ctlow

Amin, this is great. It has rhythm, texture, energy, great light. I'm going to suggest a crop. This is very personal but I only review images which i) I really like and ii) on which I have at least some ideas for improvement. That's the reason to ask for critique. Personal issues of mine are i) featureless areas (e.g. scrub brush in otherwise lovely photos simply usually has to go), and ii) large dark areas, recognizing that there may be times when they are intentional and effective. So, check out my crop (and slight punch-up - for example, I separated the RGB and found histogram expansion possible that way). I have reduced the dark cliffs on the left. Perhaps they give some foundation to the image, but I like them smaller. And then I have sacrificed other parts to keep the relative dimensions pleasing. Charles

Curtis, this is lovely. Sometimes symmetry works and sometimes not and here I think that basically it does. I would enjoy exploring other angles. I wonder about the low contrast, and this of course is highly debatable and a matter of personal judgement, but can you say whether this is out-of-camera or did you choose this amount of contrast. I'm going to try to post an edit - perhaps something gained and something lost. It's very important to retain the glow of the leaf canopy.

LJ, thanks for posting - I always learn more from critiquing than I "teach" (not that I'm qualified). First reaction: desert. Then, far in the background, shrouded in mist: geese. I might almost have missed them had it not been for your title. So, these questions occur to me, and you may have an answer for all of them, and if not then it's just me, asking what occurs to me, for whatever use you might find it. Also, I purposefully haven't yet looked at the rest of your portfolio - will do that later. 1. Why that much foreground? Do you find it appealing? Do you find it adds to the "story? 2. Why that much mist? Well, I know, that's how much mist was there, but you can adjust it with the histogram in post. The geese are "the" subject, so I wonder whey they are largely obscured. 3. Why is nothing in focus? I'm going to try to post an edit of my own, if possible. Charles

It's always good to see a fresh perspective on a well-known icon. This is the kind of image where I say to myself that I wish I could back at dawn or dusk (with a tripod) - but often for practical reasons, I can't. But at the time of day and in the lighting at that time, it comes out quite contrasty. I find the foliage in the lower left distracting, but you weren't about to go pruning, I understand! I spent literally two minutes with this in PSE 13, and will post the results - not perfect, but gives the idea of lightening the shadows and darkening the sky. I browsed through your portfolio and see that you are looking for interesting ways to show things, which I applaud. Is this helpful? Charles

Phil, it sure looks like people were having fun, and the exposure is good and the focus is good. If that was your goal - and "snapshots" are a completely valid goal for a photographer - then good. These things happen quickly and dynamically, you raise the camera and release the shutter and are happy if the timing works out well. As art, that's another matter. The dog doesn't add anything. The beach bags don't add anything. One of the four people is turned completely away from the camera, which could sometimes be done intentionally, but I don't think so in this case. The water and sky behind are kind of blah. And the beach-racers are centred, top to bottom, left to right. Centering is again valid if done intentionally, but here I think it just kind of happened. One can break the "rule of thirds" but it is a good general rule. Really nice memory in the family photo album. Not so likely to end up framed on the mantel. I'm going to try to append an edit which took me about 10 minutes in PSE. Is that assessment acceptable to you? Charles

Hi, Gianni. This image has such great potential, and the choice of subject material is great. I'm seeing from my own very personal perspective a few issues, such as over-exposure (I know it's probably all sun-bleached, but nonetheless there are washed out areas), and then deep shadows, which happily aren't too large. So should it have been taken around sunrise or sunset for a more even light? I'm also wondering about the framing - I have a small feeling that this was a try-to-get-everything-in shot, and it might be more interesting if zoomed in a bit - less cluttered, perhaps. I'm trying not to get stuck on the find-a-centre-of-interest rule, but compositionally I'm not finding anything to hold my eye into the picture. Overall, I like that you saw something worth photographing and made artistic choices about how to do it. It certainly does look worth photographing! Thanks also for the rest of your portfolio - some other very nice stuff in there. Charles