I have been mulling over this idea for a while now, but I think its time has come. This forum and the results posted by its members have become a lot stronger over time, to the point where I have observed people coming in posting barely interesting shots, and within a few short months, post fantastic, top rate shots. I would like to give this process a boost.
As such, I would like to announce this thread, created explicitly for posting alt images and receiving critique. There is no point for someone confident of their approach to post here, nor for anyone not willing to seriously consider each critique received.
For people posting critique, please weigh your words carefully. Critique should be given in the spirit of helpfulness, not as charity nor destruction. In other words, "nice shot" comments are not wanted, nor are "lousy shot" comments. Critiques should be specific and gentle, without holding back for fear of hurting someone. An example would be: "nice light, but the composition needs to be tighter, and the central motive is not interesting enough to carry the shot". Both sides should always remember that every word posted is only opinion. More weight should be given to comments from forum heavies, who regularly post great shots themselves, than to sofa critics, who do not consistently and frequently post any high caliber work, for obvious reasons.
It is not my intention for this thread to cannibalize any other thread. Everyone should continue to post to their usual Zeiss, Rokkor, MFT or NEX thread, and simply repost the image for which specific critique is desired here.
I would like to hint that people should not be posting just anything here, but rather their best efforts. It doesn't make much sense to get steps for improvement when the shot doesn't represent your best try.
I am currently on vacation and cannot personally contribute for another couple of days, but when I return, I will join the fun!
I'll start with critique, since no one seems to want to jump in first.
Definitely interesting picture, flypenfly. A meaningful, explicit subject, in context, and rich visual substance as well.
But I have some trouble "reading" it. Wat exactly did you want to achieve? Is it a good idea to shoot so tight? To highlight the upper hand? To use thin DOF? Are you going for a photojournalistic approach, or an aesthetic one?
This picture makes me want to see more, as if there were maybe something really first class available.
But still, defintely an interesting and arresting shot.
corposant wrote:
There's already a pretty lively Photo Critique thread. How would this one be different?
... This is a little tricky to answer directly. Part of it is that there are many people in the alt forum who don't post in the other forums. Part of it is that the crowd here is pretty tight, and we tend to know more about each other than in the other forums. Over there it is another crowd. There is also an alt aesthetic, separate from what you see in other forums. The level of skill here is also very high. I think that by the time someone questions their L lens allegiance, for example, people have already gone through more equipment and introspection than the average photographer ever does. There is also the idea of accumulating the knowledge in a single lively thread, as opposed to discarding it in a cascade of single image threads which quickly hit page 3.
Ultimately, I would think that people would generally tend to prefer one approach over the other, and there wouldn't actually be much conflict. I would personally never post over there, for example. I have looked in from time to time, but I have never seen the caliber of work there that you can daily here from the likes of Philippe, Martin, Luka, Luka, Lars, Charles K., Daniel, and on and on and on (this list is woefully incomplete, please don't feel that I left you out or mentioned you in the wrong order, it is unintended).
I hope that it doesn't upset anyone to have this thread here. It is meant as a tool, not a political statement about forum boundaries.
I try to answer using google translator ..
when I look at great photos on the alt forum difficult i see exif data, such as ISO and f-stop and exposure time..that are important to me to improve my photographic technique,it would be nice to add the data in the photos posted here! no?
philber wrote:
I'll start with critique, since no one seems to want to jump in first.
Definitely interesting picture, flypenfly. A meaningful, explicit subject, in context, and rich visual substance as well.
But I have some trouble "reading" it. Wat exactly did you want to achieve? Is it a good idea to shoot so tight? To highlight the upper hand? To use thin DOF? Are you going for a photojournalistic approach, or an aesthetic one?
This picture makes me want to see more, as if there were maybe something really first class available.
But still, defintely an interesting and arresting shot.
Carsten, super idea!
Great points Philber. Perhaps some works should be presented as a series of 2-4 photos so there is better context.
carstenw wrote:
... This is a little tricky to answer directly. Part of it is that there are many people in the alt forum who don't post in the other forums. Part of it is that the crowd here is pretty tight, and we tend to know more about each other than in the other forums. Over there it is another crowd. There is also an alt aesthetic, separate from what you see in other forums. The level of skill here is also very high. I think that by the time someone questions their L lens allegiance, for example, people have already gone through more equipment and introspection than the average photographer ever does. There is also the idea of accumulating the knowledge in a single lively thread, as opposed to discarding it in a cascade of single image threads which quickly hit page 3.
Ultimately, I would think that people would generally tend to prefer one approach over the other, and there wouldn't actually be much conflict. I would personally never post over there, for example. I have looked in from time to time, but I have never seen the caliber of work there that you can daily here from the likes of Philippe, Martin, Luka, Luka, Lars, Charles K., Daniel, and on and on and on (this list is woefully incomplete, please don't feel that I left you out or mentioned you in the wrong order, it is unintended).
I hope that it doesn't upset anyone to have this thread here. It is meant as a tool, not a political statement about forum boundaries. ...Show more →
Okay ... I'm in.
The image initally draws my eye to the spray can due to it's tonal values. The occupy wall street element isn't readily recognizable, and without the leading comment about the "movement" it doesn't seem to stand well on its own.
My eye goes, paint can, hand, "ALL" ... figuring out the rest of it (i.e. "OCCUPY WALL STREET") becomes a puzzle as my eye then goes to "EET" and finally it figures out the "OCCUPY". Once I get it figured out, the "ALL" seems to provide a dichotomy to the "WALL STREET" ... which is kinda cool for making a social statement, but visually (without the 'movement' hint) it is challenging to get there.
carstenw wrote:
... This is a little tricky to answer directly. Part of it is that there are many people in the alt forum who don't post in the other forums. Part of it is that the crowd here is pretty tight, and we tend to know more about each other than in the other forums. Over there it is another crowd. There is also an alt aesthetic, separate from what you see in other forums. The level of skill here is also very high. I think that by the time someone questions their L lens allegiance, for example, people have already gone through more equipment and introspection than the average photographer ever does. There is also the idea of accumulating the knowledge in a single lively thread, as opposed to discarding it in a cascade of single image threads which quickly hit page 3.
Ultimately, I would think that people would generally tend to prefer one approach over the other, and there wouldn't actually be much conflict. I would personally never post over there, for example. I have looked in from time to time, but I have never seen the caliber of work there that you can daily here from the likes of Philippe, Martin, Luka, Luka, Lars, Charles K., Daniel, and on and on and on (this list is woefully incomplete, please don't feel that I left you out or mentioned you in the wrong order, it is unintended).
I hope that it doesn't upset anyone to have this thread here. It is meant as a tool, not a political statement about forum boundaries. ...Show more →
And besides... folks on the other thread have NO idea what micro contrast is...
Fly, I like the shot, but ultimately it doesn't completely work for me. I find the composition a bit unsatisfying, possibly because there are no particular pleasing ratios, and the details extends too close to the edges. The colours are good and strong, but the message is a little hard to stumble across. Somehow it could be stronger. One little thing which doesn't work completely for me has nothing to do with you: the hands. They aren't interesting hands, so to be put in the spotlight like that doesn't feel right.
To summarize what I think might help: a slightly wider aspect ratio, a little more space around the hands and plate, release slightly earlier to make it easier to read the letters.
Sorry if I sound harsh. Well no, not really This is what it is all about. Take it to heart, or disagree, but no pulled punches.
I actually intentionally put something I wasn't 100% happy with to kick it off.
To me, this was a great missed shot, I think it could have been very powerful but for a number of reasons I couldn't execute the shot. The lighting, the mass of people, the prime lens I had mounted, etc.
I do appreciate the comments. I think if we can keep this sort of theme, this will go well.
Okay, here is a shot which I actually quite like. I wish I could process it slightly better, but I am not quite sure what I need to do. I feel it is a 4/5 with potential for a 5/5, but I might be emotionally attached to it:
Carsten, I share your view that this shot, while interesting and technically excellent, does not realise its "full potential".
My first impression was that the composition doesn't fully work for me. So I uploaded it and cropped roughly 2/3 of the bottom part out (2/3 of the empty space between the bottom of the pic and the foot of the pillar). I didn't upload the result here, as no rules specify whether this is allowed or not (time to decide, eh, thread owner!), but it is definitely more pleasing to me. I get a much greater sense of vastness with the shallower picture...
Here it is. I also did a better white balance. The second one is more accurate for the content, although it may have looked more like the first one in real life.
