Prev: Merry Christmas!
Next: Anyone still shoot film?
From: Calvin Sambrook on 18 Jan 2010 18:45
I thought this was a hard mandate so I'm pleased to see so many great
entries.

46.8-Cooper-APCH.jpg: What a wonderful first image of the set. The
composition and the juxtaposition of the very flat tones on the right with
the clouds and broken tones at the bottom works well. I particularly like
those flat tones. Superb.

46.8-Cooper-Cow Barn.jpg: This has real interest and of course it's
technically very well shot but somehow it doesn't do it for me and I just
can't say why. I like the intense detail and the use of monochrome works
well.

46.8-Cooper-Waiting for Amtrack.jpg: I really like this despite a number of
distracting artifacts, somehow it conveys a mood and a message. Disturbing
me was the solarisation around the bench, whether that's natural or the
result of some post processing I don't much care as it's distracting
whichever it is. I'm not sure about the grain, personally I find it
distracting but that may just be because I'm used to looking for that sort
of thing, a non-trained eye might not even notice it and indeed it might
actually be adding to the mood and feeling that the image conveys.

46.8degrees-Savageduck-01.jpg: I just can't get excited about a photograph
of a shop like this. The framing is interesting I guess but there are so
many other things in life which can be framed this way. Sorry, not one for
me.

46.8degrees-Savageduck-02.jpg: Another shot which tells a story, what is it
about waiting for public transport, maybe it's something we can all relate
to. This shot captures the mood well but the restriction to use 50mm lens
perspective has resulted in far too much distraction. I like the decision
to place the subject in the lower half of the frame and include lots of
essentially blank space above, that really forces the eye back onto the
subject, well done.

46.8degrees-Savageduck-03.jpg: Wow, that's more like it. This shot is well
composed with lots of interest at places my eye wants to go. Placing the
vanishing point of the track where it is makes me feel I can almost see
forever there and the detail there seems more important because of it. The
subjects are facing well into the frame which always helps and again that
feeling of boredom comes through, it's something about the posture I think.
There's not much you could do about it but that crate in the middle is a bit
of a pain, I think it distracts more than it adds, photoshop it out? And
what's with the white border? I've not really noticed it much before but
here it is a definite distraction and seriously reduces the impact of the
shot.

468_BobCoe_1.JPG: I shouldn't like this but I do anyway. Dumping the trees
right in the middle really minimises their impact and a lack of contrast
between them and the background should spell disaster but the whole thing is
saved by the clarity of the reflection in the water. Well done for spotting
that, seeing the potential and bringing it to life.

468_BobCoe_2.JPG: I like the oversaturated look of this, it makes it look
really cold and imposing. That said I think a more conventional composition
would have worked better, I wonder, did you flout the compositional "rules"
deliberately for expediency or for effect or was it just lack of care?
Turning the camera just a little to the right would have brought the beach
edge further into the frame and made the whole thing feel more comfortable.
Tilting the camera up or down would have avoided the 50/50 split
horizontally and could either have given more emphasis to the imposing sky
or to the dull sand/sea, whichever message you wanted to convey, as it is
the message is mixed and a little diluted. The seagull needs to go too, it
looks too much like a camera defect.

468_TimConway2.jpg: This shot doesn't grab me I'm afraid. There's no real
focus of attention, well I suppose there's the signs but they're not
interesting enough to hold attention. Each side of the image has
distracting elements part in, part out of shot.

468_TimConway_old.jpg: I quite like this as a snap but somehow it just
doesn't have much interest really. The colourful blossom competes for
attention with the hard lines of the cannon which doesn't help and somehow
it's got an out of focus look.

468_bowser1.jpg: This shot really works for me which is strange as I've
just slated another shot of a street sign! I like the harsh unusual angles
of the building and the sign is interesting enough to keep the attention.
The composition is good. Well done.

468_bowser2.jpg: Great, the flat sky works well and the formation is
interesting. I guess this was a little too spur of the moment to worry
about compositional niceties though? I'd have been inclined to cheat and
move them down and right!

468_bowser3.jpg: This shot just has too much wrong with it, are you testing
how nice we'll be Bowser? The snow on the foreground trees is a complete
distraction, there is no visual context to it so it just serves to make the
brain scream "what's that stuff on the lens". The dog, loyal and lovely
friend though he may be, is too insignificant a part of the image and so
adds nothing. In the end it's just a shot of some snow in the woods.
Sorry, that's a bit harsh.

50mm_Frank_ess_blossomBee.JPG: What a wasted opportunity. Surely you could
have found a camera position where the background wasn't quite so
distracting? The green tree on the bottom left, the branch of the subject
just going out of shot, the other branches just peeking in on the right,
care over composition or at least application of photoshop are needed. I
like the flat blue sky though.

50mm_Frank_ess_emblems.jpg: Ordinarily anything like this would just make
me switch off so this shot does very well to grab and keep my attention.
The clean lines and clean tones work well together although I feel it would
benefit from losing the extra bit on the right.

50mm_Paul_Furman_0033548.jpg: Wonderful. Paul really has an eye for this
sort of arty shot. The graduated background and the carefully controlled
tonal range show real craftsmanship and the use of a standard composition...
well it shows why this is a standard compositional technique I guess. A
shot I'll try to learn from.

50mm_Paul_Furman_R1- 4A.jpg: This doesn't work for me. Too much tree on
the left and the bird feeder too close to the edge on the right along with a
lot of confusion in the middle mean my eyes are all over the place but still
finding nothing that grabs them.

50mm_Paul_Furman_R1-19A.jpg: Something's wrong here and I'm not sure what.
The composition is good and draws me in but the tonal range or the colours
or something feel wrong Why do the top right trees look so flat? And
what's that horrible white scar just right of centre towards the bottom?

Jim Kramer HP5+F027.jpg: I like the composition of this and it's kind of
fun but it doesn't really keep my attention. The decision to include the
film perfs is fun too - I haven't seen them in a long time.

Jim Kramer HP5+F028.jpg: It's out of focus to the point where I can't even
tell what it's supposed to be! I guess this is meant to be arty but it
misses for me.

Jim Kramer HP5+F034.jpg: Great! A very of-the-moment shot and I really
like it. It really needs a little post processing to clean up the straw or
scratch or whatever that is though.

SI 50mm Ice Cave by Calvin Sambrook.jpg: Mine. It's been v. cold here and
my pond and fountain were fantastic. One of the many things I found was
this little ice cave surrounding the only liquid water on the surface.
Monochrome because I felt it worked best and reduced contrast/elevated
blacks to try and make it look colder (thanks Dudley for that trick). Grain
for the same reason although I'm not so sure it works as well as I'd hoped.

SI 50mm Launch Tower by Calvin Sambrook.jpg: Mine. A crisp winter's day
after a snow fall and I thought this reminded me of something. Low taking
angle to try to get a clear background which almost worked and a flat sky
because - well because that's how the sky was that day but I think it looks
good here. I love the crisp detail in this shot.

SI 50mm Off Guard by Calvin Sambrook.jpg: Mine. I've tried for so long to
get a good fencing shot and so far this is one of the best I've managed.
Way too much distraction, soft and grainy (no flash allowed and no chance to
add lights) but I like the body shapes.

SI_50mm_Alan Browne_1.jpg: An expert image. Almost everything works here,
the rich colours, the sharp objects alongside blurred moving objects, the
glare, the burn of the lights, the composition drawing you in and in and in.
The only thing I don't like is whatever's going on at the bottom, it needs a
good cropping.

_SRS0866.jpg: Great shot. The composition is superb and should serve as a
lesson to us all. The control of the background focus is great with just
enough sharpness but not too much. I suppose the right hand part of a tree
could be distracting but the rest of the shot is so good it doesn't seem to
matter. I like this a lot.

Reading this through I see some of my comments are maybe a little brash,
they're not meant to offend and with the exception of just one shot, which
I'm sure I've misunderstood, the photos this month are all really very good,
I think I'm just in a picky mood tonight.

From: Savageduck on 18 Jan 2010 19:30
On 2010-01-18 15:45:25 -0800, "Calvin Sambrook" <csambrook(a)bigfoot.com> said:

> I thought this was a hard mandate so I'm pleased to see so many great entries.
Agreed.
>
> -----------------------<Le Snip>----------------------------

> 46.8degrees-Savageduck-01.jpg: I just can't get excited about a
> photograph of a shop like this. The framing is interesting I guess but
> there are so many other things in life which can be framed this way.
> Sorry, not one for me.

Paso Robles Station. Just another station. What can I say?

>
> 46.8degrees-Savageduck-02.jpg: Another shot which tells a story, what
> is it about waiting for public transport, maybe it's something we can
> all relate to. This shot captures the mood well but the restriction to
> use 50mm lens perspective has resulted in far too much distraction. I
> like the decision to place the subject in the lower half of the frame
> and include lots of essentially blank space above, that really forces
> the eye back onto the subject, well done.

This character was a great subject, and he was just occupying the bench
waiting. My other shots of him were in hind sight probably better.

>
> 46.8degrees-Savageduck-03.jpg: Wow, that's more like it. This shot is
> well composed with lots of interest at places my eye wants to go.
> Placing the vanishing point of the track where it is makes me feel I
> can almost see forever there and the detail there seems more important
> because of it. The subjects are facing well into the frame which
> always helps and again that feeling of boredom comes through, it's
> something about the posture I think. There's not much you could do
> about it but that crate in the middle is a bit of a pain, I think it
> distracts more than it adds, photoshop it out? And what's with the
> white border? I've not really noticed it much before but here it is a
> definite distraction and seriously reduces the impact of the shot.

Sorry about the white frame, just me screwing around. as for the crate
in the middle, it is actually the AmTrak wheelchair lift, I guess they
leave it positioned there for the convenience of the 4 trains which
come through daily. How is that for heavy rail traffic?

> ----------------------------------------<Le
> Snip>--------------------------------------------

> Reading this through I see some of my comments are maybe a little
> brash, they're not meant to offend and with the exception of just one
> shot, which I'm sure I've misunderstood, the photos this month are all
> really very good, I think I'm just in a picky mood tonight.

As always your point of view is appreciated and revealing.

....and I liked your fencers.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

From: tony cooper on 18 Jan 2010 20:46
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 23:45:25 -0000, "Calvin Sambrook"
<csambrook(a)bigfoot.com> wrote:

>I thought this was a hard mandate so I'm pleased to see so many great
>entries.
>

>46.8-Cooper-Waiting for Amtrack.jpg: I really like this despite a number of
>distracting artifacts, somehow it conveys a mood and a message. Disturbing
>me was the solarisation around the bench, whether that's natural or the
>result of some post processing I don't much care as it's distracting
>whichever it is. I'm not sure about the grain, personally I find it
>distracting but that may just be because I'm used to looking for that sort
>of thing, a non-trained eye might not even notice it and indeed it might
>actually be adding to the mood and feeling that the image conveys.

Here's a companion shot in color. The train station benches are old
oak hardwood benches that have recently been re-varnished. That's why
they are so shiny. The weird bit right above the bench at the right in
my original photo is light reflected off the glossy natural wood
finish...light from the ceiling lights and not my flash. In this one,
note the strong shadow from the ceiling light to the left of the man.
My flash, from my position, would have put the shadow to the right.

There's some grain in both, but the camera was straining to make this
work with only built-in flash.

http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/photos/767934478_zCDUB-XL.jpg



--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
From: Bruce on 19 Jan 2010 03:53
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 23:45:25 -0000, "Calvin Sambrook"
<csambrook(a)bigfoot.com> wrote:

>I thought this was a hard mandate so I'm pleased to see so many great
>entries.


Hard mandate? Don't be ridiculous!!! It is one of the easiest
mandates ever. It is only "hard" for people who don't understand the
very elementary terms "focal length" and "angle of view".

If you fall into that category of people, you have no right to call
yourself a photographer, because this is about as basic and
fundamental as knowledge of photography gets.

From: Whodat on 19 Jan 2010 06:05
On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 08:53:30 +0000, Bruce <docnews2011(a)gmail.com> wrote:

>On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 23:45:25 -0000, "Calvin Sambrook"
><csambrook(a)bigfoot.com> wrote:
>
>>I thought this was a hard mandate so I'm pleased to see so many great
>>entries.
>
>
>Hard mandate? Don't be ridiculous!!! It is one of the easiest
>mandates ever. It is only "hard" for people who don't understand the
>very elementary terms "focal length" and "angle of view".
>
>If you fall into that category of people, you have no right to call
>yourself a photographer, because this is about as basic and
>fundamental as knowledge of photography gets.

There's only one photo in the bunch that is worth looking at. Which
surprised me because I thought the submitter didn't have any talent at all.
Then when looking at the others that person submitted I was right on both
counts. It was just a lucky shot. I.e. Even a stopped clock is correct
twice a day for a nano-second. The entrant doesn't even know which of
theirs is the good one. Because if they had, they wouldn't have submitted
the others that were just as painfully bad as all the rest who submitted
their snapshots.

No sense telling you who submitted the only half-decent one, by accident.
They all want to feel like they submitted something worthwhile or they
wouldn't have bothered in the first place. I wouldn't want to rob them of
their delusions.


 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Prev: Merry Christmas!
Next: Anyone still shoot film?