CRITIQUE #9

Discussions on Equipment, Locations and Tips for getting the photograps you want of Vermont scenes.Note: You must be registered in order to post. If you have trouble registering, use the contact us form on Scenes of Vermont's home page.

Moderators: bm, Andy, admin

Andy
Site Admin
Posts: 1493
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2005 12:01 am
Location: Saginaw, Michigan
Contact:

CRITIQUE #9

Postby Andy » Sat Dec 24, 2011 1:06 pm

I drove by this scene every morning this summer as our main expressway was closed for rebuilding of a bridge. I was intrigued enough by the scene that I finally got down there early one Saturday morning to shoot some images. This is in the old part of downtown Saginaw, which is one of those old, Midwestern cities that everyone has abandoned for the burbs

In keeping with my philosophy for this Critique Thread, this is an image I am not wholly satisfied with. Architectural photography has never been my forte, and for sure, I do not/did not have the kind of equipment that might have made the compositional aspects of this image easier (like Tilt and Shift). I "cleaned up" some areas using content aware fill, and sharpened the image.

I find myself wondering if this is one of those images that I should just trash. Would be interested in comments.

Image
Andy

If it sounds too good to be true, its probably . . . .


deaner1971
Posts: 443
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 12:01 am

Re: CRITIQUE #9

Postby deaner1971 » Tue Dec 27, 2011 8:21 am

Andy,

Thanks for sharing something in a new direction.

It is a really difficult image because this is one of those images that is probably so interesting in person and you feel like there has to be a picture there but, you just cannot make it all fit as well as you would like.

I feel like it needs a crop but I also see that you likely need to get at least one end of the columns to show that they are, in fact, columns. That leaves you with quite a bit of stagnant space either high or low.

Really difficult shot to get just the right composition.

abby
Moderator
Posts: 1802
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 12:01 am
Location: southeast massachusetts
Contact:

Re: CRITIQUE #9

Postby abby » Tue Dec 27, 2011 10:15 am

Hi Andy,
Architecture photography is not my thing either. Each year the category architecture comes up in camera club competitions, and I don't submit for that category. For one thing, it's probably because it doesn't interest me that much.
I agree with what Dean has written about this scene. I tried a different crop and I will post it here.....because you have given prior permission to do so with all of your images. I cropped from the top. I felt the bottom of the image was stronger than the top. I like the shape of the base of the column on the right. I felt there was perhaps too much column showing on the left, so I cropped it from the left and I also brightened that column and I brightened the forefront just a smidge. Here it is:
Image
Thanks for sharing this image and I'd be interested in seeing what others might do to improve it, if anything.
Carol

autzig
Posts: 443
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2005 12:01 am
Location: Bloomington, MN
Contact:

Re: CRITIQUE #9

Postby autzig » Wed Dec 28, 2011 6:03 pm

Trust your instincts Andy. I think this is an image you should trash. It is an interesting concept to frame the church with the granite pillars but it doesn't work for me. First, the pillars make up 70% of the image. To be sure, there is nice light on them, but the subject is clearly the church and it only takes up about 15-20% of the frame. There is too much sky and the foreground is just negative space. Additionally, the door is in the shadow. I think I would want the door to be lit, rather than the roof, even if there are some interesting spires.

So there's my 2 cents worth.

Al

Andy
Site Admin
Posts: 1493
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2005 12:01 am
Location: Saginaw, Michigan
Contact:

Re: CRITIQUE #9

Postby Andy » Thu Dec 29, 2011 11:16 am

LOL, Al! Thats one of the things I love about our friendship. Think your comment just about says it all. Back in "the day" I would have been just to the point of dropping the k-chrome slide into the wastebasket (I can hear my wife saying -- "you are wasting ALL of those?") -- but I thought it might be a good one to put up here for "critique."

Dean, thanks for trying to be soften the blow, but I think that might be exactly what you are saying, too :lol: .

I do appreciate the "why" comments, as I think it is instructional. And, since this is a critique forum, I plan to continue to put up some of these "iffy" images over time. To me, it doesn't make sense to put up an image that I think is pretty darn good, just to get the "nice image" comments. In EVERY other forum I participate on that is what happens. The so-called "critique" forums are really "showcase" forums. This is a good format.

Carol: On my computer, your "crop" says "content protected by owner" and shows a little "padlock." Apropos of your smart-ass comment to me earlier on in this thread, I like it, but I think the padlock suffers from "bullseye" syndrome. Seriously, I would like to see your suggested crop -- if you can figure out how to unlock it.

Thanks for the critique. I'll look for more in the future.
Andy

If it sounds too good to be true, its probably . . . .

deaner1971
Posts: 443
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 12:01 am

Re: CRITIQUE #9

Postby deaner1971 » Thu Dec 29, 2011 12:33 pm

Yeah, I was pretty much saying the same thing but also offer my commiseration as I have a ton of those shots where, in real life you loved looking at it, you felt compelled to record it and thought you would eventually find a way to make it work and now it sits in your HDD as a lingering frustration.

I have tons of these and just need to bite the bullet and delete them but I'll never stop shooting them as I believe I learn more from the shots that end up not working than from those that need 5 minutes of PP and I am done. Some of them still get opened every few weeks, I try a new tweak, assure myself that they are unfixable and then save them unchanged to tilt at that particular windmill some day in the future. Probably be best to delete them to prevent future wastes of time so maybe I'll bring them on a portable HDD when I come to VT next and Al can zap them for me. :D

abby
Moderator
Posts: 1802
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 12:01 am
Location: southeast massachusetts
Contact:

Re: CRITIQUE #9

Postby abby » Thu Dec 29, 2011 6:00 pm

Hi Andy,
Oops. Sorry about the padlock. I unlocked it. Here it is:
Image
Carol
Last edited by abby on Fri Dec 30, 2011 5:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

autzig
Posts: 443
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2005 12:01 am
Location: Bloomington, MN
Contact:

Re: CRITIQUE #9

Postby autzig » Thu Dec 29, 2011 6:07 pm

Carol, the images are still locked.

Al

autzig
Posts: 443
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2005 12:01 am
Location: Bloomington, MN
Contact:

Re: CRITIQUE #9

Postby autzig » Thu Dec 29, 2011 7:04 pm

Congratulations Carol, you made a marginal image better. Unfortunately, I don't think it was enough to salvage it from Andy's trashcan.

Al

abby
Moderator
Posts: 1802
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 12:01 am
Location: southeast massachusetts
Contact:

Re: CRITIQUE #9

Postby abby » Thu Dec 29, 2011 7:08 pm

I LOVE your honesty Al!!! :P
Keep posting the not so great ones Andy. I agree.....why post the ones you already know are keepers.I'll post some too. I *might* be able to find one of mine to post as well. :wink: :wink: :lol:
Carol

Andy
Site Admin
Posts: 1493
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2005 12:01 am
Location: Saginaw, Michigan
Contact:

Re: CRITIQUE #9

Postby Andy » Sat Dec 31, 2011 12:38 pm

Here is a quote from critique #8: Sometimes in an image, we have different possible “subjects” competing for attention. That gives the photo a vaguely unsettled feeling for me. In this case, it is hard to tell whether the fence or the trees are supposed to be the subject. The other “elements” of the image should then be complimentary – but not overpowering.

Guess who said it :)? The process of writing a critique has, for me, an additional effect of forcing me to think about my own images and my own approach to imagery. The above quote could certainly be applied to the image here. The columns themselves might make a good photographic subject. The Museum (which used to be the Saginaw City Library and now houses the Saginaw County Historical Society) can obviously also be a subject. The two obviously compete for the viewer's attention here in a pretty lame composition attempt. What I need to learn to do, as my friend and mentor, James Moore, would say, is learn this thought process while standing behind the lens!
Andy

If it sounds too good to be true, its probably . . . .



Return to “Vermont Photography Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests