evan_thomsen

Everyone,

 

For what it's worth, I enetered another scan of this image at kodak.com. According to the e-mail they sent me, this image is to be featured as a "picture of the day" on November 26th, 2002, and will also be seen periodically on the 26th on their marquee board in Times Square, New York City. If I understood correctly, the board is mounted on the Hotel Marriot Marquis. Anyway, just wanted to share this, and thanks to everyone who has/is viewing/rating this shot!

 

Evan

 

 

I do want to thank you for the critique, I welcome all constructive critique, positive or negative. One thing though, I honestly don't see the slope in the horizon you mention. I wonder if the slope of the top of the hills is causing such an illusion. As for the rest...well, I personally didn't find the boats ugly, and do generally disagree with your comments, but I have taken them into consideration, I can see how some might find the shot too busy for instance, and consider it a valid critique. My intent, FYI was to have the flowers frame the slightly out of depth of field boats, kind of a frame within the picture. Perhaps I was less then sucessful, perhaps not. Regardless, thanks for viewing!

 

 

The angle you took this is interesting and unique, and does give almost a "flying" feeling to the shot. I also like the lines leading almost to infinity, so the composition is great. But, the lighting and color saturation, to be honest is a bit drab, and the sky looks just to be a dull gray. If this is an easy location for you to get to, might I suggest retaking this on a partly cloudy day, when there's strong lighting? Should both add some "punch" to the colors, and make the sky a lot more interesting. Otherwise, I do like the image.

 

Evan

Again, like the "fatburger" image, this one looks fuzzy, but again it looks like the scanning, not like the print was fuzzy, assuming this was a scan of a print, and not a direct scan of a negative. Anyway, was this an overcast day when you took this? If not, did you have any filteration on the lens? Again, waiting until there are some clouds, and then using let's say a yellow or red filter (I personally like a Red 25 or even a Red 29) would darken the sky, and with this tree make the palms lighter. Finally, it's maybe printed too dark, if you can reprint and dodge out the trunk, assuming it's not too dark just because of my monitor.

 

Evan

Where I notice the blur the most is in the word "Fatburger" (LOL on that name, BTW). I think it's the scanning, but for me it does detract from the image. Also, if this is a scan from a print and not directly from a negative, may I suggest reprinting, and when you do so dodging out the porch or whatever it is behind the Fatburger sign. Would be nice to see what is there, even if it's just a door, right now there's a big black space. I have the brightness set on my monitor fairly high, so I'm assuming that the print looks like this, or at least close. Also, the lighting looks a bit flat, may I suggest taking this on a partly cloudy day, with either a polarizer or perhaps a yellow or red filter to enhance the sky? Hope you don't mind the suggestions.

 

Evan

To be honest, this is just a bit too gray for me, I want to be able to see just a bit more detail through the fog. Also, why are the "4" and the "5" so clear, when the rest is almost invisible due to the fog? I have to be honest, maybe I'm just clueless tonight, but I just don't see what you're trying to show here.

 

Evan

This here tells a much better story, IMHO. Although it's obvious that the hydroplane boat is on a hook attached to a crane, it's still interesting to me, most shots would be of the boat on the lake or a river in action, this is one of it's "floating" in air as it's placed in the water, I presume. Only real complaint is perhaps the horizon looks a bit crooked to me, and I know this might not have been possible, but I'd like to see a shot with a bit more sky, bit less of the land, would add to the "boat floting in the air" aspect. Or, if this shot is cropped, take out just a tiny bit of the sky, but put in some more of the water. Otherwise, I like it, much more interesting then the boat being painted in the shop, at least to me.

 

Evan

I realize you were going for a photojournalistic image, but well, there's too much clutter IMHO. Yes, I know it's a workshop, but still, I'd crop in much tighter on this image. Perhaps on the painter and the scale model in the background, for instance. Or if the starting clock is important, one could include that also...but right now, everything is too far away IMHO to tell a story, so to speak. Just my two cents.

 

Evan

I did a very quick cropping of this image in Photoshop, it's going to look bad since I didn't do anything but crop it and zoom in, but IMHO this is one idea I'd do. Another would be, if you're doing your own processing or can do so in photoshop, is just darken the sky, burn it in a bit so it's a bit heavier and darker. Just two thoughts.

 

Evan

Nice effect, and I actually don't find this to be too many objects, although you're probably close to your "limit". Believe it or not, I actually know of a wall kind of like this, inside of a restaurant that's no longer in business in my area, they have a wall where they have things like Barbie dolls and toys imbedded in varnished concrete, I was actually looking to see if this might have been from that wall. The place is now a bar, so I don't know if they left the wall in place, I should go in and look, if so ask to photograph it.

 

Evan

 

 

I do like the shot overall. I agree with the comments about the man, either put him in "period" clothing to fit the cars, or not have him in the shot at all if you could go back and retake this. Anyway, the reason I ask is that all the cars look the same tone, if let's say one car was blue, you could put a red filter on the lens, darken the blue car, and make one a different tone. Mind you, this might be distracting, but I suspect it would add a bit of interest to the shot, espically if let's say the darker car was the second or third one, as opposed to the first one in the foreground, or the fourth one in the back. Mind you, I like the fine tonality in the cars, I just wish one was darker, maybe a lot darker then the rest, right now the shot is a bit gray.

 

Upping the contrast might be another solution, if this was printed at a level of 2, go to about a 3 or so, maybe even a 3.5, if you don't lose too many gray tones in the process.

 

Anyway, you're on to something here, hope you can come back to this spot and get a similar shot, but even if not it's a decent photo.

 

Evan

Robin,

 

Always liked industrial shots (or what I take to be one) like this, usually I'd suggest a shot like this in black and white, but I can see that with the subtle colors that this was very much the right choice. Still would like to see what a film with a lot of tonality would do with the rusted area in the middle, but even so, color was probably the best here.

 

Evan

I do like the shot overall, but I wish for more...perhaps something in the foreground? Also, despite a fair amount of only partly cloudy sky in front of you, the lighting looks a bit flat perhaps, stronger lighting would probably help this IMHO, and maybe would have added some contrast. Also, is this slightly out of focus? I wonder if you forgot to adjust the focus for infrared. Could be my monitor or something on my end though. Surprised that you did take it at f/8, I've found that I can usually bracket one stop around f/16th at 1/40th of a second, even in winter shots of infrared. Anyway, I'm down to rambling at this point, so I'd better stop before I fill up all the bandwidth with this! Thanks for sharing, always glad to see someone else shoot Kodak HIE. :)

 

 

Evan

 

 

I was just debating with a friend of mine that one can't do infrared with digital. I guess, considering the filtration used, I put my proverbial foot in my mouth. Beautiful shot, forgive me if I look long and hard here locally in the States for a subject to emmulate this. If this never makes "photo of the week", club those "elves".

 

Evan

 

 

Everyone,

 

Just wanted to add that the cigarette is a prop, I don't smoke, so if you know me, no need to ask if I've started smoking. :)

 

 

Evan

 

 

Everyone,

 

If I may, please try viewing this on the "large" setting, many of the star trails are too faint to show up at "medium" and "small". I may also brighten this image and repost, if I do I'll edit or delete this comment.

 

Evan

I'd do this or maybe even come in tighter, for some reason her and the kid with what might be tiny dreds to the far right are the two interesting ones to me. I didn't do this, but maybe try black and white with this? This would also get rid of the expanse of grey sky to the far left, even if it was a clear day I'm not sure it would help, but the grey sky doesn't add much at all to this.

 

Evan

 

 

It's a grabshot, but I just have to be honest, the shot really doesn't do much for me. I'm not trying to flame you, but it just seems too much like a snapshot to me, and I find it disconserting, looks like the white cat in the back is literally growing out of the other one's backside. Just being honest, again not my intent to flame, just critique.

 

Evan

 

 

John,

 

Thanks! I have to add that I'm using HC-110, dil. B as my developer, and adding two minutes developing time, Kodak recommends 5 minutes under that developer for 68 deg F/20 deg. C. I am also finding though that it's sometimes hard to print shadow detail with the increased development, so I may try to cut down the development time back to Kodak's recommended time, and see if I still get enough contrast for my tastes yet a bit easier to print negative.

 

Evan

 

 

John,

 

As stated, this has almost a 3 dimensional feel for me somehow, must be the strong depth of field, and the composition, which IMHO is quite good. Wonder tonality, MAYBE I would have went for more contrast, but then again it sounds like you had some time printing it, higher contrast would make that more difficult...and not 100% sure that would add anything anyway. Regardless, a print to be proud of.

 

Evan

Thanks for the comment. And LOL on the quirky film comment, I've actually fallen in love so much with Kodak HIE that I almost don't find it quirky now...well, mostly, I still get lens flare on negatives that I'd swear couldn't be there...and wonder if it's visible or "heat" due to being infrared.

 

Anyway, John orginally posted that this image had some "annoying smears" or something similar in the sky, this caused me to inspect the file I uploaded here, notice the marks he mentioned, and thus rescan the image and repost it. I want to thank him for that also.

 

 

Evan

 

 

As my title states, I wish there was more to the sky. The lighting looks flat also, was this taken on an overcast day? I would go back to this spot, assuming such is possible, and retake it on a day when it's partially cloudy, both to add some shadows and to add some clouds to the sky. Otherwise, just to be honest, I'm not inspired by this shot.

That is my worry, the shot itself is fine, I'll decide the rating after I post but rest assured it will be high...I guess my concern is I hope the poor lass in this photo landed fairly unscathed, based on how she is holding herself as she falls off the sheep, it looks like she may have injured herself!

Yves,

 

Well, my title says it all. :) I won't try to explain in French, my use of the language is at best comedic, but anyway, you managed to take what I would assume to be a flower that most would walk by and at best "shrug" when they see it and make it into a "monster" via this shot. I like it, thanks for sharing.

 

Evan

Stacey,

 

Okay, I know you're not mother nature, and thus can't produce clouds at whim (I'm only being half sarcastic), but well...the sky needs some detail. It's a nice sunset, yes...but it needs something to add interest to my eye. Not saying it's a bad shot, it will probably get a six or seven on the aesthetic rating when I go to rate it...but it needs more...clouds, a silouette of someone or something else in the foreground...maybe it's just me.

 

Evan