| Author |
Message |
makyland
Joined: 18 Dec 2010
Posts: 9
|
Posted: Sun Jun 17, 2012 9:01 pm
| |
Hi!
I've been following the forum for long now and I think, apart from learning from others, it will be good for me to listen to your critiques on my own work. After my first submission attempt almost a year ago I didn't dare to try it again, as I'm yet seeing "problems" most of the time, and start doubting if this is an obsession or not...
I probably don't see these pictures "clean enough" yet (no noise, super sharp...) but still would like to hear your honest opinion.
Thanks in advance for your time!
| Description: |
| I like the feeling this picture transmits, however not so sure it's good candidate for stock being B&W, plus all the possible technical concerns. Noise in the sky? should I try to reduce it? |
|
| Filesize: |
113.07 KB |
| Viewed: |
2098 Time(s) |

|
| Description: |
| This is 100% crop. It says "Centro de convenciones Puerto Rico" (Convention Center Puerto Rico) and the signature is the name of the convention center, no architect name or any brand name. Is it focused enough to be a night shot? |
|
| Filesize: |
230.71 KB |
| Viewed: |
2098 Time(s) |

|
| Description: |
| I do like this picture a lot. I took it recently and I'm glad with the result, however, not so sure it is a good candidate for SS first submission. I appreciate your technical opinion, and also, I'm not sure whether this piece of architecture would requir |
|
| Filesize: |
210.72 KB |
| Viewed: |
2098 Time(s) |

|
|
|
makyland
Joined: 18 Dec 2010
Posts: 9
|
Posted: Sun Jun 17, 2012 9:05 pm
| |
I continue submitting some more
| Description: |
|
| Filesize: |
152.21 KB |
| Viewed: |
2094 Time(s) |

|
| Description: |
| I see this picture stock oriented, but probably is the one that can have more focus problems |
|
| Filesize: |
185.43 KB |
| Viewed: |
2094 Time(s) |

|
| Description: |
| 100% crop of the palmtree |
|
 Download |
| Filename: |
palmtree_100crop.jpg |
| Filesize: |
148.27 KB |
| Downloaded: |
30 Time(s) |
|
|
ruxpriencdiam

Joined: 07 May 2009
Posts: 26255
Location: Third Stone from the Sun
|
Posted: Sun Jun 17, 2012 10:02 pm
| |
Forget B&W for a first ten.
Palm tree not sure the crop is right the others are OOF and the building will need a property release or will be hit with copyright/trademark.
The chairs will get hit with lighting, not because of shadows or anything else but more so from the chairs having two different blues on them when they should be the same.
|
|
robhainer

Joined: 03 May 2010
Posts: 2744
Location: Dallas, GA, USA
|
Posted: Sun Jun 17, 2012 10:24 pm
| |
I wouldn't do the tree in black and white. Better image and better sales in color.
The other two aren't sharp. Reducing might help, but they're easy shots to get sharp. They aren't moving. Get a good tripod and try again. The building might make it as editorial. It looks like a landmark that you could write a caption for that would pass. I wouldn't do it on first ten.
Chairs are out of focus, and you have some red-cyan CA that's pretty visible at 100 percent.
|
|
mikenorton

Joined: 22 Aug 2005
Posts: 3474
Location: Guide Book http://www.lulu.com/shop/mike-norton/nortons-notes/paperback/product-5079819.html
|
Posted: Sun Jun 17, 2012 10:38 pm
| |
I would like to see the palm tree in color. The building is nice but you need to back up or zoom out a little, you are cutting the left side off. Also if you reshoot it arrive before sunset and shoot while the light is low and shoot again after the sun has gone down but before the sky gets dark. It's called the blue hour. Check out this web site: http://jekophoto.eu/tools/twilight-calculator-blue-hour-golden-hour/
Don't give up!
|
|
jeffbanke

Joined: 18 Dec 2005
Posts: 17463
Location: www.xlr8photo.com, The real California
|
Posted: Sun Jun 17, 2012 11:53 pm
| |
I have to first say I like all three shots, however the convention center and the beach blue both look soft, probably movement since it appears that it is not a DOF issue.
Beach blue also has some Chromatic fringing.
As the others have expressed B/W is generally inadvisable for the first 10, but you may have an exception to the rule here. We would still need to see a closeup of that image to determine for sure.
|
|
zxl
Joined: 11 Jun 2012
Posts: 6
|
Posted: Mon Jun 18, 2012 3:04 am
| |
| ruxpriencdiam wrote: | Forget B&W for a first ten.
Palm tree not sure the crop is right the others are OOF and the building will need a property release or will be hit with copyright/trademark.
The chairs will get hit with lighting, not because of shadows or anything else but more so from the chairs having two different blues on them when they should be the same. |
sorry, I'm a new member . I have a question. why did you say the chairs is OOF ? it seems very sharp.
|
|
semmickphoto

Joined: 12 Feb 2012
Posts: 6486
Location: Stuck between a shutter and a hard place
|
Posted: Mon Jun 18, 2012 4:11 am
| |
The chairs are out of focus, you need to be able to see that.
|
|
hhltdave5

Joined: 20 Jun 2006
Posts: 24081
Location: Our Stock, Food & Portrait photography books at www.rindersmithphotography.com
|
Posted: Mon Jun 18, 2012 7:01 am
| |
| zxl wrote: | | ruxpriencdiam wrote: | Forget B&W for a first ten.
Palm tree not sure the crop is right the others are OOF and the building will need a property release or will be hit with copyright/trademark.
The chairs will get hit with lighting, not because of shadows or anything else but more so from the chairs having two different blues on them when they should be the same. |
sorry, I'm a new member . I have a question. why did you say the chairs is OOF ? it seems very sharp. |
The chairs are slightly OOF.
Look at the edges of the white frame. Notice how they are not absolutely crisp and sharply defined? You can see a blurriness to them.
In focus means completely sharp in the area of importance. Not kinda sharp, or pretty sharp. They need to be razor sharp. There is a slight softness to them in this shot.
|
|
ruxpriencdiam

Joined: 07 May 2009
Posts: 26255
Location: Third Stone from the Sun
|
Posted: Mon Jun 18, 2012 8:09 am
| |
| zxl wrote: | | ruxpriencdiam wrote: | Forget B&W for a first ten.
Palm tree not sure the crop is right the others are OOF and the building will need a property release or will be hit with copyright/trademark.
The chairs will get hit with lighting, not because of shadows or anything else but more so from the chairs having two different blues on them when they should be the same. |
sorry, I'm a new member . I have a question. why did you say the chairs is OOF ? it seems very sharp. | Trust me on OOF.
Also the next time you take a picture of something put it on the computer and zoom to 100% and look at it now go look at what you took a picture of and if your vision is correct you will be able to see the difference. I hope? Because i can.
|
|
copidosoma

Joined: 17 Nov 2009
Posts: 3783
Location: Canada
|
Posted: Mon Jun 18, 2012 8:13 am
| |
[quote="hhltdave5] The chairs are slightly OOF.
Look at the edges of the white frame. Notice how they are not absolutely crisp and sharply defined? You can see a blurriness to them.
In focus means completely sharp in the area of importance. Not kinda sharp, or pretty sharp. They need to be razor sharp. There is a slight softness to them in this shot.[/quote]
x2 but I've had worse accepted (recently). Still I wouldn't submit themfor a first 10.
|
|
jeffbanke

Joined: 18 Dec 2005
Posts: 17463
Location: www.xlr8photo.com, The real California
|
Posted: Mon Jun 18, 2012 11:35 am
| |
I also agree, the chairs are not sharp when viewed in the closeup you gave us, and as I stated earlier have the chromatic aberration of fringing.
On this focus issue, it is apparent from the crop you gave us that nothing in the image is really sharp, not the edges of the chairs, nor the sand beneath them, this is indicative of someone hand holding a camera and inducing some shake or movement. For this reason we always recommend using a tripod, and it is extremely unwise not to, especially when shooting a still life such as the chairs.
Do I use a tripod ALL the time, absolutely not! However, I ALWAYS look for some methodology by which to get a firmer support, which may be the back of another chair, anything. Plus I have been shooting with SLR cameras since the mid 1960's and have learned how to hold a camera correctly providing the greatest support a human body can provide without assistance, something that most newbies do not understand.
|
|
mikenorton

Joined: 22 Aug 2005
Posts: 3474
Location: Guide Book http://www.lulu.com/shop/mike-norton/nortons-notes/paperback/product-5079819.html
|
Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 12:36 am
| |
| jeffbanke wrote: | I also agree, the chairs are not sharp when viewed in the closeup you gave us, and as I stated earlier have the chromatic aberration of fringing.
On this focus issue, it is apparent from the crop you gave us that nothing in the image is really sharp, not the edges of the chairs, nor the sand beneath them, this is indicative of someone hand holding a camera and inducing some shake or movement. For this reason we always recommend using a tripod, and it is extremely unwise not to, especially when shooting a still life such as the chairs.
Do I use a tripod ALL the time, absolutely not! However, I ALWAYS look for some methodology by which to get a firmer support, which may be the back of another chair, anything. Plus I have been shooting with SLR cameras since the mid 1960's and have learned how to hold a camera correctly providing the greatest support a human body can provide without assistance, something that most newbies do not understand. |
+1
Except I've been shooting SLR cameras since 1972.
And I ALWAYS, since 1988 anyway, use a tripod!
|
|
zxl
Joined: 11 Jun 2012
Posts: 6
|
Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 10:09 am
| |
| ruxpriencdiam wrote: | | zxl wrote: | | ruxpriencdiam wrote: | Forget B&W for a first ten.
Palm tree not sure the crop is right the others are OOF and the building will need a property release or will be hit with copyright/trademark.
The chairs will get hit with lighting, not because of shadows or anything else but more so from the chairs having two different blues on them when they should be the same. |
sorry, I'm a new member . I have a question. why did you say the chairs is OOF ? it seems very sharp. | Trust me on OOF.
Also the next time you take a picture of something put it on the computer and zoom to 100% and look at it now go look at what you took a picture of and if your vision is correct you will be able to see the difference. I hope? Because i can. |
this is mine rejected for the OOF, but I also can't see where is OOF. I think it sharp.
| Description: |
|
| Filesize: |
88.13 KB |
| Viewed: |
1723 Time(s) |

|
|
|
rinder99

Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 39203
Location: Contact www.rinderart.com/Books and Workshops www.rindersmithphotography.com Youtube/rinder
|
Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 10:55 am
| |
| zxl wrote: | | ruxpriencdiam wrote: | | zxl wrote: | | ruxpriencdiam wrote: | Forget B&W for a first ten.
Palm tree not sure the crop is right the others are OOF and the building will need a property release or will be hit with copyright/trademark.
The chairs will get hit with lighting, not because of shadows or anything else but more so from the chairs having two different blues on them when they should be the same. |
sorry, I'm a new member . I have a question. why did you say the chairs is OOF ? it seems very sharp. | Trust me on OOF.
Also the next time you take a picture of something put it on the computer and zoom to 100% and look at it now go look at what you took a picture of and if your vision is correct you will be able to see the difference. I hope? Because i can. |
this is mine rejected for the OOF, but I also can't see where is OOF. I think it sharp. |
The surf pic is OOF. Im laying on the floor with a laptop on my stomach and I can see it in this small size. the rocks are OOF. if ya can't see it. Eye doctor perhaps? otherwise Nice Pic.
|
|
| |
|