|
|
Critique By:
Matej Maceas (K:24381)
1/3/2005 8:23:28 PM
Colour and stronger highlights and possibly get in closer for a more mysterious, abstractish shot.
|
| Photo By: Tamara N
(K:2617)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Matej Maceas (K:24381)
1/3/2005 8:13:18 PM
1) The out of focus branch was distracting, you've done well to crop it off.
2) The photo is underexposed, this can be mitigated to some extent in software such as PS, but next time if you aim the camera towards bright objects such as the sky, make sure to set exposure compensation to overexpose by 1-2 stops (depends on the brightness) as compared to what the camera's lightmeter is suggesting, otherwise you'll end up with a photo that's too dark.
3) The bird is facing away from you, you don't have a very clear view of it so it gets lost in the surroundings, you'd do best to reshoot this photo and try to get in closer next time.
|
| Photo By: Tamara N
(K:2617)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Matej Maceas (K:24381)
1/3/2005 8:02:14 PM
One reason people might be suggesting that you 'fix' the grain because it's *not* grain - it's noise. Grain is a feature of film that you can control and utilize as appropriate for your artistic intentions, while digital noise is a bug that lowers image quality and the natural reaction of camera manufacturers and digital photographers is to suppress it as much as possible.
I think this particular photo would benefit from grain; it is more difficult to say whether it benefits from noise. Starting with a de-noised photo, such as the one you have attached, it is probably possible by clever use of Photoshop filters to achieve an effect that is closer in resemblance to real grain, resulting in a better overall impression.
As for the composition, I would be tempted to include slightly more of the dark structures at the bottom of the frame; they would offer a solid foundation from which the main chimney rises, and since they appear to be industrial-type structures, they would further reinforce the look and ambience you seem to have been trying to capture.
Notice also that by choosing a narrower crop, you could use the frame to emphasise the shape of your main subject, the chimney. An example of such a crop is in the attached version of your photo below. The second benefit of this crop is that it moves the subject more off-centre, resulting in a more dynamic composition.
|
| Photo By: Tamara N
(K:2617)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Matej Maceas (K:24381)
1/2/2005 5:14:04 PM
I also find it difficult to scan medium format film, it's much better to make a print and scan that.
|
| Photo By: andree lerat
(K:17476)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Matej Maceas (K:24381)
1/2/2005 5:07:39 PM
I think this photo would come alive when printed with higher contrast.
|
| Photo By: Tanya Kaaa
(K:1307)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Matej Maceas (K:24381)
12/26/2004 4:00:51 PM
The focus seems to be off...
|
| Photo By: Howie Mudge
(K:27933)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Matej Maceas (K:24381)
12/23/2004 12:04:33 PM
I think industrial zones are *very* photogenic.
|
| Photo By: Roger Williams
(K:86139)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Matej Maceas (K:24381)
12/20/2004 2:34:26 PM
I would hang this on my wall.
|
| Photo By: ama tor
(K:1432)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Matej Maceas (K:24381)
12/19/2004 5:43:56 PM
Welcome back :-)
Any chance of reshooting this? I think it'd definitely be worth it.
|
| Photo By: Matt Davis
(K:3935)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Matej Maceas (K:24381)
12/13/2004 6:23:17 PM
I won't add much to the discussion by saying that light is lovely, but I'll say it anyway :-)
|
| Photo By: Christian Barrette
(K:21125)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Matej Maceas (K:24381)
12/13/2004 6:19:33 PM
Which way is up? :-)
|
| Photo By: Joćo Magalhćes
(K:2067)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Matej Maceas (K:24381)
12/13/2004 6:15:48 PM
A shadowy self-portrait :-)
The green patch on the left does not look like a very steep slope but the stairs show the height nicely. Might have been even better with little people walking on the road. (Speaking of the road, why is it red? Is it clay?)
|
| Photo By: Roger Williams
(K:86139)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Matej Maceas (K:24381)
12/13/2004 6:10:49 PM
The approach to the subject strikes me as kind of too straightforward, which is OK for straight documentary, but I would guess that these roots might be a suitable subject for a more detail-ish shot concentrating on the root patterns and textures, for which you wouldn't need any colour either :-)
|
| Photo By: Roger Williams
(K:86139)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Matej Maceas (K:24381)
12/13/2004 6:02:16 PM
Now instead of hiding behind the bushes, would it be possible to sit right next to and under the camera? Not that there's anything wrong with playing "Where's Roger" ;-)
Anyway, how is your special panoramic website coming along? (I admit I haven't visited it recently.) It was great fun to be able to scroll this image this way and that, and zoom in and out, and up and down, and so on. Another advantage was that the circle was continuous, whereas in standard presentation you have to have the cut somewhere.
|
| Photo By: Roger Williams
(K:86139)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Matej Maceas (K:24381)
12/13/2004 5:56:30 PM
This is one of those images that play tricks with my brain. On a rational level, I know that the subjects are three-dimensional; on a purely visual level, thanks to the uniformity of colour and similarity of design, it looks like the railing, the bike and the lock are in the same plane. It is this need to clarify the spatial relationships between the individual elements that makes the photo attractive for me - there's really something to look at and look for, like solving a riddle.
|
| Photo By: Rafael Torcida
(K:1926)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Matej Maceas (K:24381)
12/4/2004 5:29:59 PM
Well, yes, but the butterfly photo is completely different - to me, anyway :-) It's more like an abstract painting, the car is not very recognizable.
The small photo in the collage has, for want of a better expression, more objective reality. The situation and context are very clear ('reality'), and the exterior point of view from which your own car is visible makes it seem like the viewer is following both cars rather than you the author following a single car ('objective'). Another notable difference is that I perceive 'drunken butterfly' as a static image, whereas the feeling I get here is that of a short movie sequence :-)
|
| Photo By: Kostas Tzanetos
(K:22012)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Matej Maceas (K:24381)
12/3/2004 7:08:55 PM
Hi Kostas,
it's nice to be able to compare so many variants of the same shot, with the fundamentals being the same, but the details different in each shot.
The two which I find most interesting are the bottom right corner (because of the intertwining light trails) and the one to the left of that (because of the relatively clear presence of the other car, something that I've not noticed in your previous nightrides).
|
| Photo By: Kostas Tzanetos
(K:22012)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Matej Maceas (K:24381)
11/29/2004 7:50:37 PM
What exactly do you need help with?
If it's the grain, do not despair just yet. Scanners have a way of making films look grainier than they really are, or even converting the grain (which is basically good) to noise (which is basically evil :-) ), so I wouldn't want to say "That's unacceptably grainy!" without seeing a nice traditional wet print. The scanner seems to have also introduced some purple and yellow lines into the sky, so I wouldn't trust it to reproduce grain correctly either.
Anyway, you can control grain by choosing a film that is appropriate for what you are trying to achieve (admittedly HP5 tends to be grainier than, say, Pan F+), selecting a particular developer (btw developing films is quite easy, no reason to rely on commercial labs unless you know one that's REALLY, REALLY GOOD), and whether you decide to push or pull the film, or expose & develop it according to its nominal ISO rating.
If you are asking for critique of the photo as such, I'd say it's all too gray (once again may be the scanner & software's fault) and could have benefited from a contrast filter (or completely different lighting). Contentwise, I do not find it very exciting, but that's very subjective.
|
| Photo By: Jim Gamble
(K:12164)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Matej Maceas (K:24381)
11/29/2004 7:05:49 PM
Now I understand :-)
|
| Photo By: Joćo Magalhćes
(K:2067)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Matej Maceas (K:24381)
11/28/2004 9:59:29 AM
Aaaah, yes, finally! :-)
He's lovely.
|
| Photo By: Roger Williams
(K:86139)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Matej Maceas (K:24381)
11/25/2004 6:56:56 PM
I have just browsed through your website, I'll need to visit it again when I have more time to slowly go through the portfolios, but from what I've seen so far I can tell you that I like your work quite a bit. Let me know if you'd be interested to trade a couple of prints with me.
|
| Photo By: Mick Feuerbacher
(K:218)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Matej Maceas (K:24381)
11/24/2004 7:48:21 AM
I like it.
|
| Photo By: Ray Heath
(K:4559)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Matej Maceas (K:24381)
11/24/2004 7:46:38 AM
I don't doubt they know what they're doing and that they have great skill, but... We have this saying that even a master carpenter will cut himself once in a while. I'd expect that in these sports, any odd, unlucky accident may have quite severe consequences. Oh well, I guess the risk is part of the fun :-)
|
| Photo By: Tobiah Deutsch
(K:2432)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Matej Maceas (K:24381)
11/23/2004 8:29:38 AM
The trouble with that bright background, particularly the flowers on the right, is that they fight for attention with the portraitee. The framing is also such that she is being pushed out of the picture.
|
| Photo By: Steve Bull
(K:2094)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Matej Maceas (K:24381)
11/23/2004 8:19:41 AM
I'm curious, is it usual for people not to wear any sort of protective gear when doing these stunts?
|
| Photo By: Tobiah Deutsch
(K:2432)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Matej Maceas (K:24381)
11/22/2004 7:56:51 AM
Poor focus, too much contrast, static situation, shooting peoples' backs with a telelens is a difficult way of achieving memorable examples of street photography.
|
| Photo By: cecilia tovini
(K:29423)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Matej Maceas (K:24381)
11/14/2004 7:39:39 PM
Orloj? :-)
|
| Photo By: Rozmi [ . ]
(K:360)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Matej Maceas (K:24381)
10/29/2004 3:30:30 PM
Hmmm, a new position, it seems :-) Cool.
I guess now the only place where you haven't stuck the camera yet is the underside of the chassis for a hell of a low point of view? ;-)
|
| Photo By: Kostas Tzanetos
(K:22012)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Matej Maceas (K:24381)
10/29/2004 3:21:15 PM
I hope you won't be away too long and look forward to seeing your future work.
|
| Photo By: Aris Michalopoulos / OsirisiS
(K:1916)
|
|
|
Critique By:
Matej Maceas (K:24381)
10/29/2004 3:10:15 PM
Nice work, there is a look in her eyes that reveals a strong emotional connection, such a connection between the photographer and the subject makes splendid portraits. I also like the fact that it's not just a headshot but has clear context, this strengthens the involvement because it shows that even in the midst of a busy event you two can share moments of unspoken communication.
|
| Photo By: Anthony Gargani
(K:4527)
|
|
