chad_gard

Good control of exposure and DOF - a lot of motion and emotion in this shot.

Very unique composition - I'm curious what caused all of the parallel lines in the sand - do they rake the beach or something?

 

It would have worked better for me without the red and blue object in the background right. You have very nice lines leading in and to the left, but that object (is it a boat?) is rather disturbing and disrupts the flow.

Thanks for your comments.

 

Miguel - unfortunately, it's not really possible to get more detail in the rocks without grossly over-exposing everything else.

 

That's pretty much what they looked like in reality. They're dark because, well, they're essentially black. Which is why they call it BlackRock (ie BlackRock Beach, BlackRock Reef (under the water). The only reason they have a little brown tint to them is because it is sunrise.

 

I metered from the sand, which is somewhat darker than neutral, and thus chose to under-expose from the metered level by 2/3 of a stop. If I had instead metered on the rocks, I think they would have appeared a rather unappealing greyish-brown, and the sand would be nearly white. And there'd be no color in the background.

 

Carl - I , too, would have preferred a little more bold/ interesting background to the left. But, alas, it's a sunrise and we're looking west, so I should probably be happy with what is there :)

Comments appreciated

I would like to see that other. But note I was suggesting shorter, not longer, focal length combined with the lower angle. I think a longer focal length would compress the distance between the two statues too much.

Yes indeed, he did let you get pretty darn close. I love the eyes in this photo, but the background is a little too busy (though it does show how effective his camouflage is). I prefer the first, more environmental photo you had requested critique on - indeed I think you succeeded in showing his environment.

Better. And your photoshop skills far surpass my own. It's very very close to a 7/7 in the amended version.

 

Just a bit more cleanup and I think you'll have it ('course, I still think it looks like you could have originally shot it without the flash and avoided all of this work ;) )

 

There's still a point of glare on the left side, at the junction between the window frame and the curtain. And some overall glare on the curtain next to that point, a little bit on the right side window frame, and a bit on either side of the middle bar.

 

Loosing the green thing was a big help. The biggest distraction now is the point glare. The glare on the right side of the window frame is much less bothersome - it's mostly an annoyance because of the change in light color there than the glare itself. Probably wouldn't even notice it online (though I probably would on a large print) if the other flash artifacts weren't there, too.

Nice exposure on such a contrasty subject. I would just like to see a little sharper focus on the eyes. it looks like the "shoulder" is the sharpest focus, and the DOF is shallow enough that the eyes are already soft. While I think the shallow DOF is good, I prefer to see the sharpest focus be on the eyes.

 

I hope you didn't squish your model afterwards :)

Wow - great light and I love the contrast of the green undergrowth with the snow/frost covered trees and foreground element. I only worry about having that one tree trunk so close to dead-center when it is near enough not to be faded by the fog.

Something about seeing statues of children covered with moss is a little disturbing, yet appealing at the same time. Perhaps reminiscent of the cabbage patch kids craze?

 

I like the subject and textures/tonal range you've captured. But compositionally I'd like an angle a little lower to the ground, and a bit to the right, with a slightly shorter focal length. This would emphasize the hills a bit, as well as the height of the moss, and be a little more "personal" with the foreground statue, wile not loosing the two in the background.

Great lighting, love the tonal pallet choices, and excellent highlight in his eyes. The cute model helps, too. :)

Wow - owls are tough! Too often too dark to photograph them by the time they come out.

 

I like the composition and the owl's pose. I would have liked to have seen a closer shot of the owl, but it would then loose some of its environmental appeal. Chances are you were already as close as you could get and had the lens racked all the way out to 300 anyway, judging from the depth of field.

 

Is that 100-300 the F4L? If so, how do you like it? I would like to purchase it, but it's pretty low on the budgetary priorities right now.

Interesting show and use of such a wide-angle lens. I'm not sure if the extreme title of the horizon works for me or not.

 

I would like to have seen a little more interesting path for the sled tracks. As they are, they serve more to divide the frame in half, rather than draw the eye in to the shot. A more conventional camera angle may have been enough to change that, or simply moving to the side, so the tracks start more near the bottom right and lead to the top left (for example).

Nice colors and composition. Just a slight move so the head was completely eclipsing the sun might have been more fun. Or might have ruined the lighting on the kite. Hard to know for sure...

Interesting - I'd really like to know what it is a photo of.

 

Having the boundary between the light and dark areas right in the middle seems a bit static in an otherwise very fluid subject. In addition, it is the top portion that really has the more interesting shapes, and there's a disturbing dark triangle in the upper-right where a swirl was cut off.

 

I would re-compose (not just crop), so that there is a little more of the light colored area, and perhaps not the dark dot on the lower right. Moving the camera up in this way would move the transition line into a more compositionally strong place, as well as avoid cutting that swirl right at the top right corner.

 

Of course, these are probably two liquids and recreating their precise pattern would not be possible...

Always wanted to visit Delicate Arch. This is an interesting perspective on it that I've not sen before.

 

The light is just a touch too harsh for my tastes, but given the lighting situation you were in, this is probably one of the better solutions to get an interesting and appealing photo.

 

I'd also crop up just a sliver from the bottom - there's something dark there - the horizon? edge of the frame? Oh, wait, there's something top left as well. Perhaps scanned from a print, and not quite square? You may want to clean those two up a bit.

 

After that, the polarization is just a touch too extreme - while I think using the polarizer was the right move here, I think maybe just a slight turn to lower the amount of polarization a hair would allow a better tonal balance and maintain the definition in the clouds.

the sharpest focus seems to be on the chin, rather than the eyes. I'd like to see the eyes have better focus, and let the chin focus be a little more soft.

The shadows and off-kilter horizon add an interesting dynamic element to the an otherwise very still life. Might be better to emphasize that a bit more by moving the apple out of the center.

He seems like a popular guy ;).

 

I'm not sure the expression on the model's face helps the otherwise very intriguing photo. Love the coloration and lighting, and it's a truly wonderful idea.

At first glance, this is a wonderful photo. I love the mood, the contrast in colors and textures between the wealthy person's house/building and the poor-appearing woman.

 

But on closer inspection, there are a couple of things that detract. What first caught my eye was the green spot on the woman's head. It doesn't look like something that would naturally be there. I believe it is caused by a reflection from the flash.

 

Which brings me to the bigger annoyance - your reflection in the window and the flash's reflection in the window. It looks like the lighting as rather flat and flattering already, so I'm guessing you could have done without any fill flash. With it, we see your reflection, and a big bright shine on the window, window frame, etc. right in the middle of the shot. And probably the green spot. And possibly your own reflection (which would have been less noticeable even if it did occur were it not for the flash drawing the eye).

 

Without the flash, I think I would have given this a 7/7. But with it I keep getting distracted.

Indiana's antique bridges have been on the National Register of Historic Places most

threatened list for many years running. And nothing of substance is being done to protect

them. I've been wanting to do a project photographing them for a while, but it is hard to

find information on where the bridges actually are. I was running an errand (involving a

200 mile trip) anyway, and afterwards was planning to visit a nature preserve near my

travel plan. I stumbled accross this bridge and had to stop, in spite of the horrid light.

 

Have several shots of parts of the bridge, but due to the bad light, this is really the only

shot "of the bridge" I took. Would love both comments on the photo and any research

recommendations folks to lend on ways to find these bridges other than happenstance.

This one was also originally intended to be B&W, and I later wasn't sure if I liked the color or B&W version better.

Here is a B&W version of the same photo - more graphic, sky less distracting, and what I had in mind when I originally shot the photo. But afterwards I wasn't sure if I prefered the color of B&W version. Hence, both, for your pleasure.

This photo seems to be drawing a lot of comments even without a

request for critique, so, well, why not request.

 

I've had several people ask for the story behind it. Since most

people seeing it here probably aren't interested in the details behind

how we got here, I'll put in some hilights. However, please rate the

photo, not the story.

 

this was the day of the Indianapolis 500, and I live in Indy. A good

day to be out of town. We knew there were going to be several

tornados, including some very close to home. But we also knew that it

would be too humid to see them close to home. So, we decided to chase

in west-central IL.

 

We got a little sidetracked by early tornados behind us that surprised

us, wasted some time on storms north of us, then finally settled back

down on our original plan.

 

We targeted this storm entirely visually - we had stopped to look at

radar data, and there were just so many interesting storms we couldn't

decide. Then, I saw the top of the tower on this storm, and figured

it was forming on the outflow boundary of a colapsing one. It wasn't

raining yet, thus not on radar, and was approximately 40 miles away.

 

We followed the entire life cycle of this tornaod, from that tower,

through several rotating mesos & wall clouds, to a tornado with no

visible funnel (debris cloud on the groun, meso above, but no funnel -

most common tornado form in my area). Then the funnel formed from top

and bottom to middle. We were approximately .75 miles from it at this

point.

 

We wanted to get closer, as we were in perfect viewing position and

there were several good escape route options, but there was a

slow-moving fire truck in the way blocking the road. Also almost got

run over by an idiot passing in the ditch - probably a Piotrowski

wanabe. Anyway, the tornado was moving about 35mph northeast, and we

were limited to about 20 mph east and north at right angles by the

fire truck. Thus, this photo was taken early in the weakening phase

of the storm, from about 2.25 miles.

 

We were woried it would hit the town of Secor, IL. Thankfully it

"roped out" before getting to the town, and only destroyed a barn. It

was a fairly strong tornado, probably would have been an F3 if it had

struck the town. Thankfully it was an F1, as it stayed in rural

areas. Sadly it did strike and destroy a barn (hence the F1, rather

than F0 rating - and the barn in the photo survived - it was north of

that barn).

 

Shortly after this we nearly drowned as we tried to backtrack to a

different storm and got caught by the squall line coming through as we

were refueling, then couldn't drive fast enough to catch anything else.

 

Returned home to a city that had had several tornados affect it, and

helped with communications at one of the red cross shelters. We knew

we were taking a risk driving 400 miles away from home on a day we

knew home would get hammered. But it paid off, because we saw our

tornado, and could watch it without getting wet or hailed on, which

would not have been possible at home.

Interesting now that I know what it is. Very creative. I'm not sure if I like it more now that I know what it is, or if I liked it better as a mystery.

 

Really very nice (I hope my former critique didn't seem too, well, critical).