Hospitality Corner.

[pavel_l.]

Thank you for your thoughts.

 

[DanJM]

Interesting. Two suggestions come to my mind.
 

1. I think the 1:1 aspect ratio works but I would tighten the composition to cut out some of the space to the right of the chair by pulling up the bottom right corner a little and pulling down the top right corner a bit more. 
 

2. The pavers and mug look blown out so maybe see if you can recover some of the details there. Adjusting the exposure to the whole image would also darken the black chair, which I think would also be an improvement. 

[pavel_l.]

On 11/11/2023 at 9:04 AM, DanJM said:

Interesting. Two suggestions come to my mind.
 

1. I think the 1:1 aspect ratio works but I would tighten the composition to cut out some of the space to the right of the chair by pulling up the bottom right corner a little and pulling down the top right corner a bit more. 
 

2. The pavers and mug look blown out so maybe see if you can recover some of the details there. Adjusting the exposure to the whole image would also darken the black chair, which I think would also be an improvement. 

Thank you Dan.

Exposure of this shot was correct, the reason I blew this out is to separate chair from background.

Cheers.

[DanJM]

1 hour ago, pavel_l. said:

Thank you Dan.

Exposure of this shot was correct, the reason I blew this out is to separate chair from background.

Cheers.

Just a thought, could you accomplish some of that my upping the contrast? Maybe then the exposure would not need so much of an increase. 

Edited November 13, 2023 by DanJM

[samstevens]

2 hours ago, pavel_l. said:

Exposure of this shot was correct

I don’t think it’s a matter of this exposure being correct or not. It’s a matter of what you want and what you like. Just as the critique is not about what exposure is correct. It’s about how the photo looks. 

[hjoseph7]

The composition is grood and so is the atmosphere, but I wish you would have spent more time nailing the exposure. 

[marc_rochkind]

A couple of comments here are to the effect that the exposure is wrong, or at least could be improved, but the test of whether the exposure is right is whether the result achieves the photographer's artistic intent.

This works for me! A strange, unsettling image.

Edited November 14, 2023 by marc_rochkind

[DanJM]

8 hours ago, marc_rochkind said:

A couple of comments here are to the effect that the exposure is wrong, or at least could be improved, but the test of whether the exposure is right is whether the result achieves the photographer's artistic intent.

This works for me! A strange, unsettling image.

I completely agree with the first sentence, but based on the title, Hospitality Corner, I wouldn’t have thought the OP’s intent was to make an unsettling image. Unless the title is meant sarcastically, of course, but I read it at face value. 

[pavel_l.]

On 11/12/2023 at 10:44 PM, DanJM said:

Just a thought, could you accomplish some of that my upping the contrast? Maybe then the exposure would not need so much of an increase. 

Thank you Dan. I tried to play with contrast, but it did not do to much to me.

 

On 11/12/2023 at 11:30 PM, samstevens said:

I don’t think it’s a matter of this exposure being correct or not. It’s a matter of what you want and what you like. Just as the critique is not about what exposure is correct. It’s about how the photo looks. 

+

 

On 11/13/2023 at 10:56 PM, hjoseph7 said:

The composition is grood and so is the atmosphere, but I wish you would have spent more time nailing the exposure. 

This is the original shot:

 

 

12 hours ago, marc_rochkind said:

A couple of comments here are to the effect that the exposure is wrong, or at least could be improved, but the test of whether the exposure is right is whether the result achieves the photographer's artistic intent.

This works for me! A strange, unsettling image.

Thank you Mark.

 

4 hours ago, DanJM said:

I completely agree with the first sentence, but based on the title, Hospitality Corner, I wouldn’t have thought the OP’s intent was to make an unsettling image. Unless the title is meant sarcastically, of course, but I read it at face value. 

I used this title because the combination of objects, outlet for the power gadgets, chair, bottle of water. Also, the shadow of chair "creates" the presence of table, and shadow of bottle is representing practically an absent object.

 

[hjoseph7]

High-Key photography is often used in the studio to give the photo a sort of 'heavenly' look. The subject(s) looks as if its merged into the blazing white background. It also can make a darker subject stand out against a blown out background. Our eyes seem to gravitate towards the brightest part of an image, in this case my eyes gravitated toward the blown out floor and the bottle.  Our eyes also gravitate towards high-contrast scenes where the subject jumps out from the BG.  In this cropped image, I'm not sure what the main subject is ? Is it the chair, the wall, the bottle, the shadows ? Nothing seems to jump out at you dramatically (IMHO).    

Edited November 17, 2023 by hjoseph7

[AlanKlein]

I played with it a little just to see what it would look like darker.

 

[pavel_l.]

On 11/16/2023 at 7:01 PM, hjoseph7 said:

High-Key photography is often used in the studio to give the photo a sort of 'heavenly' look. The subject(s) looks as if its merged into the blazing white background. It also can make a darker subject stand out against a blown out background. Our eyes seem to gravitate towards the brightest part of an image, in this case my eyes gravitated toward the blown out floor and the bottle.  Our eyes also gravitate towards high-contrast scenes where the subject jumps out from the BG.  In this cropped image, I'm not sure what the main subject is ? Is it the chair, the wall, the bottle, the shadows ? Nothing seems to jump out at you dramatically (IMHO).    

Thank you Joseph. I would like to stress, that I'm not trying to "please" the viewer's eyes with the perfect exposure, and there is no the main subject here, it is a short sketch.

 

On 11/16/2023 at 7:10 PM, AlanKlein said:

I played with it a little just to see what it would look like darker.

 

 

Thank you Alan for your version, but it still too close to the original shot, to me. The background is too graphic which make it too difficult to separate the chair.

[samstevens]

A lot of the appeal for me in the original shot is the play of shadows on the wall. That shadowing is a presence. I don’t see why the separation of the chair would require losing those shadows or blowing out the foreground to such an extent. 

[hjoseph7]

11 hours ago, pavel_l. said:

Thank you Joseph. I would like to stress, that I'm not trying to "please" the viewer's eyes with the perfect exposure, and there is no the main subject here, it is a short sketch.

 

 

Thank you Alan for your version, but it still too close to the original shot, to me. The background is too graphic which make it too difficult to separate the chair.

Patel if you were not trying to "Please" the audience then why exactly did you ask for a critique ? In a way, photography is a communication tool like writing.  When we write something and make it public, we are writing to an audience not just ourselves.   

Edited November 18, 2023 by hjoseph7

[samstevens]

3 hours ago, hjoseph7 said:

Patel if you were not trying to "Please" the audience then why exactly did you ask for a critique ?

Perhaps he was trying to jar the audience, or scare the audience, or offend the audience, or challenge the audience in some way, or provoke the audience. There's a lot more to photos than being pleasing. A critique might be used by the critic to simply help a photographer see things they didn't or accomplish what the photographer wants to accomplish better. I often am not interested in pleasing an audience, yet I've read many helpful critiques of my work that seem to understand that. I do often hope to reach an audience, or at least the few viewers that will see my work.

[pavel_l.]

21 hours ago, samstevens said:

A lot of the appeal for me in the original shot is the play of shadows on the wall. That shadowing is a presence. I don’t see why the separation of the chair would require losing those shadows or blowing out the foreground to such an extent. 

Thank you Sam. I can recognize the wall shadows you mentioned, I also feel that they presence competes with the main line. Not allays possible to kill two birds with one stone.

 

11 hours ago, hjoseph7 said:

Patel if you were not trying to "Please" the audience then why exactly did you ask for a critique ? In a way, photography is a communication tool like writing.  When we write something and make it public, we are writing to an audience not just ourselves.   

Joseph, the reason I am not trying to "Please" the audience is the type of genre I try to present with above shot. The content is my main attention here.

 

7 hours ago, samstevens said:

Perhaps he was trying to jar the audience, or scare the audience, or offend the audience, or challenge the audience in some way, or provoke the audience. There's a lot more to photos than being pleasing. A critique might be used by the critic to simply help a photographer see things they didn't or accomplish what the photographer wants to accomplish better. I often am not interested in pleasing an audience, yet I've read many helpful critiques of my work that seem to understand that. I do often hope to reach an audience, or at least the few viewers that will see my work.

+

Edited November 19, 2023 by pavel_l.