amorteguy

Frankly, I am a bit disappointed. Not in your photo of course, but in that I had to sludge through 151 other photos to get to it. I selected to look through the top photos of the week from all categories, and this one showed up at number 152.

 

This is a wonderful image, not technically perfect, but technique is only a part of the value of an image. Content should always overrule technique when it comes to a documentary photo. This is a fact of which many here at Photo.net seem blissfully unaware. I would not have been so disappointed had the other 151 images that earned higher average ratings actually been superior or equal to yours.

 

What images did I find ranking high than yours? One of a zillion flower photos exhibiting no originally nor character, utterly boring; a cute but artistically vacant dog photo; water drops on a leaf, extraordinarily ordinary; a high key snowy rustic, a tree and a fence brought to life through the artistic efforts of a bit too much exposure; two more vacant horizons with pier pilings exposed oh-so-long to create a velvet water texture (how many times must we endure this clich鿩; countless oversaturated poster snaps of pretty sunsets and water, no less than 33 banal boudoir photos (come on guys, Playboy is not hiring more photogs.) And, (drum roll please) the top photo is a knotted truck of a tree with highly saturated green grass in the background. How did this photo warrant the number one spot? It was rotated upside-down! Excuse me?!?

 

I realize that this site is populated by burgeoning photographers, and in my critiques I have been highly encouraging to these nascent artists, but are we doing anyone any good if we relegate a fine image such as this to the 20th page of the top images of the week while the first page is populated by a strong man lifting two nude ladies and a close up of impressive but artistically worthless pair of boobs in a pink blouse? I think I'm done with this site.

 

This is very indicative of a modern documentary photograph. Very good image, tough one to capture. There are a lot of good points to be made, but they have been made above in previous posts. So, I'm just sending my kudos.

 

However, I wouldn't say that this is a true F.U. from the boys. They are having to much fun for me to see to any negative in their boyish playfulness. If you want that true F.U. feeling, the first image that comes to mind is the famous shot of Johnny Cash.

Interesting perspective. It is hard to perceive the distance and scale: Is it a large peak? Is it a small hill? I�m not sure what it is. Possibly this is due to the DOF softening the far peak which makes the foreground peak seem small.

 

All of this uncertainty makes for an interesting photo. Technically, I find the dark sky and light earth a pleasing contrast.

Very peaceful. I enjoy mornings such as this, that is why I like this image.

Does your cat like you getting this close with a camera? Fun shot.

Almost. Could be improved by shooting at a different time of day for better light.

Nice image for an ad layout. The only thing that that detracts is the brochure on the table. It is not clear enough to discern what it is. I keep thinking that it is supposed to add something to the composition, but I just can't figure out what.

Very nice composition and character study. I was wondering if the hawk was a good choice for digital enhancement. In my opinion it detracts somewhat from an otherwise very traditional and pleasing composition.

 

If you like the hawk in the composition, I would have placed it a more natural position. The upward flight looks too unrealistic. Also, to make it appear more realistic, gausian blur the hawk so it appears at the same degree of softness wich would result from the overall depth of field.

 

All that said, I like it and I encourage your continued creativity.

This just cracks me up. It is SOOO refreshing to see someone who can produce such humorous images. You need to trademark that little sheep.

 

Also, you are not just good at poking fun at your images, you have great a talent at capturing great landscapes. You have a wonderful portfolio.

Brian: Good point. Like I said before, I guess I'm old-fashioned in this area. I should just ignore the camera details and just enjoy the great images such as this one.

In my opinion, there is something impure about creating B&W images on digital cameras (I know, old-fashioned), but there is not much to complain about here. Nicely done.

A beautiful "painting."

Peaceful. Just a bit too much foliage in the foreground.

Very nice. I really like the colors. In my critique of this strong image, the only thing I can see that would be an improvement is to get rid of the "tracer" between droplets.

 

I think there was just enough light to catsh the drops falling before the flash. I think the reduction of ambient light to get rid of this would have allowed the drops to present cleanly against the beautiful abstract background.

Peter has it right. It is interesting as a document of the conditions, but there is too much going on to focus on. Simplifying it and trying to isolate a single story would focus the image.

Image brightness is an ongoing problem for me. I look at these images from two location; work and home.

 

At home I have LaCie Electron Blues (2x19"), and at work a cheapo Dell LCD. The Dell is MUCH brighter and much less contrasty. The LaCies' are much more contrasty. So, I have to be careful when critiquing images.

Now I'm laughing too. What a fun shot.

Pretty bird. I would have gone f/4.5, 1/1000. (When does that lens kick into 5.6 for max aperture?) The background is still to "there" for me. But again, pretty bird.

Boy, I have got to get my monitor at home worked over! My comments on the foliage being too dark was totally wrong.

 

I am looking at this on my work monitor and it looks absolutely PERFECT! I have got to be careful.

Flyer? Advertising promo? Nice tone.

You are on the way to a great image. Very good composition and feel. I like this a lot. The foliage by the dead tree needs to be dodged a bit. It has lost all detail in the black.

What were they whispering? Nice shot. Technically there may be too much black. A little more detail in the surroundings would have been nice.

 

[Doh! I wrote my comment from the "Rate Recent" area and didn't see that the answer to my question was in the title.]

Fierce winds. I looked at the details and was surprised this was a recent (digital) image. I could have sworn this was an old film shot from the 70's. I has a film look to it. And the color looks like old film stock too.

 

None of the comments above are negative critiques, it is just what I saw at first glance. It is an interesting image in a documentary style.

Lots of strong color, that's good. It does lack a little focus; too much going on. Looks like you have a nice dark background, maybe isolating a bloom somehow so there isn't "so much."

The very erect framing is balanced nicely by the roundness of the vents. Putting my soft images up against such firm compositions such as this; it's hard on me.