Critique My Image

1356728

Comments

  • FlowtographyBerlinFlowtographyBerlin Posts: 477Member
    Pierre…. Something that can only be completed from the original is to correct the vertical perspective as if it were taken with a view camera. This would eliminate the "falling building" effect of pointing our cameras upward.
    @msmoto: That can (and should) be done to correct mild and unwanted distortion, but not extreme distortion from purposefully extreme perspectives like the picture of Pierre:

    image

    (If you want to see what the building looks like in reality, enter "calatrava malmö" in Google image search.)

    @Golf007sd: That's exactly the "sliders-up" look I was talking about. There's a reason why you don't see this look much outside of amateur forums... ;-)
  • MsmotoMsmoto Posts: 5,398Moderator
    edited January 2014
    Our discussion here clearly demonstrates our different preferences as well as the inability to do much more than offer suggestions. One never knows what the original artist had in mind when we view an image. This building is quite unique and I truly must admit I have no idea how I would actually approach it until I saw it in person.

    So, here is another building….in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA

    Milwaukee Buildings
    Post edited by Msmoto on
    Msmoto, mod
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 4,493Member
    One never knows what the original artist had in mind when we view an image.
    Photos should be like a good joke, no explanation needed from the creator. If an image maker cannot make the purpose of the image clear, is that the fault of the viewer or the photographer? The photographer, no questions asked.
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • mikepmikep Posts: 280Member
    edited January 2014
    nato strap

    so, i got those lights i was mentioning before, but no softbox yet, just umbrella. so i put one umbrella directly above it, and filled the shadow with a slightly snooted flash from one side. this is shot with my trusty 50mm.

    seems ok to me, but any comments are welcome - im hoping to not have to buy a new lens for this :/
    Post edited by mikep on
  • framerframer Posts: 491Member
    edited January 2014
    Sorry, I just couldn't resist the urge to dalize it.

    image

    Guess I'm sniffing too much white glue today...

    That a horses mouth taken 20+ years ago
    Post edited by framer on
  • ElvisheferElvishefer Posts: 329Member
    @framer - love it. All in good fun.
    D700, 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII, 24-70mm f/2.8, 14-24mm f/2.8, 50mm f/1.4G, 200mm f/4 Micro, 105mm f/2.8 VRII Micro, 35mm f/1.8, 2xSB900, 1xSB910, R1C1, RRS Support...

    ... And no time to use them.
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,487Moderator
    edited January 2014
    Hah-hah, be gentle with me:

    Still screwin' around
    Post edited by spraynpray on
    Always learning.
  • ElvisheferElvishefer Posts: 329Member
    @spraynpray - I really like the idea. I would suggest working with the reflection more. At the risk of looking like an old Apple ad, it could add some depth to the image. Also, the shadows on the screws themselves could be brought up ever so slightly to give the spirals a bit more 'spiraliness'. Very cool!
    D700, 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII, 24-70mm f/2.8, 14-24mm f/2.8, 50mm f/1.4G, 200mm f/4 Micro, 105mm f/2.8 VRII Micro, 35mm f/1.8, 2xSB900, 1xSB910, R1C1, RRS Support...

    ... And no time to use them.
  • michael66michael66 Posts: 231Member
    Yeah, love the idea. But as Elivishefer mentioned, the spirals need something to give it a little more pop. I have NO idea how to do that, I am speaking only as viewer. A little more light? In any event, I'm going to steal this idea and try it for myself.
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,487Moderator
    I deliberately went for the high contrast look by using stainless screws and snooting a speedlight from above I couldn't get the shadows as consistent as I wanted, I found that tough. Another version I shot lit by two speedlights but that was boring. lots of lovely clear spirals, but boring.
    Always learning.
  • WestEndBoyWestEndBoy Posts: 1,456Member
    Hi Spraynpray, I love the photo. You really inspire me regarding photo opportunities that could be lying around the house.

    I am hesitant to offer a critique for all the reasons described above. I looked at the EXIF data and noted that you shot this at F22 because I was wondering what the photo would look like if everything was in focus.

    Do you have any experience with focus stacking? It would be interesting to try that and see what it looked like. It might look better or worse. I don't know.
  • AdeAde Posts: 1,071Member
    Here is a shoot I took a few years ago. At the time I was pretty chuffed with it, but now that I have a D800 I really wish I could go back and retake it. Not a lot post, except for some cropping and color saturation:

    Looking for Prey...
    D7000 | Tamron 70-300mm @ 116mm (174mm) | 1/500 | f/6.3 | ISO 100
    I've been thinking about this one. It's a good capture. Maybe a bit too much contrast?

    A lot of times, what separates good bird picture vs. great ones is a clean background. That's "easy" when the bird is up in the sky, but for a low-level flight like this...

    Maybe if there's every an opportunity to take another similar picture, experiment using a slower shutter speed and panning the shot. That way the background (grass) gets blurred for a cleaner look.
  • AdeAde Posts: 1,071Member
    @msmoto

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/fantinesfotos/12130738605/sizes/z/

    First time I saw your pic there I thought it was a picture taken aboard the International Space Station. They do use Nikons, after all. :P Nicely done.
  • MsmotoMsmoto Posts: 5,398Moderator
    edited January 2014
    @Ade

    Thanks… I actually shot this for a friend who is a retired pro and last year did a conversion on one of these vans to travel and do some photography. I enjoy the fisheye, but is not always forgiving….

    @spraynpray

    Somehow I wanted to say something like screw…. But, the image is very nice. These always require a lot of setup time and are far more difficult to achieve than most folks think.

    I am wondering what the image would be like on a high key white background with the screws on a glass table floating in air….or, lighting the screws with surround high key lighting but having them on the black…. then later taking out the white and making it all black background. Oh well, I like the shot you took the way it is.
    Post edited by Msmoto on
    Msmoto, mod
  • TaoTeJaredTaoTeJared Posts: 1,306Member
    @Msmoto - it's probably just me, but I think that one would look better cropped in. That space is what fisheye's are made for though!

    @mikep - I would move the top light forward just a bit and a few degrees to the side to knock the shadows out a bit more and move any off center. That is just preference of mine - and nit picky.

    @spraynpray - needs a separation light coming from behind. Could be something as simple as a reflector (or a bit more power if there already). It would add that 3d definition to the object.
    D800, D300, D50(ir converted), FujiX100, Canon G11, Olympus TG2. Nikon lenses - 24mm 2.8, 35mm 1.8, (5 in all)50mm, 60mm, 85mm 1.8, 105vr, 105 f2.5, 180mm 2.8, 70-200vr1, 24-120vr f4. Tokina 12-24mm, 16-28mm, 28-70mm (angenieux design), 300mm f2.8. Sigma 15mm fisheye. Voigtlander R2 (olive) & R2a, Voigt 35mm 2.5, Zeiss 50mm f/2, Leica 90mm f/4. I know I missed something...
  • FlowtographyBerlinFlowtographyBerlin Posts: 477Member
    @spraynpray: Nice idea, nice styling! I agree with @TaoTeJared concerning the separation light. (You can use the snoot for that, so that the light doesn't go anywhere else but the screws, and just gives a tiny contour. You can experiment with the location of the light, from directly behind the motive to slightly off to 45° angle to...) Plus, the reflections would better 'define' the screws if the light source from above was bigger. Since the motive is so small, a maybe 15 x 15 cm would suffice, not much bigger than the footprint of the square shape of the arrangement, and not too far away from the screws either. You can easily do that if you take a small piece of cardboard and have the strobe flash against it. It doesn't matter (or, it's actually better) if your image comes out a little brighter than you want it, you can get a more defined look if you do the final darkening in post, and the effect is easily controllable.

    Then again, we might all be wrong and it looks best the way you shot it. Let us know!

    @msmoto: Your fisheye lens project looks very interesting. Did I understand correctly that you took a cheap DX consumer lens and modified it?
  • MsmotoMsmoto Posts: 5,398Moderator
    @TaoTeJared

    Yes, I should have cropped the edges in to almost the circle.

    @FlowtographyBerlin

    The lens is a AF DX Fisheye-Nikkor 10.5mm f/2.8G ED which has had the lens hood cut off.
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/fantinesfotos/7054108687/in/set-72157630044833773

    This allows the full image on FX as posted.
    Msmoto, mod
  • WestEndBoyWestEndBoy Posts: 1,456Member
    You cut the lens hood off!! That is gutsy, but creative.
  • FlowtographyBerlinFlowtographyBerlin Posts: 477Member
    edited February 2014
    The lens is a AF DX Fisheye-Nikkor 10.5mm f/2.8G ED which has had the lens hood cut off.
    Wow ok, so it's not a cheapskate lens. I'm disappointed. :-) A quite 'courageous' modification, I'd say.
    Post edited by FlowtographyBerlin on
  • MsmotoMsmoto Posts: 5,398Moderator
    edited February 2014
    Actually, one of our members shoots with this lens with a crack in ti and the images are fantastic. It is an extremely nice lens, and the cutting of the lens hood requires some care but is not difficult. If you want full details, check this out from the old forum:

    http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=5507

    One of my first fisheye images: 'Sour Green Apples'

    Gumballs at the Mall

    Really Big: http://www.flickr.com/photos/fantinesfotos/7050923197/sizes/o/in/photostream/
    Post edited by Msmoto on
    Msmoto, mod
  • donaldejosedonaldejose Posts: 3,415Member
    What should I have done different?

    600_1252
  • MsmotoMsmoto Posts: 5,398Moderator
    I might have done it this way:
    Donald's Guest Image 02.01.14
    Msmoto, mod
  • PierrePierre Posts: 360Member
    This thread is turning out to be lots of fun, interresting to see the multitude of interpretation for something 'static'. I have done many perspective adjustment but on this one, the vanishing point that exagerate the twisting of the structure was an important part of the composition for me. There are elements I like in all of your suggestions, definitely to remember.
  • PhotobugPhotobug Posts: 5,751Member
    +1 on the crop proposed by Msmoto. Also prefer the skin tone in Msmoto's picture.
    D750 & D7100 | 24-70 F2.8 G AF-S ED, 70-200 F2.8 AF VR, TC-14E III, TC-1.7EII, 35 F2 AF D, 50mm F1.8G, 105mm G AF-S VR | Backup & Wife's Gear: D5500 & Sony HX50V | 18-140 AF-S ED VR DX, 55-300 AF-S G VR DX |
    |SB-800, Amaran Halo LED Ring light | MB-D16 grip| Gitzo GT3541 + RRS BH-55LR, Gitzo GM2942 + Sirui L-10 | RRS gear | Lowepro, ThinkTank, & Hoodman gear | BosStrap | Vello Freewave Plus wireless Remote, Leica Lens Cleaning Cloth |
  • donaldejosedonaldejose Posts: 3,415Member
    The lighting was blue. Keep it the way it was or warm it up? Keep the image more true to how the band presented themselves or substitute colors you like better? Msmoto's cropping is fine but then you take her out of the contest of the band. Do you want a portrait of a woman singing into a mike or do you want a shot of a band's lead singer with other band members in the background? Choices. Thinking about the choices we made and considering the choices made by others is what this thread is all about which I why I post images here that are subject to different preferences for people to express theirs and show us how they "see" the image.
Sign In or Register to comment.