower right corner of the frame. This would increase the angle and the curve of the lines, making them an even stronger counterpoint to the railing lines. You’d then need to clone in more decking to fill in the lower left corner. I’ve forgotten what tools Elements gives you for warping images, though. Like I said, hare-brained. But fun to try.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder what you’d think of a non-specific DE-CONSTRUCTIVE criticism as an alternative to what you requested. Here’s a description of deconstructivism and then a quote to consider. (It’s meant metaphorically and not to start a discussion about particular styles of architecture.)

 

Deconstructivism is a movement of postmodern architecture which appeared in the 1980s. It gives the impression of the fragmentation of the constructed building. It is characterized by an absence of harmony, continuity, or symmetry. Its name comes from the idea of "Deconstruction", a form of semiotic analysis developed by the French philosopher Jacques Derrida. Architects whose work is often described as deconstructionism (though in many cases the architects themselves reject the label) include Peter Eisenman, Frank Gehry, Zaha Hadid, Rem Koolhaas, Daniel Libeskind, Bernard Tschumi, and Coop Himmelb(l)au.

 

Besides fragmentation, Deconstructivism often manipulates the structure's surface skin and creates by non-rectilinear shapes which appear to distort and dislocate elements of architecture. The finished visual appearance is characterized by unpredictability and controlled chaos.

”Uncertainty and self-awareness are now the issue at hand rather than taste and beauty and this redefines our notion of aesthetic judgment and criticism.” —Jacques Derrida

"You talkin' to me?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder what you’d think of a non-specific DE-CONSTRUCTIVE criticism as an alternative

Another definition: Constructive criticism is the process of offering valid and well-reasoned opinions about the work of others, usually involving both positive and negative comments, in a friendly manner rather than an oppositional one.

In other words, a comment regarding deconstructivism could well be provided as part of a constructive critique. I'm very curious about what you have in mind regarding deconstructivism as it pertains to this image.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm very curious about what you have in mind regarding deconstructivism as it pertains to this image.

Photos that are about more than and understood in ways in addition to composition, color palette, exposure, and image sharpness.

 

By the way, I’m not advocating for deconstructivism. I’m just considering it as an alternative or really an additional way to approach photos.

 

Derrida mentions self awareness as opposed to the usual notions of beauty and taste. He and others also talk about narrative.

 

Is there a story here? Or is it being seen as and discussed as simply elements of style and technique? Even if seen abstractly, can some psychological or personal aspects inform the curves and lines and physical relationships?

"You talkin' to me?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Leslie, Sam, and David: Indeed, when I finished this image, I felt it was at least partially abstract, i.e., still retaining some readily identifiable elements. However, I deliberately chose to omit that consideration in the OP, to see how well the image would be seen in terms of considerations that were more of a technical nature.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks to me like the ship is skidding around a corner, turning sharply right, which is causing a heavy, 20-degree list to the port (left). If that's due to lens distortion, then you need way more correction.

 

David, on the contrary, that's due to my attempt to straighten the horizon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Photos that are about more than and understood in ways in addition to composition, color palette, exposure, and image sharpness.

 

By the way, I’m not advocating for deconstructivism. I’m just considering it as an alternative or really an additional way to approach photos.

 

Derrida mentions self awareness as opposed to the usual notions of beauty and taste. He and others also talk about narrative.

 

Is there a story here? Or is it being seen as and discussed as simply elements of style and technique? Even if seen abstractly, can some psychological or personal aspects inform the curves and lines and physical relationships?

 

Sam, although I majored in philosophy in both undergraduate and graduate school (MA plus 2 chapters of a dissertation, before I had to abandon it), I had heard about Derrida but never read or studied him. I get your point about "psychological or personal aspects inform[ing] the curves and lines and physical relationships," but disagree about the presence of a story. Sadly abstract photography seems to have a pigeonholed definition as always trading on such elements and color, form, shape, etc. and not ever including a story. Before PN2 was created, Admin created an abstract forum which was used to post abstract photos and also to discuss the question of what constitutes such an image. As I recall, almost consensus was reached in coming to the realization that abstraction was a matter of degree and not of kind. I view the OP image as being semiabstract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

David, on the contrary, that's due to my attempt to straighten the horizon.

 

Which demonstrates how trying to "fix" one element can distort another element and then people label your image "abstract" or "semiabstract". I'm guessing that your intent was to present an accurate picture from the perspective of near the stern of a cruise ship. If so, as I suspect, you need a better lens or better digital lens correction software OR clone out the pipes and crop out the leaning edge of that bulkhead.

 

Clear your head of your preconceived image of this scene, then look at my description and then look at the image to see if I'm right. As it is now, I can't look at it and not see a huge ship, skidding around a corner and leaning hard to its left. Without looking at the original, I assume that it looked like the sea was draining to the left. You "had to" fix that, BUT the resulting shipboard distortion is just as unacceptable, assuming that you were going for accuracy.

 

If you were attempting an abstraction, then, perhaps, the sea would have best been left unlevel, to make it clearer that abstraction was intended.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael, thanks, I’m not sure what you think I was saying about abstraction and story, but I don’t think one precludes the other and I also don’t think abstract is an on-off switch and photos can be categorized as “strictly abstract” but they can also have varying levels of abstraction.

 

I’ll tell you what I experience here. The graphic elements, particularly the railing and the way the chairs are shot, seem to present a barrier to a psychological letting go and a deeper embrace of a narrative.

 

One of the reasons I “liked” David Triplett’s comment above is because it actually mirrors well what the photo is doing, at least in my opinion. He begins with the impression of a story that could be more complete (which might have certain ramifications in terms of mystery) and then moves on to discuss the more graphic elements and their more technical aspects.

 

I don’t think a more complete narrative (maybe “complete” is not necessary as much as more attention paid to or involvement in) would have to lessen mystery. A narrative can be focused on, expanded, and fleshed out without necessary supplying a more literal meaning or definitive answer.

 

I don’t think more elements like an island would need to be added to the story as much as allowing the story that’s already there a little more latitude.

 

Are the empty chairs, the wake in the water, the distant horizon, and the sense of space, capable of carrying the photo and does the concentration on graphics actually diminish the possibility of such a view? It feels like the graphic elements are protecting the photo from itself rather than adding to what’s there or being key to what’s there or even supporting what’s there.

 

I think if the empty chairs, wake, horizon, water, and space were given into instead of being caged by a more typical and more objective rather than subjective concentration on and scrim of line and shape, there is potential for a more revealing, suggestive, and personal photo that’s been graphically and spatially undermined.

 

I think there would be room for graphics, pipes, and railing still, in a supporting role, dealt with in a way that avoided some of the pitfalls DC is pointing to.

Edited by samstevens
  • Like 2

"You talkin' to me?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, for me, the image is trying to tell a straightforward story of being at sea and viewing the infinity of the wake and there are deck chairs awaitin'. The problem is that wake is at an angle to where we seem to be. If we're trying to be realists here, then the wake needs to be perpendicular, rather than oblique, in my mind. All the leading lines are leading us away from the notion that the wake is where we've been.

 

Better yet, why not take the image from the tip of the stern, looking straight back, from a low angle with the two deck chairs angled slightly, toward the wake? Story: passage, infinity, travel, comfort, relaxing...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It depends on what you mean by "The original image's perspective" in terms of being way off. A tilted, moving, vibrating, and pulsating horizon might exactly be the perspective this image is screaming for. Or not.

 

Phil, your use of "a tilted, moving, vibrating, and pulsating horizon" really grabbed my attention. I need to be more daring with some of my images, and not worry about making mistakes or pleasing viewers. I'm going to rework the image, and will post it when I'm done.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, for me, the image is trying to tell a straightforward story of being at sea and viewing the infinity of the wake and there are deck chairs awaitin'. The problem is that wake is at an angle to where we seem to be. If we're trying to be realists here, then the wake needs to be perpendicular, rather than oblique, in my mind. All the leading lines are leading us away from the notion that the wake is where we've been.

 

Better yet, why not take the image from the tip of the stern, looking straight back, from a low angle with the two deck chairs angled slightly, toward the wake? Story: passage, infinity, travel, comfort, relaxing...

 

David, your suggestions would work for me, but I've decided to rework the image more from an abstract point of view.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the reworked version. Initially, I modified the tonality to create a low key look. Then, I brought out the color in the chairs, thereby reducing the predominance of blues throughout the image. Next, I squeezed the image horizontally, resulting in almost a level horizon and distortion in the railings. Finally, I used a filter to add a slight painterly effect. .Of course, I appreciate in advance your addition al feedback. - - My best, michael

 

 

fullsizeoutput_65d9copy2.thumb.jpg.3e0a00cdf3e5100724854befd50c7f7b.jpg

Edited by michaellinder
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael, I like where this is headed. I don't share others' concerns regarding the off-angle of the wake,since I'm comfortable with the various turns and bends of a ship's decks and rails. Likewise, the bend in the rail on the left side really doesn't matter. I would like to see better continuity in the rail segments at their upper end, as the loss of continuity seems a fairly apparent artifact of your PP. A little brighter/lighter treatment of the chairs so we can experience their texture and color would help, as they are the sole offset to the heavy blue/green theme, and form a nice counterpoint. My personal preference would be for all of the rail stanchions to be the same color, whether off-white or green, but consistent. That's all I've got for now. Keep it comin'!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael, I like where this is headed. I don't share others' concerns regarding the off-angle of the wake,since I'm comfortable with the various turns and bends of a ship's decks and rails. Likewise, the bend in the rail on the left side really doesn't matter. I would like to see better continuity in the rail segments at their upper end, as the loss of continuity seems a fairly apparent artifact of your PP. A little brighter/lighter treatment of the chairs so we can experience their texture and color would help, as they are the sole offset to the heavy blue/green theme, and form a nice counterpoint. My personal preference would be for all of the rail stanchions to be the same color, whether off-white or green, but consistent. That's all I've got for now. Keep it comin'!

 

Muchas gracias, David. More work to do

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The first thing I notice when bringing fresh eyes to this photo as it’s been reworked is the paint filter. Not the content, not the feeling. Not the space or the composition. Just the filter. The second thing I notice is how muddy and disinviting the chairs look, and then I see the stripes of green on their arms. I see what David sees as well in the railing.

 

This is probably a photo where it’s worth considering your original vision and purpose, taking all the comments to heart which you seem graciously to have heard, and not attemptIng a post processing “fix” such as this. When post processing is intimately integrated with the content and feel of a photo, it can do wonders. It often has the opposite effect when post processing just feels laid on top of the photo and is as apparent, even blatant, as it is here. I think this may be a photo to learn from and look to future photos to apply what’s learned. I never underestimate the greatness of photos like that.

  • Like 2

"You talkin' to me?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This image is a good idea. The black and white is much more effective since there is so much blue overcast and because there is no particularly exciting colour in the subject. I found the angle of the wake to be odd, but that is what it is. I would lessen the over exposure of the wake, however, to make it blend more into the image, rather than stand out as it does. For me the ocean and sky needs to be in focus, which it does not appear to be.

 

 

I am very curious to know if the ship was really built that way, in your unaltered image, and what lens/camera was used, to know if it made the distortion worst. If the ship was in fact built that way, why take out the shape? Perhaps I am missing something, as I only skimmed through the thread.

 

 

If the colourized photo above is not the original scene, I would like to see the original shot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This image is a good idea. The black and white is much more effective since there is so much blue overcast and because there is no particularly exciting colour in the subject. I found the angle of the wake to be odd, but that is what it is. I would lessen the over exposure of the wake, however, to make it blend more into the image, rather than stand out as it does. For me the ocean and sky needs to be in focus, which it does not appear to be.

 

 

I am very curious to know if the ship was really built that way, in your unaltered image, and what lens/camera was used, to know if it made the distortion worst. If the ship was in fact built that way, why take out the shape? Perhaps I am missing something, as I only skimmed through the thread.

 

 

If the colourized photo above is not the original scene, I would like to see the original shot.

 

Thanks, John. My shooting location was very close to the ship's stern, where the deck was rounded. Hopefully, this explains the wake's appearance. As to the soft appearance of the sea and sky, I used a fairly wide open aperture setting deliberately, since the aggregate of the ship's elements was my intended subject. Finally, I used a Canon DSLR (60D) and a Tamron 16-300 zoom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...