Only the Brave - Honest Photography Feedback

[Craigwww]

RichTT said:

For the honesty part. I'm pretty sure that I have a massively self inflated sense of achievement with my photographs. Even though I accept that they are myopic in their focus and technically average. Sites like Flickr and 500px, both of which I contribute to, are never a good judge of quality, and family and friends are probably just as bad. I can never tell if a photo I like is good because it stands alone as an independent photograph or purely due to the memories that I have associated with that particular moment. Perhaps I'm just a validation we and even posting in this thread is a vain attempt to seek praise.

I'm an opportunistic photographer who doesn't plan a shoot, I'm there, therefore I photograph. Subject matter is largely irrelevant as long as it has a geometric form once framed. I try to get it right first time, shoot only in JPG and almost never post-process apart from a slight alignment or cropping.

So, up for criticism and comment is my latest upload to Flickr.

Shot at the Chinese Garden of Friendship in Sydney. I love it because it reminds me of a classical oil painting. The water looks oily and dark and there's just enough of the Koi visible to be interesting.

Oily Fish, on Flickr

Edited by RichTT on Sunday 8th April 11:49

With the intention of this thread in mind, to me this is just a pretty poor snap of a fish and I fail to see any photographic merit in it.

[singlecoil]

Craigwww said:

With the intention of this thread in mind, to me this is just a pretty poor snap of a fish and I fail to see any photographic merit in it.

I don't think I would have put it quite as strong as that, but I must admit I was wondering why it had been posted at all.

[Resolutionary]

I'm feeling brave today:





And a couple of automotive snaps, this being PH and all:

[singlecoil]

Resolutionary said:

I'm feeling brave today:

Your images are a bit too small, and Thumbsnap is nfg anyway.

I suggest you get a Flickr account and use it to post just your favourite image.

[Nik da Greek]

Cool heron though

[Resolutionary]

singlecoil said:

Your images are a bit too small, and Thumbsnap is nfg anyway.

I suggest you get a Flickr account and use it to post just your favourite image.

Here you go (I have uploaded a load more to my brand new Flickr account)!

Original paint(s) by RA, on Flickr

Set up by RA, on Flickr

Through the trees by RA, on Flickr

Nik da Greek said:

Cool heron though

He was pretty chilled out when I met him!

[Whoozit]

singlecoil said:

Craigwww said:

With the intention of this thread in mind, to me this is just a pretty poor snap of a fish and I fail to see any photographic merit in it.

I don't think I would have put it quite as strong as that, but I must admit I was wondering why it had been posted at all.

I hope RichTT won't mind, here is what I would make of his image doing a quick and dirty application of the processing I described. I think there is a definite idea there which is worth developing. Particularly if for instance the fish had a nice curve to its body, or there was a secondary point of interest in the image such as a lotus flower.

[Turn7]

Have a pair of Birds.....

Both Taken at Millers Wood Hides, Haywards Heath, a venue I wholeheartedly recommend. I think these are about as good as I get, and any shortfalls are either poor PP or op error........

Millers Wood (19 of 21) by Mark P, on Flickr

Millers Wood (1 of 21) by Mark P, on Flickr

[DibblyDobbler]

They are both excellent Mark - only crit I have is they look quite low contrast? It’s personal preference but I’d probably add a bit of punch.

[Turn7]

DibblyDobbler said:

They are both excellent Mark - only crit I have is they look quite low contrast? It’s personal preference but I’d probably add a bit of punch.

thanks Mike, Im always reluctant to push colours on natural subjects, to the point that they may look a tad dull....its a delicate line to walk I think, and I also use a calibrated monitor for the record.......

However - if thats the only serious crit, I feel made up tbh !

[DibblyDobbler]

You should be - they’re both great shots

[RichTT]

Whoozit said:

I hope RichTT won't mind, here is what I would make of his image doing a quick and dirty application of the processing I described. I think there is a definite idea there which is worth developing. Particularly if for instance the fish had a nice curve to its body, or there was a secondary point of interest in the image such as a lotus flower.

Don't mind at all. Thanks for the work you've put into it. Perhaps I'm so wide of the mark that I'm round the other side.

[Nik da Greek]

Thread resurrection? Took some random photos of local stuff while I was out for a cycle. What am I doing right? What am I doing wrong?



High and Dry by Nick Liassides, on Flickr



Kites by Nick Liassides, on Flickr



mud flats by Nick Liassides, on Flickr



Marching windmills by Nick Liassides, on Flickr



Eyes on the prize by Nick Liassides, on Flickr

[Kermit power]

Speed addicted said:

TheRainMaker said:

Comments all taken on board and I've done a few tweaks.

PH Updated by The Rain Maker, on Flickr

Yes, exactly!

I know this is from ages ago, but I much prefer the original! I get people's points about the reflection on the beach, but I felt that the roll of the wave onto the sand added to the picture, and it's not as good for taking it away.

[Kermit power]

227bhp said:

RobDickinson said:

227bhp said:

isn't that the essence of (generally) what a photographer is trying to achieve?

No.
In some fields ( reporting/documentary/possibly sports/wildlife) its a key attribute but ...

First the camera never sees things as you do. you are always at an approximation

Second photography is about more than recording what your eye would see. I make pretty landscape/astro pictures, very few are anything like what you would have seen at the time with your own eyes due to abusing the mechanics of photography, exposure time,s colour, depth of field etc.

I dont see it as a requirement to portray anything as you would see it. Often without 'tricks' your composition can lie substantially compared to how it would have looked being there.

227bhp said:

Serious question; Is it difficult to capture water well along with sharp surroundings?

No. flowing water = longer exposures, this usually leads to wind affected foliage people often dont bother taking a second faster shutter speed to blend the two.

Every picture so far in this thread is as the eye sees, but yes I know where you are coming from (Long exposure pictures of motorways at night and of the stars etc) For many that is where the skill lies - recording what we see. If I'm out and I see something that is worth picturing I do it, but because I have little idea and no equipment it generally doesn't reproduce what I am seeing as well as I hoped.

I think you've got your long & short exposures the wrong way round btw, short exposure would capture moving leaf and water very realistically, it's long that blurs. Also, there are no moving parts (apart from the water) in the chaps canal scene so it could have looked more realistic and the stonework a little sharper.

I think you're missing a key point with regards to moving water. Your eyes never see it frozen in time, so unless you're recording video, it's impossible for the camera to capture what you see yourself. Yes, you can play around with shutter speed for anything from completely frozen in time to completely whited out, but no matter where you stop in between, it won't be what you saw, so it's all very subjective.

[Craikeybaby]

Nik da Greek said:

Thread resurrection? Took some random photos of local stuff while I was out for a cycle. What am I doing right? What am I doing wrong?



High and Dry by Nick Liassides, on Flickr



Kites by Nick Liassides, on Flickr



mud flats by Nick Liassides, on Flickr



Marching windmills by Nick Liassides, on Flickr



Eyes on the prize by Nick Liassides, on Flickr

I'd say that the first thing you are doing wrong is posting too many photos for critique, you are more likely to get detailed feedback on one or two images...

1 and 3 don't really do anything for me.

The horizon doesn't look level on 2, but I like how you've kept the kites against the sky.

[Nik da Greek]

Craikeybaby said:

I'd say that the first thing you are doing wrong is posting too many photos for critique, you are more likely to get detailed feedback on one or two images...

1 and 3 don't really do anything for me.

The horizon doesn't look level on 2, but I like how you've kept the kites against the sky.

Odd, isn't it, because it is (pretty sure it is, anyway). The horizon looks more on the wonk in the one of the windmills to me but I don't think it is, either

Stupid question, but if there are too many there, why not just pick one you like/hate and ignore the others?

[singlecoil]

Nik da Greek said:

Stupid question, but if there are too many there, why not just pick one you like/hate and ignore the others?

Better still, you choose the one you like the best and post just that one.

[singlecoil]

iMitchy said:

Why not.

May I suggest using Flickr instead, posting a bigger picture and maybe losing the watermark along the way.

[iMitchy]

singlecoil said:

May I suggest using Flickr instead, posting a bigger picture and maybe losing the watermark along the way.

Sorry Flickr is blocked at work! Had to take this off my Facebook (compressed horridly I know), but not home till next week.

I'll delete for now and upload another time.