girl in white dress

Marjolein - Thank you for being so gracious and putting up with all of this discussion about your photo. I hope you realize that the tweaked version which I offered was done only to suggest possible alternatives that you may not have specifically considered before you posted the image to photo.net.

To me, the most efficient and direct way to put such possibilities on the table is by using concrete visual examples rather than using a words-only approach. Unfortunately, my approach seems to strongly irritate some folks who seem to feel that modifying anyone else's image, is insulting, arrogant, presumptuous, ego-driven, does not take into account the concept and goals of the photographer, etc.. I assure you that these assumptions about my intentions couldn't be further from the truth. I sincerely hope you were not irritated by the simple visual presentation of two major suggestions: for a smoother background and a lighter face.

When I offer a possibility, say, lightening the face, my tweaked version shows exactly what I have in mind. However, if I had simply said in words, "you might want to consider lightening the face", it would not be as precise a way to communicate. The reader would always wonder, did he mean, "lighten the blacks of the face", "lighten the mid-tones", "lighten the highlights", "lighten that area as a whole or selectively in areas like the eyes", etc. etc. It certainly is vastly more direct than including a description of the tonality of the face in one's critique, hoping that doing so will draw the photographer's attention to that area.

By using visual examples, I intentionally don't leave myself any "wiggle room", but that doesn't mean that I think my tweaked version is the "best" that can be done (by some metric), or even an "obvious" improvement. It's intended as substantive food for thought by the photographer and the other responders. I wish others did the same.

Thanks again for being so gracious and putting up with us. ;-)

Best regards,

Tom M

Well, since Fred G. is not satisfied, it means that not everyone is satisfied, which in turn means that my tweaking has not been mere bread and circuses for the unwashed, popcorn-chewing masses and has possibly helped the artist turn this image into a better work of art :-).

And it's nearly 3 a.m. over here. I'm going back to bed.

Tom, we got past this a while back. I've now said three times that I regret making it about re-working photos in general and wanted to keep it about the particular re-workings we've been shown. I'm still of the opinion that all the re-workings shown seriously undermine the photo and not one has helped it expressively or "improved" it, though most make it much more typical and commonplace, perhaps even more "appealing" if that's what one cares about, which I don't.

I would say the same about some of the text-only critiques. For instance, Olaf suggested a bit more room at the southwest of the image. How much? 1/4-inch? 1/2-inch? Many of these very specific suggestions, a touch more space here, a straight line there, are simply absurd.

Alex, that's a "cute" way (much cuter than this photo, which you earlier characterized thusly) to try to twist words to your advantage. It doesn't, however, change the sensibility of your post about "everyone's liking" and doesn't change the effectiveness of your so-called "fixes."

Fred, re bringing up visual examples vs text-only descriptions/suggestions again, since Marjolein just joined the thread, I wanted to make absolutely sure she knows that my intent was not malicious, presumptious, etc.

Fred, since you are still "on the line", I'm curious how you would react to the following gedanken experiment:

Suppose "the elves" had chosen Pnina's darker version of this image as the POTW, and then Marjolein had, in response, posted the version of it that the elves actually selected.

Given that there was essentially complete unanimity in this thread that Pnina's version was too dark, would you (and others) do the logical thing and point out how Marjolein's hypothetical tweaked version was "better" (ie, just like you pointed out how Pnina's was worse), or would you (and others) simply state that her darker version could have been her vision and leave it at that?

Tom M

I would have pointed out that Pnina's seemed dark and murky and asked what kind of mood she was going for. If she were going for a more earthy and/or more technically formal or rich kind of look, I might have started by simply saying that she was headed in the right direction (and that Marjolein had undermined that by posting a lighter version) but that it looked dirty or sloppy rather than darkly moody.

I might ask if she had in mind the kind of technique someone like Ansel Adams or Wynn Bullock tended toward, a more complete tonal range, etc. If she said, "Yes," I'd first suggest that she hadn't achieved that sort of look and simply ask her to take another stab at it, keeping in mind that greater tonal range doesn't need to start to look dirty or muddy in the darker areas, mentioning refinement as opposed to a heavy hand.

IMO, there is no inherently better photo to make. There are many, many, many different photos to make of the same scene and even the same shot. It's a matter of what the photographer sees, imagines, and wants.

I'd go with the direction Pnina wanted to go in. If she told me she wanted the more gritty look that her re-working of this photo currently moves toward, and that maybe she wanted there to be heaviness, I might simply suggest that what I was seeing looked more like processing mistakes than intentional expressive processing and see if she couldn't try other methods that would seem more organic to the mood she was trying to convey. I might ask how she got the darker, grittier look she got and mention some alternative methods for her to explore or go into more detail about how she employed the method she used and how that might result in more of what she seemed to want.

Of course, I would suggest she start from the original (unlightened) file and not from a file already lightened. Were I ever going to re-work someone's photo, I would not start from an already significantly-altered version but would request an original to start from.

Usually pictures of children should be taken at their own eye level, a rule of photography. Due to this there is not much detail in the subject's face as it should be. The blown out snowy highlights do not help me much either. Average image.

Oh, rats! If only Marjolein had followed the rules! Her photo would then probably be above average.

With all the ideas and suggestions thrown out here, the little girl will be all grown up before Marjolein sorts them all out. I believe that correcting that odd tilt is crucial to the image's success (or greater success if you wish). My suggestion might be a trifle narrow; at any rate I think the bit of foliage on the left needs to be saved. Since Marjolein's picture here is cropped, she can have a go at the original image, if she desires, aline it properly and save more space around the girl.

Cleaning off the dreadful sepia brings the girl out of 1909 to 2011, where she belongs.

I am sure Marjolein is satisfied with her version and the little girl is at no risk......

Marjolein's POW has provided one of the most head-shaking experiences I've ever had here on PN, just from reading the comments. Such incredible diversity as well as different ways of looking at and evaluating photographs. That's putting it kindly.

The beauty of an image is purely emotional and very different in each individual. Getting a good image convey emotions across cultures is extremely difficult. Congratulations. Best wishes. Vicente.

Hello Marjolein, in any case this is your hard and creative work and worthy of praise and also I have learnt much from the fair, informative and open critiques and comments here. I congratulate you on your well deserved award and talented work and other works I have seen in your impressive portfolio. Best wishes to you always. Dara

Marjolein, it is a very vibrant image of the girl in a white dress. There is something special going on in the middle part of the image. The white, washed out part that is behind the girl's back. It makes for a nice contrast in relation to the girl's waist and chest. I wouldn't change it at all. Then, there is more to that special looking portrait: the girl's right hand stretching into that white, washed-out part of the image. All that play with an open aperture and a blur, makes the portrait idyllic. Like a mother's reminisce.

Contra all proposals to better this photograph, the original is still the best. And of course it is, it was perfect to begin with. It resonates with our archetypes of summer, childhood, etc., most poetically, most beautifully.

Hi Marjolein, great to find your work on PN. The quality of your work and the fact that I can relate to the scenes of live and places in it make your portfolio an instant favorite for me. I'm sure I'll return often for inspiration or simple viewing pleasure. Thanks.

We wonen helemaal bovenin Groningen, vlak bij de Waddenzee. Mooi plekje, maar het maakt een weekendje Parijs, wat we graag doen, altijd een flinke onderneming :-)

Grt, Nick