andrewg_ny

An interesting subject.

 

I think whatever you're doing though is creating a halo around your foreground subjects--I imagine the intent was to make the sky darker and more dramatic while making the subject livelier but to me it doesn't look very natural that there's a glow around the boundary between subject and sky.  Also, the green looks a little too bright considering the lighting, unless you can convince that the island is getting sun while the clouds are only in the background.

 

 

Not a bad idea but I think a less busy background might have made it better.  Also, consider cropping out some of the foreground, more of a panoramic-type aspect ratio.  It appears that you included either intentionally or because of your equipment a bit of a vignetting effect (darkened corners)...I think it works reasonably well here.

Extremely nice scene, you get the feeling the subjects are cooling their heels after quite a walk to get here.  I do feel like the image is a little dark/underexposed, the shadows a bit too deep and the highlights not very bright...light reminds me a bit of an eclipse but not quite that surreal.  I sort of wish I could better see the boat in the distance, but I guess even as is it helps provide a sense of scale.  From a composition standpoint, I find myself wishing there was less of the ground on the left and a little more expansion on the right, probably aligning the group of hikers a little closer to 1/3 from the left.  Might also look interesting as a square crop, removing most of the image left of the leftmost hiker.

This does capture the morning light, like the rich colors on the boat (motor-canoe?). If I have to criticize, I think I'd want the shot level (right side looks low to me) and maybe a little less space on the right and a little more on the left but I don't know if I really want it centered so maybe not.

Neat, and a little bit of a departure from other stuff I've seen from you. Has a nice harmonic disorder here with the square shapes combined with the spaghetti lines. I guess if I had to complain, I wish the tops of the floats weren't quite so blown out, and perhaps the tangled lines at the bottom just *slightly* darker and more contrasty...but I like. I don't own an FA31 and know better than to attribute too much to it...but perhaps it's not a coincidence that two of your images I like best from this set were shot with it.

The water is calm, and there's a peaceful quiet about this image. Exposure for sky, water, and trees all looks good. Perhaps there isn't a real dominant subject here but among other shots like it, this one stands out for me.

Striking subject & color, that roughly matches the sky. A good eye for noticing it. I think I would have liked to see more space around it, particularly on the left side but perhaps you were deliberately excluding a trash dumpster or the like.

Pascal,

 

This shot stood out on the page for me...nice high-key shot, the blown out sky works here as you end up with just the right amount of non-white stuff in the image. Nice, pleasant, peaceful fresh-fallen snow.

@Peter Smith: The POW is explicitly NOT a contest , and while in my personal lexicon this isn't a photograph either, it doesn't in any way make it less art- or discussion-worthy. Perhaps the forum should be "Picture of the Week" instead, but I think the ground rules have already been laid out pretty clearly here. I don't think all of us could have created this image in PS--it is from Ceslovas' imagination and he implemented it with unusual skill. It has been differentiated--it has clearly been presented as a manipulation and the elves/mods have repeatedly asked that the discussion focus on the quality and application of manipulation and not on whether or not it belongs here.

As for a critique on the posted image, it is beautiful, no doubt, and is a wonderful concept. If there's anything for me to criticize it would be that I'd like to see the more distant hills fade more, blend into the horizon with a little more haze. The shadow cast by the man appears to be a little bit too crisp and dark in comparison to the shadows cast by the trees. And composition-wise, I feel like I wish the trees weren't in quite so straight a line.

I started reading through these comments, surprised at how just how positive all of them were, mostly commenting only on the more-interesting-than-average subject rather than the photograph. I think the composition is just fine. I'm not one who normally likes the hypersaturation and excessive contrast that we see so much of these days but my first thought is that this one seems to need *slight* exposure, black-point, contrast and saturation boosts, going especially gentle on the reds. Looking again however, maybe it does have something as is--the cool, grey skin almost makes her look slightly like she's made of wax, there's a certain interest there. Perhaps it is treading a very fine line as it was shot in rather flat lighting.

The subject is emotional and powerful, but this photo doesn't do much for me. Please excuse me if you think I'm being too harsh, but frankly it looks like a tourist snapshot (which it very well may be).

Subject is small in the framethe background detracts in that it is busy without being terribly interesting. The light is harsh, you can't see his faceThe bag, etc. in the foreground is sort of awkwardly cut off right at its edge A vertical crop, cutting off most of the left and right is probably the best hope for rescuing this.Also consider stooping down or kneeling to take this so that you're looking across rather than down at him.

The photo is nice enough but the editing appears rather crude and detracts--the cut out edge (particularly the white around the hair, her right arm and left ankle) is quite obvious. Also, it looks like she's floating there since there isn't much of a shadow at her feet to convince me otherwise.

Subject and exposure are nice. I find myself wishing that you'd stepped back enough to include the left part of the flower and probably another bit of breathing room on the right of the frog. Perhaps also somehow apply rule-of-thirds here--probably placing the two subjects lower and further left in the frame. I imagine you posted this one mostly because you were pleased with the image quality of the frog & flower.

I was struck by the 'little trees' effect...Took this from an open

window after a late-winter/early spring snowstorm. The shadows were

fading in and out as the clouds rolled over.

 

Interesting and pretty well executed, makes one think of Ms. Hepburn, and there's little to find fault with the photo of the model. The cube gradient corners look a little fake for my tastes. That being said, what strikes me as a little odd is that either the ceiling should appear 'higher' than it does, or perhaps there might be a ceiling reflection as well? Also, I think the portal on the right might be slightly lower than the one on the left, maybe the model's curve is making it seem even more so?

 

Lighting, color, and exposure are nice, though that green access panel sort of spoils the mood for me.

Whether or not the effect was completely deliberate or not at time of shooting perhaps doesn't matter--what was no doubt deliberate is that the artist selected this shot out of many to show. The artist's eye and intent counts both before and after capture.

It is easy to imagine a shot like this being even better, but I don't think that necessarily detracts from what it is. And just because it isn't sharp doesn't mean you can't print it up poster-sized. Noise, distortion, grain, blur, etc. detract from some types of images more than others. From an educational standpoint, for those of us who like the style, it might be nice to know about just how accidental or orchestrated the shot was.

In photography there is a philosophical debate about art vs. documentary snapshots. For something to be evaluated as art, I think that all that is really required is it to be presented as art, whether it was captured with that intent or not. There's no need to be afraid of this--from that point on, the photo needs to stand on its own. The photographer can recognize after the fact that a photo may have aesthetic merit. Of course, there's a tendency to reward and place value on apparent effort--if the viewer thinks that the artist went to great lengths to capture something, they're probably going to give the artist the benefit of the doubt and grant it more consideration, more time to figure out what the artist intended. A shot like this, it's hard to tell, so the artist will not have that effect working in their favor. Crafting a photo before capture increases the odds that the resultant image will acheive what we envision. I "like" this picture.

-Andrew

On one hand I like the contrasty look of the condos on the cliffs in black & white. On the other, I'm not embracing the dash of color left on the breaking surf and the beach and grass in the middle of the picture. I'm not sure what feature you were intending to highlight...and I'm also wishing that that wave was breaking further to the left in this shot. The people wading in the foreground are good and lend a sense of scale to the surf.

The lighting is great, the colors of the Chateau Frontenac, the autum leaves, and the foreground buildings pop out nicely against the dark but rich sky and grass. I love autumn.

The Sunday evening I captured this felt like the last relaxed day of

summer to me. How does it make you feel? Any criticisms or

suggestions would be appreciated.

Rachel,

 

As Cyrus suggested, the 'Curves' adjustments can be a little tricky to get the hang of--visualizing the effect ahead of time isn't the most intuitive thing to some of us. You can also try the 'Levels' adjustments; I typically move the outer sliders to where recorded data starts on the histogram (for example, in a darker image, if there was no recorded data on the right part of the histogram, I would move that slider to where the data starts). This generally has limited visible effect on the picture, but has the effect of spreading the remaining data across the whole available range. Then, more importantly, I frequently end up adjusting (to taste) the middle slider to lighten the midrange details.

 

-Andrew