Re: OT: Photo-criticism (was: Re: PAW - seated @ 1/4)
Hi! When Cotty is not kidding and/or joking he appears to be quite wise g... My comments interspersed. C I think that there is plenty of room for criticism in art, and Marnie is C right that any photograph can be criticised. However, it is whether or C not the criticism is heard, or even desired that is the question. Plenty C want it, plenty don't. I think you're the first among people I know who does not seem to want it. C If I present a picture ... It means that I am happy with it. If I'm C not, you don't see it. Yes of course, unless you are like me in some cases have some kind of unresolved question which you don't seem to manage to solve on your own. Then you might want to turn to others in order to try to spot in their words those words that are key and that are missing. C There are those of us who consider ourselves students, and rightly are C learning by trial and error - but what are they learning? If there is no C right and no wrong, how can they learn anything? I believe the answer is C that they are learning to come to terms with their own desires, their own C perceptions, their own limits. Ultimately, personal satisfaction and C contentment with a creation is the goal. How could it possibly be C anything else? I think you're right. But, photography is IMHO done mainly in order to show one's photographs to others. Even if it is not meant like request for critique but rather like look on this scene I saw ten days ago, isn't it lovely/funny/strange/whatever? Obviously when one is showing their stuff, critique would be born. Very often, at least in my case, I tend to miss things that could be seen on my shots. So unless I listen to others, I wouldn't see it, at least immediately. I think that learning/teaching photography is ultimately about allowing the student to experience more of the spectrum of the experiences one may have doing photography. And the more experiences one gets to live through, the better they would be as a photographers, hopefully. C You can teach and therefore learn the mechanics of photography, but you C cannot teach and therefore cannot learn how to make a photograph. It is C an intuitive thing. Students beg to please others with their work. The C rest beg to please themselves. The transition is invisible - despite the C protestations of those who claim to be continuously learning. I suppose you are a little wrong here. I think that mere asking a student to shoot different subjects, giving a student assignments, and helping the student to examine the photographs that he or she would come back with, can already be very beneficial. It is not like in order to shoot A and B you have to put your lights there, your camera there and depress the shutter when A blinks and B yawns. It is more like you wanted to have this emotion prominent, let's see how you see it, how you're sure that this emotion is indeed shown... Makes sense? C If you are learning, and asking for critique is desirable to you, then it C should continue. And it does. If you are content with your pictures and C simply present them for viewing by others, equally well and good - but if C you read the critiques, you're only kidding yourself! I would say that I would be reading critiques just in order to learn how my perception differs from that of other people. Which in itself a wonderful experience. And of course I shouldn't accept all the critique, should I? Please notice that I never studied photography formally. C All my opinion of course. C With due respect, Likewise. Likewise. C Cheers, Likewise g. C Cotty No way! Boris!
Re: PAW - seated @ 1/4
I don't know why but i really like these type of night time sky line shots. I really like the coloured reflections from the buildings in the water.The people in motion give it that hustle-bustle feel. Dave I haven't posted a pic for a while and I've been subterranean all this week (don't ask) so I can really only submit something from last week. The pic contains all the EXIF data that PS7 preserves and the lens was the A20/2.8, I was seated and just took some shots of the crowd buzzing around me prior to the movie screening. http://members.ozemail.com.au/~audiob/temp/imgp1792m.jpg Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: PAW - seated @ 1/4
I've always try to give my ideas as to how an image can be improved, wither is compositionally or technically. As far as the subject material goes - well I generally leave that alone. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: PAW - seated @ 1/4 I finally have it figured, you guys are all frustrated would be editors. I often see photos that I wouldn't have taken, but I always feel that is because my vision is different from the person's who took it, and not that my way is better. I can see giving technical advice, but everytime someone posts a photo, there are a bunch of folks that jump in and say you should have made a different photo. That is a bunch of crap. In this case the crop is no better, nor worse than the original, it is just a different vision. At least a real editor would have had the saving grace of doing it to fit the picture in a different sized space. -- Shel Belinkoff wrote: http://home.earthlink.net/~scbelinkoff/robs-pic.jpg With bottom and top cropped. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd crop off the bottom, a little above that tiny yellowish spot on the right. All that black on the bottom is just dead space that isn't doing anything, ergo, contributing nothing to the scene. -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com You might as well accept people as they are, you are not going to be able to change them anyway.
Re: PAW - seated @ 1/4
Hi! SB http://home.earthlink.net/~scbelinkoff/robs-pic.jpg SB With bottom and top cropped. SB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd crop off the bottom, a little above that tiny yellowish spot on the right. All that black on the bottom is just dead space that isn't doing anything, ergo, contributing nothing to the scene. I like Shel's version more. But nonetheless (what a word g) this is amazing scene - People and the Big City. As a side remark - Shel's version has a little more ambience, a little more well defined mood to that shot. It makes me think of jazz evening... Boris
Re: OT: Photo-criticism (was: Re: PAW - seated @ 1/4)
On Fri, 20 Feb 2004, Cotty wrote: Art - and don't kid yourself: photography is art - is totally and utterly subjective. Photography is as much art as pottery. There is Ming pottery and ASDA plastic vases. My photography is ASDA plastic vases. There is a lot I can learn by studying Ming and everything in between so as to produce better ASDA plastic vases. The folks of Ming cannot teach me anything, they are long gone (of course I can study their work, but it's just not the same). Graywolf (who started this conversation saying that suggestions on cropping and framing are crap) has helped me a lot, as has the list in general. There are those of us who consider ourselves students, and rightly are learning by trial and error - but what are they learning? What all students should learn: to *listen*. Oh, by the way, I know of a famous man whose most famous quote is that he is aging always a student. Even if I was content with a picture, I am always willing to listen how you or anybody would have taken it. I can always reject it, but I am always thankful. Kostas
Re: PAW - seated @ 1/4
Rob, I really like the feel/atmosphere of the this image. The blur in the lower LH corner is a bit of a distraction, but all in all a great shot. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: PAW - seated @ 1/4 The pic contains all the EXIF data that PS7 preserves and the lens was the A20/2.8, I was seated and just took some shots of the crowd buzzing around me prior to the movie screening. http://members.ozemail.com.au/~audiob/temp/imgp1792m.jpg Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: PAW - seated @ 1/4
Yes, sadly, they do not seem to have very high requirements for their intructors. Though some of them were very good. Of course as adults with a few of decades of life experience we tend to have different standards than 18 year olds just trying to get employable. -- Kenneth Waller wrote: Funny you should bring up Henry Ford CC, I work within a mile or two of it and took a couple of Photoshop classes there a few years ago. It turns out I knew more about Photoshop that the instructors did. If I remember correctly one of the instructors had never used PS before the class and was simply presenting the material she was given! I've taken a number of week long workshops with several noted Outdoor Photographer professionals and one of the hardest parts of the workshop, for the leader, is the critiques of participants images. On one hand the participants seek suggestions for improvement, but the instructors have to be careful of not totally crushing the ego of the participant. For me, that's one of the reasons for me to take the workshop, I want to be able to see what they see. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: PAW - seated @ 1/4 I guess my problem with all this goes back to when I took a color photography course at Henry Ford Community College in Dearborn 25-30 years ago. I took the class because while I had about 20 years experience with BW, I had almost zip with color. Figured it would be a quick way to come up to speed. We used strictly slide film for the class overnight develop and turn in the whole roll in slide pages for each assignment. One of the assignments was the color red. I caught a shot of a brand new bright red junkyard crane. I was in a position to photograph only once that I saw in a year of watching afterward. It had to be in just the right position in the yard or it was blocked by buildings. In that position you could see it from a park. But only from a spot about 10 feet square. Move right or left and it was again blocked by the buildings. Move forward and it was blocked by a fence. Move back and the trees blocked it. But from that point that one time it was perfect. Except, there were powerlines in front of it. Now today with Photoshop that would be no big deal. Nor would it have been much of a problem having a print retouched, but with an overnight slide? The lady instructor insisted that I should have taken the shot from another viewpoint. That there was always another viewpoint. That she was absolutely right about everything she said, she was the instructor, after all. Unfortunately she didn't know a heck of a lot about photography. I had the impression that her qualifications were that she had taken the same course a couple of years before. I have ever since hated uninformed criticism. Interestingly that is the only formal photography course I have ever taken. I tried to get into a business class for photographers a few years later. The instructor wanted me to turn in my portfolio and contact sheets for evaluation to determine if I could be given such advanced standing. Remembering the other class, I took his idea seriously and asked some of area pros what they thought of him as a photographer, and would they hire graduates from his courses. As a result of that research, I took a couple of general business classes. -- Rob Studdert wrote: I'm with Frank to a degree, I don't mind constructive criticism however the after the fact comments are what put me off competing in photo club salons. I don't know how often these sorts of compositional comments were made as if the photographer had control of the elements or could have put themselves in a better position than they did (for instance where the shots were obviously happened upon and not at all static). Sometimes it just isn't possible to better the composition and if as the photographer you know this then comments telling you how you should have done it are frustrating to say the least. -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com You might as well accept people as they are, you are not going to be able to change them anyway. -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com You might as well accept people as they are, you are not going to be able to change them anyway.
Re: PAW - seated @ 1/4
Agreed, and perhaps a slight trim along the top as well, just at or above the uppermost cloud. That seems to tighten everything up quite nicely ... [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 2/19/2004 7:42:30 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: http://members.ozemail.com.au/~audiob/temp/imgp1792m.jpg Rob Studdert Nice, very nice. Quite successful. Interesting color contrasts. I'd crop off the bottom, a little above that tiny yellowish spot on the right. All that black on the bottom is just dead space that isn't doing anything, ergo, contributing nothing to the scene.
Re: PAW - seated @ 1/4
http://home.earthlink.net/~scbelinkoff/robs-pic.jpg With bottom and top cropped. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd crop off the bottom, a little above that tiny yellowish spot on the right. All that black on the bottom is just dead space that isn't doing anything, ergo, contributing nothing to the scene.
Re: PAW - seated @ 1/4
In a message dated 2/20/2004 12:31:05 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: http://home.earthlink.net/~scbelinkoff/robs-pic.jpg With bottom and top cropped. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd crop off the bottom, a little above that tiny yellowish spot on the right. All that black on the bottom is just dead space that isn't doing anything, ergo, contributing nothing to the scene. I don't know, shel, I kind of prefer a little more sky above. Sort of the contrast between the smallness of people's concerns (entertainments, whatever) against the vastness/eternity of space. Puts it in context. But that's just me. Marnie aka Doe :-)
RE: PAW - seated @ 1/4
http://home.earthlink.net/~scbelinkoff/robs-pic.jpg With bottom and top cropped. It's incredible how much difference that makes. Malcolm
Re: PAW - seated @ 1/4
I like that - landscape and candid portrait photography combined, and at my favourite time of day, too :-) S Rob Studdert wrote: I haven't posted a pic for a while and I've been subterranean all this week (don't ask) so I can really only submit something from last week. The pic contains all the EXIF data that PS7 preserves and the lens was the A20/2.8, I was seated and just took some shots of the crowd buzzing around me prior to the movie screening. http://members.ozemail.com.au/~audiob/temp/imgp1792m.jpg Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: PAW - seated @ 1/4
On 20 Feb 2004 at 0:32, Shel Belinkoff wrote: http://home.earthlink.net/~scbelinkoff/robs-pic.jpg With bottom and top cropped. Hi Shel (Marnie et.al), Thanks for the alternate perspective, I must admit I did just throw up the full frame resized. I can see the benefits in a crop but I think I'd tend to just chop some of the up close detail around the bottom to tidy it a bit. I did shoot the same view at 31mm however it has a very different feel. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
RE: PAW - seated @ 1/4
Surreal! Beautiful! Was it really taken at 1/4 sec? I'm guessing you had no room for a tripod where you were. How'd you get the buildings in the background so sharp if it was handheld? Or are you just that steady. cheers, frank The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: PAW - seated @ 1/4 Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 14:40:54 +1000 I haven't posted a pic for a while and I've been subterranean all this week (don't ask) so I can really only submit something from last week. The pic contains all the EXIF data that PS7 preserves and the lens was the A20/2.8, I was seated and just took some shots of the crowd buzzing around me prior to the movie screening. http://members.ozemail.com.au/~audiob/temp/imgp1792m.jpg Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 _ Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/photospgmarket=en-caRU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca
Re: PAW - seated @ 1/4
I like it uncropped. Makes the buildings seem farther away - makes the foreground seem more isolated from downtown; that isolation adds to the surreal effect, IMHO. Same thing with the stuff at the bottom - I like the distortion (not of the lens, but the wide angle), for the same reason as above. But, that's just me... g -frank The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: PAW - seated @ 1/4 Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 00:32:55 -0800 http://home.earthlink.net/~scbelinkoff/robs-pic.jpg With bottom and top cropped. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd crop off the bottom, a little above that tiny yellowish spot on the right. All that black on the bottom is just dead space that isn't doing anything, ergo, contributing nothing to the scene. _ STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/bcommpgmarket=en-caRU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca
Re: PAW - seated @ 1/4
This is technically really good, I hate you... At 11:40 PM 2/19/04, you wrote: I haven't posted a pic for a while and I've been subterranean all this week (don't ask) so I can really only submit something from last week. The pic contains all the EXIF data that PS7 preserves and the lens was the A20/2.8, I was seated and just took some shots of the crowd buzzing around me prior to the movie screening. http://members.ozemail.com.au/~audiob/temp/imgp1792m.jpg Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 I drink to make other people interesting. -- George Jean Nathan
Re: PAW - seated @ 1/4
Well, we're not real editors, just playing around with different ideas to perhaps stimulate some thought and creativity. Just tossing about ideas. I'm pretty firmly rooted in my vision, and generally disregard suggestions about cropping and content (as far as redoing a photo is concerned), but the suggestions presented sometimes provide fresh ideas, maybe even for other photos. I don't really consider suggesting alternate cropping an edit, rather, I look at it as an exploration of possibilities. graywolf wrote: In this case the crop is no better, nor worse than the original, it is just a different vision. At least a real editor would have had the saving grace of doing it to fit the picture in a different sized space.
Re: PAW - seated @ 1/4
graywolf wrote: but everytime someone posts a photo, there are a bunch of folks that jump in and say you should have made a different photo. That is a bunch of crap. I disagree - generally I see people jumping in and saying *they'd* have made a different photo. As far as I'm concerned, I welcome that - if I post a photo and a bunch of experienced photographers tell me how they'd have done it differently, then that's a whole bunch of new things I can try the next time. S
Re: PAW - seated @ 1/4
In a message dated 2/20/2004 7:42:20 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I often see photos that I wouldn't have taken, but I always feel that is because my vision is different from the person's who took it, and not that my way is better. I can see giving technical advice, but everytime someone posts a photo, there are a bunch of folks that jump in and say you should have made a different photo. That is a bunch of crap. I disagree. All photographs can have criticism applied. How else is one to learn? And/or improve? Look at one own' photographs and think how one could have taken it differently. And have others do the same thing. Rarely, I think, is a photograph just perfect to the taker of that photograph. They are often wondering how it could have been better. Or how they'd do differently it next time. I think feedback when all one says is that one really, really likes a photograph is good. But I think feedback when one offers some mild criticism of how it might be better, is often what the photographer is REALLY looking for, so it often is more valuable. It doesn't mean people dislike it. If someone dislikes it, they may say, but, let's face it they usually won't. So mild criticism is usually offered for those things one LIKES. (As long as those offering suggestions/criticisms remember to say they like it. :-)) And I think suggestions on cropping are the least intrusive and the most doable. Because it doesn't mean do it differently next time, it means how could the actual photograph that already exists be made a little better. Cropping changes are easier to actually do, or not. The photographer who took the photograph can always ignore any and all cropping suggestions and/or suggestions about how to do it next time. Because, of course, their vision is their own. But I think everyone knows that. Marnie aka Doe ;-) And some of us tend toward perfectionism, aim toward perfectionism in photography, more than others.
OT: Photo-criticism (was: Re: PAW - seated @ 1/4)
Graywolf : I often see photos that I wouldn't have taken, but I always feel that is because my vision is different from the person's who took it, and not that my way is better. I can see giving technical advice, but everytime someone posts a photo, there are a bunch of folks that jump in and say you should have made a different photo. That is a bunch of crap. Marnie: I disagree. All photographs can have criticism applied. How else is one to learn? And/or improve? Look at one own' photographs and think how one could have taken it differently. And have others do the same thing. Cotty: I think that there is plenty of room for criticism in art, and Marnie is right that any photograph can be criticised. However, it is whether or not the criticism is heard, or even desired that is the question. Plenty want it, plenty don't. If I present a picture - whether it be a print to a friend, or a page on the web - personally I have absolutely no desire to hear or read a critique of that picture. None whatsoever. Anyone, of course, is free to do so - just I have no interest in reading or hearing it. If you look at one of my pics, it's the finished article - period. It isn't going to change the crop, the colour, anything. It's done and dusted. It means that I am happy with it. If I'm not, you don't see it. Art - and don't kid yourself: photography is art - is totally and utterly subjective. There is no such thing as right and wrong. There is only 'contentment' (in the sense that a piece of art has achieved - in the mind of the creator - what the creator set out to do - - even if the creator didn't have a plan, or even realise what they were doing). There are those of us who consider ourselves students, and rightly are learning by trial and error - but what are they learning? If there is no right and no wrong, how can they learn anything? I believe the answer is that they are learning to come to terms with their own desires, their own perceptions, their own limits. Ultimately, personal satisfaction and contentment with a creation is the goal. How could it possibly be anything else? You can teach and therefore learn the mechanics of photography, but you cannot teach and therefore cannot learn how to make a photograph. It is an intuitive thing. Students beg to please others with their work. The rest beg to please themselves. The transition is invisible - despite the protestations of those who claim to be continuously learning. If you are learning, and asking for critique is desirable to you, then it should continue. And it does. If you are content with your pictures and simply present them for viewing by others, equally well and good - but if you read the critiques, you're only kidding yourself! All my opinion of course. With due respect, Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: PAW - seated @ 1/4
I generally agree with Tom - although my opinion is not quite as strong as his g. That being said, cropping suggestions are the least offensive, and I suppose, the most constructive of those sorts of you should do it this way. At least they're do-able after the fact. And, I have to admit, some cropping suggestions have improved some of my photos. Same goes for maybe you should try burning the face a bit, or whatever. What I really dislike is the you should have taken it from a different angle or I'd have used a different lens, sort of thing. Sorry, too late for that!! The shot is what the shot is. Your suggestion is of no help to me now! cheers, frank The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: Steve Jolly [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: PAW - seated @ 1/4 Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 17:57:22 + graywolf wrote: but everytime someone posts a photo, there are a bunch of folks that jump in and say you should have made a different photo. That is a bunch of crap. I disagree - generally I see people jumping in and saying *they'd* have made a different photo. As far as I'm concerned, I welcome that - if I post a photo and a bunch of experienced photographers tell me how they'd have done it differently, then that's a whole bunch of new things I can try the next time. S _ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/viruspgmarket=en-caRU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca
Re: PAW - seated @ 1/4
While I can see and understand your point, the suggestion might be helpful in a future situation. In a similar scene one might be tempted to shoot it similarly to an earlier effort, but with someone's voice in your head, however subtle, saying try another approach, you might just do that and get an altogether different result than what you had in mind - for better or worse, of course. frank theriault wrote: What I really dislike is the you should have taken it from a different angle or I'd have used a different lens, sort of thing. Sorry, too late for that!! The shot is what the shot is. Your suggestion is of no help to me now!
Re: OT: Photo-criticism (was: Re: PAW - seated @ 1/4)
Hi, Marnie: I disagree. All photographs can have criticism applied. How else is one to learn? And/or improve? Look at one own' photographs and think how one could have taken it differently. And have others do the same thing. Cotty: I think that there is plenty of room for criticism in art, and Marnie is right that any photograph can be criticised. However, it is whether or not the criticism is heard, or even desired that is the question. Plenty want it, plenty don't. it is probably as difficult to be a good critic as it is to be a good photographer. David Hurn, who writes so well about photography, is very sound on this subject. In his book On looking at photographs he talks at some length about it: Understand that whether or not you [the critic] like the pictures or not is irrelevant. Gauge the photographer's intent in taking them [...]. Inevitably there will be a discrepancy between the photographs and the ideal images for the stated purpose. Offer guidance and advice on how to get from _here_ to _there_. This advice might be technical or concern issues of presentation or suggestions regarding publication/exhibition. In this way your remarks will be practical, useful and relevant. Unfortunately the model for a photographic critic is one who pontificates in academic jargon, who professes to possess superior insight, and who cannot communicate in simple, intelligible, vivid prose. [...] Good critics of photography are much, much rarer than good photographers. He goes on for page about what to do, and what not to do. I haven't the time or patience to write it all down now. It's here if you're interested: http://www.lenswork.com/olp.htm Sample pages: http://www.lenswork.com/olpsample.pdf -- Cheers, Bob
RE: PAW - seated @ 1/4
On 20 Feb 2004 at 9:46, frank theriault wrote: Surreal! No it was real :-) Beautiful! Thanks, sometimes snapshots turn out to be a little bit more. Was it really taken at 1/4 sec? I'm guessing you had no room for a tripod where you were. How'd you get the buildings in the background so sharp if it was handheld? Or are you just that steady. I'm just steady and it was shot whilst I was seated :-) You can see on my left my blurry friend who happened to bend down to retrieve something from her bag just as I hit the shutter. Given that the seats were all linked was surprised at the sharpness myself. The focal plane was placed at the near waters edge so this gave me good sharpness in the B/G and a reasonable DOF in the F/G considering the wide aperture. I made a strip crop of the full res image so you can form a realistic appreciation of the DOF/Focus/shake across the image: http://members.ozemail.com.au/~audiob/temp/imgp1792crop.jpg I just set up my PDML PAW folder at Photo.net all my subsequent submissions: http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=377892 Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: OT: Photo-criticism (was: Re: PAW - seated @ 1/4)
In a message dated 2/20/2004 3:04:41 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Cotty: I think that there is plenty of room for criticism in art, and Marnie is right that any photograph can be criticised. However, it is whether or not the criticism is heard, or even desired that is the question. Plenty want it, plenty don't. Well, one could always post a photo and say NO CRITIQUES, PLEASE. :-) If they say any comments appreciated, then that leaves them wide open. Marnie aka Doe It's always good to ask for what one wants. And netiquette-wise it's probably a good idea to say specifically.
Re: OT: Photo-criticism (was: Re: PAW - seated @ 1/4)
Or, if one doesn't want photos critiqued, don't post them. I'm not being sarcastic or flippant when I say that, either. I'm just thinking that this isn't the forum to post one's photos if one doesn't wish to have them critiqued. Or, one may post the photos, and then not read the responses... cheers, frank The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Well, one could always post a photo and say NO CRITIQUES, PLEASE. :-) If they say any comments appreciated, then that leaves them wide open. Marnie aka Doe It's always good to ask for what one wants. And netiquette-wise it's probably a good idea to say specifically. _ The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/bcommpgmarket=en-caRU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca
Re: PAW - seated @ 1/4
In a message dated 2/20/2004 3:41:37 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'm just steady and it was shot whilst I was seated :-) You can see on my left my blurry friend who happened to bend down to retrieve something from her bag just as I hit the shutter. Given that the seats were all linked was surprised at the sharpness myself. The focal plane was placed at the near waters edge so this gave me good sharpness in the B/G and a reasonable DOF in the F/G considering the wide aperture. I made a strip crop of the full res image so you can form a realistic appreciation of the DOF/Focus/shake across the image: http://members.ozemail.com.au/~audiob/temp/imgp1792crop.jpg I just set up my PDML PAW folder at Photo.net all my subsequent submissions: http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=377892 Cheers, Rob Studdert Thanks, I was wondering too, how you did it. Such nice dark/light contrast. Marnie aka Doe
Re: OT: Photo-criticism (was: Re: PAW - seated @ 1/4)
In a message dated 2/20/2004 4:11:52 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'm not being sarcastic or flippant when I say that, either. I'm just thinking that this isn't the forum to post one's photos if one doesn't wish to have them critiqued. cheers, frank That, of course, is the other response. (Rather than specifically saying whether you want critiques or not.) And I tend to agree, frank. Also, hopefully no one is so thin skinned that they were mortally wounded by anything this novice photographer said. Or will be mortally wounded in the future. Marnie aka Doe :-)
Re: PAW - seated @ 1/4
frank theriault wrote: What I really dislike is the you should have taken it from a different angle or I'd have used a different lens, sort of thing. Sorry, too late for that!! The shot is what the shot is. Your suggestion is of no help to me now! You seem to mostly shoot candid portaits Frank (or should that be frank portraits?), so there's not much point someone telling you I'd have asked that cyclist to hang around while I switched lenses and hunted through my bag for the hood. If I were to post a landscape shot though, I'd find comments like an ND grad filter would have really helped there *useful*, because chances are I'll be in that situation again sometime, and it's always nice to have some new things to try. S
Re: PAW - seated @ 1/4
On 21 Feb 2004 at 1:30, Steve Jolly wrote: If I were to post a landscape shot though, I'd find comments like an ND grad filter would have really helped there *useful*, because chances are I'll be in that situation again sometime, and it's always nice to have some new things to try. I'm with Frank to a degree, I don't mind constructive criticism however the after the fact comments are what put me off competing in photo club salons. I don't know how often these sorts of compositional comments were made as if the photographer had control of the elements or could have put themselves in a better position than they did (for instance where the shots were obviously happened upon and not at all static). Sometimes it just isn't possible to better the composition and if as the photographer you know this then comments telling you how you should have done it are frustrating to say the least. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: PAW - seated @ 1/4
I guess my problem with all this goes back to when I took a color photography course at Henry Ford Community College in Dearborn 25-30 years ago. I took the class because while I had about 20 years experience with BW, I had almost zip with color. Figured it would be a quick way to come up to speed. We used strictly slide film for the class overnight develop and turn in the whole roll in slide pages for each assignment. One of the assignments was the color red. I caught a shot of a brand new bright red junkyard crane. I was in a position to photograph only once that I saw in a year of watching afterward. It had to be in just the right position in the yard or it was blocked by buildings. In that position you could see it from a park. But only from a spot about 10 feet square. Move right or left and it was again blocked by the buildings. Move forward and it was blocked by a fence. Move back and the trees blocked it. But from that point that one time it was perfect. Except, there were powerlines in front of it. Now today with Photoshop that would be no big deal. Nor would it have been much of a problem having a print retouched, but with an overnight slide? The lady instructor insisted that I should have taken the shot from another viewpoint. That there was always another viewpoint. That she was absolutely right about everything she said, she was the instructor, after all. Unfortunately she didn't know a heck of a lot about photography. I had the impression that her qualifications were that she had taken the same course a couple of years before. I have ever since hated uninformed criticism. Interestingly that is the only formal photography course I have ever taken. I tried to get into a business class for photographers a few years later. The instructor wanted me to turn in my portfolio and contact sheets for evaluation to determine if I could be given such advanced standing. Remembering the other class, I took his idea seriously and asked some of area pros what they thought of him as a photographer, and would they hire graduates from his courses. As a result of that research, I took a couple of general business classes. -- Rob Studdert wrote: I'm with Frank to a degree, I don't mind constructive criticism however the after the fact comments are what put me off competing in photo club salons. I don't know how often these sorts of compositional comments were made as if the photographer had control of the elements or could have put themselves in a better position than they did (for instance where the shots were obviously happened upon and not at all static). Sometimes it just isn't possible to better the composition and if as the photographer you know this then comments telling you how you should have done it are frustrating to say the least. -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com You might as well accept people as they are, you are not going to be able to change them anyway.
PAW - seated @ 1/4
I haven't posted a pic for a while and I've been subterranean all this week (don't ask) so I can really only submit something from last week. The pic contains all the EXIF data that PS7 preserves and the lens was the A20/2.8, I was seated and just took some shots of the crowd buzzing around me prior to the movie screening. http://members.ozemail.com.au/~audiob/temp/imgp1792m.jpg Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: PAW - seated @ 1/4
In a message dated 2/19/2004 7:42:30 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: http://members.ozemail.com.au/~audiob/temp/imgp1792m.jpg Rob Studdert Nice, very nice. Quite successful. Interesting color contrasts. I'd crop off the bottom, a little above that tiny yellowish spot on the right. All that black on the bottom is just dead space that isn't doing anything, ergo, contributing nothing to the scene. Very nice. Marnie aka Doe IMHO, in my humble opinion, of course.
