randall_shafer

I can't think of any level where this portrait works for me. Rule breaking is fine when it accomplishes something, but when nothing is accomplished, it's just rule breaking.

 

The flat, lifeless lighting and lack of contrast further degrade the visual impact, and the subject is rendered as unattractive and uncomfortable looking. The pose and crop add insult to injury.

 

Seniors can make very dramatic subjects if you respect them and want to bring out their character with careful posing and lighting. On the other hand, a poorly lit mug shot

achieves the opposite effect as is so well demonstrated here.

I had a great chuckle about the complaint about being "too liberal with the unsharp masking." A 4X5 transparency that is drum scanned certainly doesn't need ANY unsharp masking an I'm sure this one doesn't have (or need) any. In fact, the biggest problem drum scanning large format is the sheer amount of data to handle. Perhaps the commentator is thinking of one of those grainy little 24mmX36mm images?

 

Very nice job on this image. I'm not of the persuasion that every image needs to be a monumental work of art to be valuable. So many places simply need to be competently recorded because they can speak to us without extra manipulation by the recordist.

 

One wonderful exercise is to go to the same place over and over again and capture the same basic scene in different ways. The appearance of a scene can change drastically from day to day and hour to hour. A local pond is a favorite place fo mine to relax and make images, and I've photographed it many hundreds of times, in every season, and with everything from a 4X5 to a Canon Elph. The variety of images is quite remarkable and together they help capture the essence of the place.

 

Very good work, and I'd love to see more images under different conditions. (If you can afford a ready supply of transfer cases.)

The weak contrast and poor framing of this image combine with the gimmicky frame to produce an image that fails to convey the meaning implied in the title.

 

so many others have done the subject so much better.

 

Keep trying.

I have a lot of respect for those willing to go out in stormy conditions and stand by a metal antenna with a camera on top to take this kind of photo. Very nicely done.

Wonderful choice of colors and lighting that is simply perfect really creates a rich, yet subued look. Some technical suggetions, though. This model has simply stunning eyes, and the image should exploit that feature. Really, if you think about it, the eyes are the real subject here. The large expanse of green and the cropped hair fight they eyes for attention. The face needs to be larger and the eyes more dominant in the frame. I would have even tried framing horizontally to accent the eyes. That snippet of hair also needs to come back because it is shading one eye and as great as her hair is, the eyes are the subject here.

 

Another critic's comment about the sharp folds in the cloth is well-taken. Draping the cloth properly really helps and is one of those "attention to detail" items that separate experienced photographers from those still learning. Excellent effort, though, and keep in touch with that model--- She's got "it" and you appear to work well together.

A delightful illustration of the ability of photography to capture fleeting moments and preserve them.

A very striking effort but marred by some technical faults. Is it a portrait of a mother and her children? If so, one person's face being hidden really diminishes the effectiveness of the image and it's value as a portrait. The bright spot over the left hand of the mother stands out and really competes visually with the rest of the image. The photographer missed the obvious opportunity to brighten the mother's head and the backdrop behind it to accentuate the spiritual nature of the act of motherhood.

A great start for an idea, but one that doesn't work as well as it could. The color slide is so small in comparison to the frame, it really destroys the impact of the idea-- The vast majority of the image is a dull gray. Also, the cable release seems like an afterthought and takes away from the original idea. You really don't need 100 empty slide mounts showing to imply a pile of empty slide mounts-- this image needs to be shot a lot closer so the slide is much larger. Reducing the size of the pile and moving the image slide more into the corner would allow the same basic composition but with more emphasis on the color slide. Nice idea though, and one that needs to be developed.

"It's a Big World" composition works against the title. The centering of the tree makes it dominate the frame. Moving the tree more to the left will help isolate, and the somewhat circular pattern of the clouds will be more obvious. Color is muted and supports the idea, but I would prefer to see it in B&W.

This one is mediocre, but at least the editors selected one from a great photographer. There are so many in the photographer's portfolio, though, that are so much better-- both in composition and technical achievement. The POW shot begs for exposition in black and white-- the sepia tone further weakens a photo with little visual interest.

A rare exception to the steady stream of mediocre or just plain bad POW. This photo needs to be printed in the rich sepia tones of Edward Curtis to make it even more effective. Portion deleted by moderator. Personal and not useful comments towards other members or admin. go against policy and will be deleted as they add nothing to the discussion of the image. Author: See folks? The editors at Photonet can't take it-- they must resort to censorship of comments they don't agree with.

An exceptionally ill-composed, dull, subjectless photo that completely fails to convey any sense of humanity, uniqueness or anything else for that matter. With so much one could say about this metropolis, why say so little?

Some inflammatory content edited by moderators as off topic and inappropriate. Opinions are invited of a positive or negative nature, and you are very welcome to state them. Controversy and debate and diversity of taste is important. However, the subject is the photograph. Personal attacks will be removed courtesy of the site administrators.

The only "attacks" were on the continued lack of a discernment on the part of the editors, who must resort to censorship when THEIR work is critiqued.

Images of flowers are quite common here on photo.net but are rarely executed with any skill or artist vision. This shot, however, has great composition, good technical execution, and actually shows a lot more that the typical big blow of color. My only desire would be to see the rest of the petal at the lower edge. Cutting it off so close to the end seems cruel.

This would be a wonderful shot if the model was looking up at the camera. As is, it falls flat and seems quite pointless.

Yet another example of the ongoing lack of artistic discernment on the part of the editors. One would hope that an entry in a photo contest for a botanical garden would at least attempt to add some botanical interest, but the complete opposite-- a harsh line study of stone and steel-- completely loses the point of the contest, doesn't it? The image itself is visually interesting, not at all original (what is these days?) but could have been a lot more compelling with some creativity added beyond standing on a chair to take the photo. Perhaps the bare feet and shins of a model standing in the upper left corner, even with a flower or flowers just visible in lowered hand, with only the skin and flowers in color? There is so much that could have been done but wasn't.

A classic pose, poorly executed. Would have been much better in B&W, but you can't fix the poor focus so why bother? Weak effort from an otherwise outstanding portfolio. A real pro, however, would not show this photo because of the technical faults.

the large negative space doesn't communicate anything to me, and coupled with the right side of the face cropped-- well, I just don't think it works

nice study in texture and line. i would have turned the photo a bit counter-clockwise to make a more diagonal composition. the composition as-is is a bit static with the vertical split of the sand and water. nice texture showing in the sand as well as water-- usually hard to capture.

actually would have been more interesting without the clothes. I read the title but the photo doesn't communicate anything to me.

an interested subject rendered in a bland, snapshot fashion. The centered subject is too far away, the horizon line appears tilted. You should really move in on an interesting object like this and shoot quite a few shots from different angles. When you have a huge blank sky like this, using a polarizer doesn't help-- there is nothing to see there anyway. move in and fill the frame with the subject.

nice candid. highlights are completely blown away-- if this was taken on print film, more care should have been taken with scanning or printing. my screen also shows a very strong magenta cast which also detracts. a fill flash would have brightened the eyes.

nice action shot, good composition

why put a caption in the middle? the picture works by itself.

nice color, but might benefit from a longer lens to bring in the formations a bit. Have you ever tried flash on a shot like this to get some detail in the rock structures? Nice color.

would benefit from a much stronger shift to red, and also spot out the distracting smear on the left side that looks like a big piece of lint.