Hi all! Would love critique on some of my photos. I am meh on most of them myself so don't hold back. Also new to black & white so I'm sure my adjustments were not great. In particular I wasn't sure how to make the guy between the trees in the distance in one of the photos more visible; I think it ended up too contrasty (probably I should have just walked closer...) Would love to get good at documentary photography.
It is hard enough to do any sort of worthwhile critique with the online format. Including 4 images for discussion makes that even more difficult so I will only make a few superficial comments to start the discussion.
The first image is a portrait type picture of mushrooms. The focus is on the log in front of the subject and the shallow depth of field left the mushrooms soft and blurred out most of the rest of the image. At a minimum I would like to see the focus/depth of field improved. If you want to feature the mushrooms, I would also suggest trying a much lower and closer angle of view. If you want to feature the environment, then better DOF would be needed. This seems to be more of a snapshot than an image were you spend some thought on what you wanted to feature.
The second image is by far my favorite. There is a natural vignette that holds the viewers attention. The main subject stands out due to the black and white coat. Every where I look there is something interesting to examine. It is almost like 50 pictures in one. I like the overall composition, balance, and black and white tones.
Image #3 does not work for me. I totally missed the man you said you wanted to feature. Instead the brighter areas pull my attention to a sign and the fence beyond. The way the composition works will not allow you to somehow feature the man. There is a flow to the image but it does not lead to the man, rather it emphasizes the sign.
From me, #4 would be improved by cropping. The two figues on the left side and the bright sky are distracting. I could consider cropping out both or at least crop out the sky and clone out the two figures. I would like to see this more strongly feature the young woman and the photographer.
Anyway, I hope my few comments have been helpful and will at least start a conversation.
Hi Camperjim—thanks so much for the critique!! I really appreciate it and this is indeed helpful.
When you mention it being hard to do critique online, this might be a dumb question but what would you suggest as an alternative? Would a local photography club be the right place to go?
I belonged to a photography club for a couple of years. I was not impressed and dropped out. Basically no one had any training in the visual arts and that included the "judges" brought in to handle the monthly competition scoring.
I was lucky enough to find a really good OLLI (Osher Lifelong Learning) program at the nearby university (Stony Brook U). The critique and other photography courses were lead by people who really knew what they were doing. Unfortunately the program sank during and after Covid and has never totally recovered. I would recommend looking for some serious academic sort of experience. I have no idea what exists in your area. I know the SF Art Institute failed but is trying to find a away to return.
Perhaps the clubs in your area are different and/or you can latch onto a good mentor. I also have no idea about your level of accomplishment in photography. Even the relatively mediocre clubs in my area would be beneficial for someone who is relatively new.
This forum was a decent resource several years ago but recently has floundered. That also reflects a greatly decreased interest and participation in photography forums. I have looked and not found any online forum that works for critiques.
Ok, sorry I am on Long Island and am not familar with opportunities in the Bay area. My daughter is in Berkeley but she is into music, not photography.
No worries! Will follow your suggestion and try find teachers around here with formal training. Coincidentally my younger siblings both went to Berkeley, one for music!
Please don't take this as mean-spirited. It's what I see.
Photo 1: Mushrooms are lacking detail. They could be darker. And you could crop a bit tighter.
Not a lot to comment on here. It's a photo of mushrooms.
Photo 2: There's a lot going on here. I'm not sure where to look, or what the intended subject is.
By the scene, my guess is this might look better in color. I don't think B&W serves this photo well, especially since it appears very flat.
Photo 3: Like #2, not sure where I'm supposed to be looking. If it's the person on the bench, you're way too far away, and too many distractions along the way. Crop WAY in to include the two trees on the left and just past the post on the right, then remove the horizontal bar, and adjust the brightness and you have a better idea of how it could be improved. The lighting on the person is ideal. You're just too far away, but you had potential here.
Photo 4: A picture of someone taking a picture of someone. Not a flattering pose on the woman. Nothing to take away from this photo. If she was alone, and posed well, you would have something here. I'd try for a lower camera position to catch her reflection in the water, and remove the people in the background. This photo had potential if you worked the scene. Don't be afraid to use the healing brush to get rid of distractions.
B&W can be tough, especially if there's no contrast in the scene, no directional light, and no emphasis on the subject. Eyes always go to the brightest areas, which you need to control
Photo critiques can REALLY help you improve your photography, if they're constructive.
Check out Kelby One, The Grid, and their blind photo critique episodes. You can pick up quite a few tips and start to look at your own work differently. There's an episode with Joe McNally which is terrific.
I think the images are nice, but I agree the subjects aren't standing out to me. Some of these too feel like they'd benefit with more proximity to the subjects, the second and third image in particular.
