mottershead

Nick and "B": the interesting shadows cast by straight blades of grass is one of the most intriguing aspects of this series, isn't it? I believe it is caused by the fact that the sand is not flat, but is undulating in a subtle way that is only visible through the shadows.

Juergen, like all your work, it is beautiful. However, one doesn't have to look at it long or analyze the "haze" etc as Matthias has done, or even read your disclosure to realize that it is a composite. The scale of the boat relative to the water streaming off the rocks is wrong.

Joanne, this subject has so much potential. Although this photo is already rather nice, I think you should try again if possible and see if you can frame it so as to not show the lip and curve of the aquarium at upper right, and less of the whatever-it-is at upper left.

 

Some other suggestions: avoid using auto levels; it almost never produces the best results. The best idea is to master Curves but doing the Levels manually almost always does better than Autolevels. Even Variations... is preferable. The picture could use some Unsharp Mask also. Finally, consider uploading it at around 600-700 pixels in the long dimension, which is low res enough that no one will be able to appropriate the picture except for display on a monitor, but it will still be large enough that people can see and appreciate the image.

Tris, the ad hominem attack does not advance your argument and seems designed only to be offensive.

You have not answered my basic point. Suppose the only technically feasible form of analog photography had been color photography. That, out of necessity, the mastery of photography's masters included the ability to handle color. And that black and white had entered the scene only recently as "digital desaturation", achieved in Photoshop.

Would you be celebrating the technical progress which had finally made it possible to realize black and white, the essence of photography? Or would you be decrying it as a manipulation, to be indulged only by philistines with an aesthetic understanding clearly inferior to your own?

How fortunate that the aesthetically more fundamental form of photography -- namely, black and white -- was technically the more feasible! If color photography had been easier than black and white and had had historical priority, we might all be thinking (incorrectly of course) that black and white is a "manipulation", accomplished through the use of suspicious or sleazy techniques lying outside the realm of true photography.

Here we are midweek, and this photo already has 133 comments. Chris Battey's photo last week only had 106 by the end of the week. This must be a much better photo than last week's.

This is very good: simple and elegant. Vibrant, saturated colors, and very good composition. The window provides a point of focus; I definitely wouldn't remove it. Try removing it with Photoshop and you will see that the picture is weaker without it.

Marco, I'm not trying to be condescending, but another theory for you to consider is that this picture is great in a way that you are not yet able to appreciate, and when you can, you might have taken a step towards being able to equal it.

It might be helpful for you to post the wedding photos that you believe are as good. If they are, then photo.net will have gained some more wonderful photographs. And if they aren't, well perhaps someone will be able to help you see why not.

 

Almost any street or social documentary photograph which does not show something extraordinary like Diane Arbus-style freaks or drug addicts shooting up, etc, is going to look a little like thousands of hackneyed wedding pictures or snapshots. They all just show regular people doing normal stuff that everyone does. It is when the composition, the light, and the details combine in ways that are difficult to describe but can be recognized that such pictures become unusual and worthy of note.

 

Another point I wanted to mention: while most of the people who have talked about the "story" of this photograph have been admirers of it, I think they are admiring it for the wrong reasons. This picture is not fundamentally presenting a "story", as Vuk has correctly pointed out. This picture is about relationships, as almost any wedding photograph would be. This one has the composition, light, and detail that I spoke of. So I think this is a masterful photograph, but one will look in vain to discover a clear story here.

 

However, I do agree with Vuk that the woman being obscured by the central male figure is rather bothersome once you notice it. Another thing that I've realized from this week's discussion is that the composition is somewhat unbalanced on the right. This occurred to me after Sophia posted her diagram, where it is apparent that one corner of the compositional triangle is cut off. It was interesting that a few posts later, Chris mentioned that this is something that bothers him about the image.

 

 

Marco, when you make a statement like that, you should expect that people will check your portfolio for the images that are clearly superior to this one. I did, and what can I say? Perhaps you should post your wedding pictures.

Can't argue with the elves this week: this has been one of my favorites on photo.net almost since I've been hanging out here. I could congratulate Chris on the honor of being chosen for POW (and I do), but with a picture like this it is almost the other way round. The other POW's will gain lustre by being in the company of this one.

 

To the picture. I don't find the window being burned out to be a problem at all: the detail there isn't important, and Chris has managed the light in the significant areas like a master. The block of white that is the window does not disturb the composition, either. Sometimes when managing a high contrast scene the only solution is to place a larger area than you would prefer as black or white. Generally, we make something black, because this usually seems more acceptable to the eye. But the opposite choice, as this picture shows, can also be valid.

 

As others have said the relationships between the people are the subject of this photograph, and they are reinforced by a wealth of details. The mirrored expressions and postures of the two young men, and the baby bottles that have infiltrated the beer glasses are my favorite elements.

 

Tony said the photo is so perfect, it almost looks like a setup; but I don't quite agree. You know that a picture like this is a masterpiece when it would require greater imagination than anyone could have, and better acting than anyone could do, to set it up. This is real.

 

Unfortunately, that standards guidance is both not very clear, and it was written before the scale was changed from 1-5 to 1-10, and the conversion from one to the other is not just a factor of 2.

Julia, I don't really understand the very high ratings on this image. About 600 images are uploaded per day, and of those about 100 are marked by the author for rating and selected by the elves as good enough to go into the gallery. Consider that all of those images warrant at least a 5-6 (unless you disagree with elves and think it doesn't even belong in the gallery.)

 

Now, maybe the top 10-20% of these 100 (i.e. around 10 to 20) would be a 7 or higher, and under 5% (i.e. 5 or so) an 8 or higher. By the time you're getting to 9 or 10, you're talking about an image that would come along not more than once a day, probably more like once every two or three days, a couple of times per week. 10's should be the most rare, a couple of times per month.

 

Now this image is good, and certainly deserving to be in the gallery. On some days, it might even be among the more interesting images of the day, but not among the top handful images -- in other words a high 6 or 7, possibly a stray 8, cancelled out by the stray 5. I don't understand how this image can warrant so many high ratings.

 

Julia, how do you see it?

 

 

I think this is a fine photograph. The light and the exposure are superb, and the handling of the depth of field is original and excellent. Of course the map, and the young woman's penetrating observation of the scene make the picture.

 

The picture would be better without the person standing with her and almost completely obscured. At first I didn't realize (he?) was there, and I took his hair as hers (an unconventional hair style.)

 

Also, I wish the guy in the beige jacket and the blue shirt were a little further back, instead of growing out of her nose. And I'm not sure what I think of the shoulder in the lower left corner.

 

Perhaps if you had taken the picture a second sooner, or a second later.... I hope you keep taking this kind of picture.

 

It may be so that the sharpness cannot be rendered in a low resolution JPEG, although unsharp masking generally helps. If that is so, perhaps you should upload somewhat larger files, or choose other photographs that are not so resolution-critical.

Bill, I think this is a wonderful and unusual photograph. Superb light, and a quietly interesting setting and people, as if from another time. The quality of the light and the warm tones remind me of some of the Dutch masters! As Tony said, this is a picture that draws one back, and I too have come back many times to it.

 

But there is one thing that always bothers me and prevents it from being a masterpiece in my mind. And that is the man whose back we see in the foreground with the bright beige sweater. At the level of composition, because of its size, brightness and position on the intersection of thirds lines, this sweater becomes the primary focal point of the picture, instead of the standing, mustachioed man to whom all the sight lines lead. Worse, the man's sweater, which looks much more modern and casual than most of the other clothes, breaks the mood of the picture.

 

Please pardon me for messing with such a wonderful picture, but I have attached the result of some burning in and desaturation of this sweater. The sweater remains a focal point, but I think now it is secondary and complimentary. To my eye, this improves the photograph. I won't say significantly, since it is already great, but enough to be worth doing.

 

(By the way, does anyone know how you just make a link to an attachment rather than embedding it? I see this on other comments, and would prefer to do this, but I can't figure out how.)

Daniel, there are many purposes for taking photographs besides art. Not all photographs are art, nor intended to be, yet they may be technically excellent. And they may be perfect for their application, despite technical shortcomings.

 

The purpose of this photo is to amuse its viewers. I doubt anyone would put it on the wall, or in a book of "artistic" photographs. In this, it has a great deal in common with many other recent choices for POW. "Art" photographs are actually rather under-represented in the POW choices, in my opinion.

 

This one, someone might publish in a comedy magazine, perhaps, or on a humorous greeting card. Apparently plenty of photographers who frequent this site find it so amusing that they are prepared to overlook its technical faults, which is usually hard for photographers. I must admit I cannot see why, but the only thing more perplexing than taste in photography is what people will find funny.

Congratulations Haluk.

 

This week the POW topic is humor in photography. I'm afraid my preferences in this area run to "found" humor, including unexpected juxtapositions of objects or expressions, such as the picture in this same folder with the police and the mannequins. The greatest of "street photographs" have this type of humor. Not so this photograph.

 

Leaving aside the fact that it is contrived and staged, this picture will also separate the fans of "Three Stooges"-style, finger-in-the-eye humor from those, like me, who are left cold by this style of humor. One of the problems with humor is that it is difficult to find jokes that everyone will find funny. I suspect that photo.net is an even tougher room for comedians than photographers.

 

 

Unusual image. The brown color palette and the light diffusing through the netting are very interesting. And the expression of the child is superb: let me out!

When you do contrast adjustment in Levels (or Curves) you also increase the saturation. Even if it is close to the natural appearance -- because you were in unusual light -- it doesn't look it, and I think it would be better if you toned down the saturation.

 

Apart from this, the composition is rather interesting. I wish there were a little detail in the very black areas at top and bottom left.

Mark, I like this a lot: it has the feel of an impressionist painting and you have captured the movement very well.

 

Here are some things in the digital darkroom department that might improve it a little, not that it really requires much improvement.

 

First, I think the yellow/magenta color mixed with the green is wonderful, but it is perhaps a little too much. I think I would try to slightly desaturate the top third or so of the picture. Second, I think it would be improved by the application of Unsharp Mask. This may seem paradoxical since you are going for a soft look, but to my eye some sharpening gives it more texture. Third, it might be improved by being darkened a little. Fourth, try burning-in the clump of grass sticking up on the bottom edge about 1/3 in from the right. These are all small things and you might not consider them improvements.

 

Finally, it's generous to offer us so many pixels, but most people won't be able to display 2160x1440 pixels on their monitors without having to scroll the image. Many people have monitors displaying no more than 1024x768 pixels. My suggestion is to downsize your images for upload to photo.net to around 780x260 pixels. This helps people on slow lines also.

I love the idea of this shot; I think I'll steal it! You have controlled the flare of the sun very well, and rendered the sun as a "star". Unfortunately, the maple leaves, while colorful, are lacking somewhat in contrast and texture. But I don't know whether it is even technically possible to do better.

10 on originality to everyone who has attempted to synthesize some significance out of this photo, to quote myself. It isn't in the photo, though.

A single unburned match would be better; the viewer could synthesize some metaphysical significance out of that, I am sure. Also, as someone else pointed out, the composition would be improved if the flame originated a little to the right compared to the actual photo.

I think it might suggest movement more if the burned out matches were still smoking and/or the captured moment showed the next match starting to go before the previous match had burned out. It is not quite the decisive moment.

 

I suspect, like others, that it was a setup and that only the one match actually burned during the take. In the picture, there is no visual evidence that the previous match has been burning very recently or that the next match is even going to light. The matches are spaced fairly far apart, so I am not sure these are the type of matches where you would have a chain reaction.

To Thomas: Congratulations on the POW. This is an original and technically difficult shot. Aesthetically, it does not appeal to me. To my eye, the fence-like line of matches is too symmetrical and is insufficiently relieved by the flame, which in turn does not have sufficient detail to hold my interest. The photo seizes one's attention through originality and technical mastery, but does not hold it very long.

To the elves: really, I think it is time to pass the baton. I find the elves' taste very different from mine, and I would like to see someone else choosing the POW's for a while. Its not that the elves' selections are bad photographs, but there has been hardly a great one for months. They seldom even pick one of the best from the photographer's folders.

Perhaps the whole concept of what photos are featured on the front page of photo.net and selected for community discussion needs to be rethought. At present there are two photos featured on the front page: the POW, and a high-rated one selected at random. Usually, the random one appeals to my taste better than the POW.