markwilkins

What's wrong with this picture? This is one of my poorest-rated photos, yet I keep coming

back to it. I'm fascinated by the structure in the bush and the scale of the moon in the sky

is surprising to me.

 

Incidentally, this one's years old, so I'm way beyond having a personal connection to the

experience of taking it. I barely remember the session.

 

Thoughts?

My first reaction was "tourist happy snap" and then as I looked at it longer I was intrigued. First, there's something a little creepy about a smiling child at the controls of a weapon like that. Second, her face tucked in there among the lines of the ship's features is quite striking.

 

I can't imagine the sepia being quite as interesting, because the color's needed to draw the eye to her face. I'd possibly have gone to the extent of significant painting in Photoshop to eliminate the people in the background, but I realize that's not necessarily practical or a good use of the poster's time. :)

 

Rub a dub dub put my camera in the tub...

I find the forms of flowing water interesting -- amazing how you can watch a fountain for

hours and never see individual droplets like those you can capture in a photo...

Had you cropped away the right side of the frame at about the edge of the white wall, I'd have thought this was great -- the woman and boy appear to be looking at the guy with the flying tie, and that crop would make this all about their eyeline.

This image would have been even more interesting if the geometric patterns in the glass were precisely aligned with the film plane. However, if this was a grab shot, I recognize you may not have had control over that.

I love your other images to death. This one, though, I find very troubling -- mostly because the magenta of the flower is so intense as to blow out any visible detail, and because magenta and the warm yellow with which you've framed it tend to clash badly to me.

... don't care for the title.

 

I was going to say that a little more fill in the shadow would probably be nicer, but it couldn't be much, as the difference in tone between the face and the background sets the subject off well.

 

By the way, rather than just desaturating, by judiciously using the channel mixer (along with some creative masking) you could get a lot of control over the tones in this image that could make it much more dramatic. Mail me a small copy of the color version and I can show you what I mean...

Could you umm, punch up the road a little bit. Also, we'd like a little more of a highlight on Clifford's forehead to give his fur a healthy glow. Take the hood saturation down a notch too, it competes with him.

 

You guys bill 180 days net, right?

A friend of mine who is a matte painter for motion picture visual effects takes many, many photos of clouds for reference, to the point that he has a thick binder of 6x7 transparencies that look about like this. Seeing the collection as a whole is amazing.

 

In the context of a comprehensive collection of thousands of different kinds of clouds and weather conditions, images like this can add up to a tremendous impact... of course, my friend has a practical reason for having started to collect them, but the collection has taken on a life of its own. In ones and twos, though, they're just clouds.

 

Ten thousand images from now you'll have a work of art, but I'm not sure you'll be able to upload it to photo.net even if you give them $100 or something. Until you get to that point, clouds have more impact in a context, which these unfortunately do not have.

 

That said, I wouldn't want to dissuade you from pointing a camera at the sky because you want to. Thus, I'll refrain from actually rating your photo, but if I did I would probably give it a 4 for aesthetics (I like clouds well enough!) and a 2 for originality. (In my book, photos of small children related to the photographer get a 2 for originality if the lighting is nice, and flash-lit snapshots of groups of friends standing around at a party get a 1.)

I agree with some of the contrast and lighting issues mentioned, but to me it's really a striking photograph anyway.

If you want to suggest something like cropping or different color correction, please feel free to post a small version with your changes applied so that we can see what you're talking about! :-)

 

-- Mark

... is the foliage too dark? I could definitely try a more

sophisticated approach to varying the levels overall but this is

pretty close to what the original transparency looks like.

 

-- Mark

This photo appealed to me because I was capturing another

photographer in the same spot where I had stood for one of my

favorite photos. I know a few people who really like it, but I'm not

sure how I feel. Anyone have any arguments one way or

another?

It's not intended to communicate anything. It's just color.

I've always liked this image but others haven't always known

what to make of it. Feedback?

I'm not sure I see the charm. The color is kind of interesting but it captures little that's special about being on the train to Machu Picchu...

 

Sorry for the poor scan, the highlights were not originally blown-

out...

 

I posted this one a while back and wanted to get some fresh

opinions. Personally, I like the color and the geometry of the

curb. Is there too much foreground?

Yep, looks goth-y.

 

Technically nice, but I feel like I've seen this photo before.

As someone who does not Scuba dive, this image is both interesting and beautiful at the same time.

... it appears woefully underexposed. Exposed properly, the blacks would be saturated. Unfortunately, the light probably didn't give you much to work with and pushing the film would have been the only solution.

 

Properly exposed, and perhaps framed a little differently to bring in a feeling of perspective, this would be a nice environmental portrait.

 

By the way, I gave this a 2 on the aesthetic side because the technical issues left it so wanting, but a 7 on the originality side because, exposure aside, it's a far better family snapshot than most.

This is my kind of photo!!!!

... the dark foreground is fine.

this photo seems VERY soft, VERY blown-out at the high end, and VERY light at the dark end. For example, you can't see the flagpole because there's so much flare. More contrast and more sharpness are necessary to make this photo work.

You don't succeed at making their sleep seem peaceful -- the harsh flash makes their environment seem stark and uncomfortable.

 

Perhaps a softer flash from an angle would have helped?