Discussion in 'Dog Pictures and Pet Photos' started by AdrianneIsabel, Jan 1, 2013.
Gah, I have TOO MANY IDEAS and TOO LITTLE DAYLIGHT!
Well, I really tried hard on this. I put a lot of thought into it. And time! I had to find my tripod, which had never been out of the box (over a year old), learn how to work my remote (which hadn't been used in a year), set the scene...beg for Kastle's cooperation. Then I had troubles getting the focus to work for me etc etc. Definitely a learning experience!
So, this is me. I like to read, I love to be on my computer, I like nightly hot tea, snuggling with my dog, down blankets, and curling up on a cold winter night
I want to join in on this. Have a DSLR but don't use it to it's full capability. At all. I've never used it in manual. Once upon a time I knew the basics of using a SLR but not any more. So I'm pretty clueless...but hopeful.
Right now, I'm sick but hopefully by the weekend I can go outside and play with the camera
Keep 'em coming all, we'll go into critiques in a couple days.
If you like a photo, then say so. Tell the photographer what you like about it. Tell them how it made you feel, or what it made you think about. Very often, the most technically-proficient photographers are the least able to express their feelings about a photo, so people who can do that are particularly valuable critiquers.
Some things that you may want to consider:
Critique the technical.
Is any area overexposed or underexposed? If so, can you say why you think that happened? How could the photographer prevent this problem in the future? Are there details both in the highlights and in the shadows, or are there large "blown-out" highlight areas or "blocked-up" shadow areas? Again, blown highlights are not necessarily wrong. If you look at sunlight reflected in a glass window, what the eye will see is a white area, so there is no reason at all why a photo shouldn't show the same thing. Sometimes blown highlights can be used to good artistic effect. As always, don't parrot rules, think about how well things work in this photo. If the exposure is biased towards light (high key) or dark (low key), did the photographer make a good choice?
Is the main subject in focus? Is it sharp focus, or a "soft" focus? Is the focus appropriate for the situation? Is anything in focus? Is it the subject or something else? Is the depth of field appropriate? Is the subject contained within the depth of field or are parts of the subject fuzzy? Are there distracting elements in the background that are in focus which would have been blurred out by a wider aperture? As with composition, remember that there are no fixed rules. Think about what works or doesn't work in the case of this particular photo.
Depth of Field (DOF).
Is the DOF shallow or deep? Does the DOF work in this shot, or should more (or less) of the photo be in focus?
Lighting / White balance.
Is the light soft or harsh? Does the type of lighting enhance or detract from the things in the photo? Is the white balance set correctly? Is there a yellowish, orangish, or greenish cast to the photo?
Was the photographer's choice to use or not use color sound? If they used color, does the color contribute to the image, or would it have been more effective in b&w? If its b&w, does that help to focus on the essentials of the image, or are we missing something important? This will always be a subjective judgment, of course, but hearing other people's opinions on this is often useful.
Has the photographer made full use of the facilities at their disposal? Or, are there things that the photographer could have improved with a little more work? Does it look like the photographer made an extra effort to capture the best possible image under the circumstances, or did they just go with what was in front of them?
Critique the composition.
Centered vs. "Rule of Thirds."
Is the main subject in the center of the frame? Is it on a third? Somewhere else? Does the chosen composition work, or would you have done something differently?
Fore, Middle, and Backgrounds.
(Most applicable to landscape photos) Does the photo contain all three? If not, do you think it would be better if it did?
Is there wasted empty space is the photo? Should the crop have been tighter? Is it cropped so tightly that important parts of the photo have been cutoff?
What type of colors do you see? Did the photographer use a lot of primary colors? Secondary? Complementary? Are the colors too vivid? Not vivid enough? If you are looking at a B&W photo, is there a true black, true white, with a large tonal range in between, or is the photo too "gray"?
Diagonals, S-Curves, etc.
Did the photographer make use of any visually-interesting elements, such as diagonal lines or S-curves?
Do the lines and overall composition make you want to look deeper into the photo? Is your eye drawn into the photo, or out of it?
Dark vs. Light areas.
Are there too many bright areas? Too many dark areas?
Is the photo balanced? Would it be better if there were other objects or other light/dark areas in the frame to improve the balance? If the photo is off balance, is there a reason for it?
Spatial positioning and composition.
Please, please, please do NOT just spout standard photographic guidelines as if they were the law! The rule of thirds, for example, is not an instruction handed down from the gods - it is a handy guideline to what will often work well. For some photos, a centered composition will be perfect and using the rule of thirds would ruin it. So think about what works in this case. Does anything look squeezed up against the side of the frame? Are there big open spaces around the edges that could be cropped out? Is there a clear subject that occupies the majority of the frame, or is the subject unclear or small and surrounded by irrelevant material?
Direction of attention.
What do you see first in the photo? Is it the right thing? Do you have to hunt for the subject or does it stand out? Is your eye drawn to objects in the background, rather than the subject, or do you look to the edge of the frame, expecting to find something that isn't there?
How does it make you feel?
Even if you are a beginner, you are certainly qualified to critique based on these questions:
What mood do you see in the photo?
Do you think this mood is what the photographer intended?
Does it make you happy? Sad? Angry?
Did the photographer succeed in telling his/her story with the photograph? Why or why not?
Do you like the photo? And, more importantly, say WHY you like the photo, or why you don't.
Would you hang this photo on your wall? Why or why not?[
I'll go into more but this is a great outline of a critique, above all critiques should be constructive. This should be to help photographers to improve their work through a better understanding of both technical aspects and visual literacy. However, this should always be done with an attempt to support ones individuality and helping a photographer to grow as themselves.
1/52 Me but not me! by AussieHike!, on Flickr
Colorful, a little sassy, relaxed and in love with my dog!
When does the new week go up/how long do we have?
You are so much more creative than I am! Fun pic!
I love your hair!
Just doing a little whining: me and my new remote release do not get along and now I have minor frostbite. However, I WILL get my picture, dang it.
No way! I love your photo.
nice photos guys! I'll come back to upload mine and throw out my critiques at some point!
I'll put up the next week on Monday again.
Didn't have a tripod with me, so I'm not in it, but I think this describes me pretty well.
Friends, my dog, and exploring the world. Curious to see what's around the corner.
Here's my attempt... Art, books, dogs, horses, fencing, collecting - I like things with a history. The horse statue belonged to my paternal grandfather, the desk was my great aunt's, the collie statue was given to me by my great-grandmother (she collected dog figurines, too) about 50 years ago. I like books (the feel and smell of an actual book), and I like collecting dog figurines and vaseline glass. The dagger is a fencing trophy (much more fun than a regular trophy), it usually resides on the bookcase next to my bed.
F11, 1/125 sec, ISO speed 200, bounced the flash off the ceiling
Self Portrait. Week 1. by CharlieDogist, on Flickr
dogs and their stuff. cords. music. a bit of junk. random bits and bobs. computers. doctor who paraphernalia. no edits.
1/15 Æ’/2.6 ISO 800 3.7 mm
Taken off my camera directly.
Week 1 - Photo that describes you by JessLough, on Flickr
Dog, ferrets, sewing, quilting, knitting, crochet, photography, DS, tablet, my phone...
0.3 f/5 ISO 400 25mm
So, this is totally not the photo I was going to use, but it stands out. I keep going back to it and it does describe me in a ton of ways. It's very non traditional compared to the photos posted here but I am very non-traditional.
Settings: 1/800 Æ’/4.5 ISO6400 18 mm
Geese? by RedChrome, on Flickr
I love the outdoors, my dogs and obedience(the choke chain on Judge represents obedience). I can be silly and a bit rough on the edges much like Judge looks in this picture. The river represents my life, life to me is like a river, calm and serene at times and at other times, fast and turbulent, almost never fair but always has a reason for the conditions. Give me the outdoors,a few good dogs and some space and I'm at home.
Ok, here is mine...
This is the sign that hangs at the entry of my home and describes it very well. This home houses all that is dearest to me - my dogs, cats, my love, my books, my projects, surrounded by my gardens and horses and the landscape that I love - mountains, lake, forest all ready for exploring.
I love this shot!
The colors are wonderful and the focus is right on.
Even though this is shot outside and obviously in the cold it makes me feel all cozy.
I love GoingNowhere's shot, too (they're all really good, but hers I can really relate to.)
I don't have a remote, or a tripod, but I am going to try to get a photo for this. I might not get it until tomorrow, though, but I suppose that's still in the time limit.
Separate names with a comma.