Wow - Five pages and I only now discover this great idea of a thread! Way to go Carsten.
I figure I should post before providing my own critique on other works. I use Flickr a lot and I like seeing what people react to but even more what they don't react to. Sometimes I post an image that I feel has emotional context but others don't see it. Here is one example. Perhaps it's because "The Fan" is my son's best friend from high school (5 years ago) and the guitarist is my son so I feel a natural emotional response. By the way, I know this image has noise, which is expected, but I'm focusing more on the emotional context of this image than it's technical accuracy.
rji2goleez wrote:
Sometimes I post an image that I feel has emotional context but others don't see it. Here is one example. Perhaps it's because "The Fan" is my son's best friend from high school (5 years ago) and the guitarist is my son so I feel a natural emotional response.
I'm not seeing any emotional connection. You need something to illustrate the interaction between the performer and the "fan" --- a fragment of facial expression or some body language that demonstrates how the person is "The Fan" and not just "That Random Guy Blocking The View."
mpmendenhall wrote:
I was worried that the bottom/foreground was a bit weak. Do you think a tighter crop helps, or is the photo just too fundamentally boring?
For me it feels like a crop where the main subject is not there. Apparently it works for Wilhelm, so maybe listen to him and not to me The other shot though I found just fantastic, and I am not saying that to compensate for my criticism of this shot
alemmo wrote:
This is a neat thread. Here is one of mine
I like the composition overall, but I'm not usually a fan of having significant portions of an image darkened to flat black (especially for "natural" subjects, where my real-life expectation is always to see a little detail even in the deepest shadows). I think it would improve the image to keep the black areas very dark, but restore just a hint of detail in them.
Bifurcator wrote:
< My poor bug got ignored... > --->> hint hint...
I like the color scheme, the background mirroring the red/white/green of the mantis' eye. Perhaps a square crop might work better, and showing either more or less of the long front legs? Also, the image has a slightly "plasticky" texture as though overly aggressive noise reduction has been used.
carstenw wrote:
For me it feels like a crop where the main subject is not there. Apparently it works for Wilhelm, so maybe listen to him and not to me The other shot though I found just fantastic, and I am not saying that to compensate for my criticism of this shot
Actually, for me the tree 'hangs in the air' in both images, I need more foundation. But I found the composition in the first more pleasing. That is hightly subjective of course - but I am not too fond of random crop ratios. Close to original or square is what works for me, this is one area where I think I need to work on my conservative ideas..
Ratty, nice image. For me, the trees creeping into the scene are a little distracting. I would try a square or vertical crop and focus on the symmetry. I think this will also make the color palette more pleasing.
Alemmo, very nice. From a critique standpoint, I don't have anything to add. I like it as is, images like this are always difficult for me to figure out what to do with. I'll be interested to hear what anyone else might have to offer.
mpmendenhall wrote:
I like the color scheme, the background mirroring the red/white/green of the mantis' eye. Perhaps a square crop might work better, and showing either more or less of the long front legs? Also, the image has a slightly "plasticky" texture as though overly aggressive noise reduction has been used.
It also looks like it could use a bit more DOF if that's possible (this could be due to NR). I agree that it is very well scene, and I certainly couldn't do any better
Jacob D wrote:
Ratty, nice image. For me, the trees creeping into the scene are a little distracting. I would try a square or vertical crop and focus on the symmetry. I think this will also make the color palette more pleasing.
In my opinion, the trees are the best part --- they strikingly reinforce the "double" symmetry that makes the image (up/down and left/right). Also, they add to the perceived clarity and depth of the image --- without that vibrant foreground detail, the slightly haze-shrouded distant building would dominate the image and make it look washed out; instead, with the trees and railings clear in the foreground, the haze helps instead to give the image a sense of depth.
Bifurcator wrote:
< My poor bug got ignored... > --->> hint hint...
- uninteresting light (too harsh, many specular reflections)
- forelegs (most impressive part of the mantis' anatomy) not included in the frame
- strange background (odd mixure of colors), perhaps blurred too much and not giving the mantis any kind of natural looking environment
- pose of the mantis isn't particularly interesting (expressionless)
@Michael: The first frame doesn't really do anything for me. Nice tree + contrail make a disharmonious combination IMO. Not much of interest for me in this one otherwise, perhaps mostly because of the dull tones.
I like the patches of yellow a lot in the second frame. Rich diversity of tones. The composition is pretty good, but there is a kind of strange separation between the dimensionality of the foreground and the background (where you can't see the direction of the light). The shadows on the little path are distracting from the whole for me. They should either get more attention or be excluded. The stalk on the right is a bit annoying (perhaps better to clone out).
mpmendenhall wrote:
In my opinion, the trees are the best part --- they strikingly reinforce the "double" symmetry that makes the image (up/down and left/right). Also, they add to the perceived clarity and depth of the image --- without that vibrant foreground detail, the slightly haze-shrouded distant building would dominate the image and make it look washed out; instead, with the trees and railings clear in the foreground, the haze helps instead to give the image a sense of depth.
Thank you both for the C & C. I appreciate it a lot.
I like the color palette. The bridge is of wonderful color and it matches well the subdued rust of late leaves.
However your DoF is too thin -- the background trees are out of focus and they are precisely at that awkward stage where it's clear they are soft and yet are not blurred into an inoffensive background. Also your horizon is tilted which is most easily visible through the tree in the right foreground.
I would also have picked a different point to take this picture -- it would help to get rid of the twigs right in the center foreground and the branches high at the left edge, plus the river and the path curve very nicely but that curve is underused by this image.
But I still like the color, it captures the early-twilight feeling well.
Kaax, thanks for the comments. I don't think I could have altered the DOF without jacking up the ISO or using a tripod (which I didn't have). Perhaps if I was closer to the bridge with a wider lens (which I don't own ;-) I could have thrown the background more out of focus...
I do think it would be better with more in focus rather than with a more blurred background.
I really like the transition between the left and right of this composition. The blacks seem about 15% too crushed but nothing too bad. Overall, I think an interesting shot worth examining printed larger.
The other shot though I found just fantastic, and I am not saying that to compensate for my criticism of this shot 
... No but the sunrise hits the coastline just like that in many areas along the coast up there. Especially this time of year!
> --->> 