F/10 shutter speed….
I liked the way the sun was shining through the red leaves and the green above. The wind was blowing so I thought it would be perfect for practicing slow shutter speeds.
Specific Feedback Requested
Does there seem like a good enough movement captured? Does the bokeh look ok or detract? Anything else
Technical Details
Is this a composite: No
Nikon D3400, ISO 100, 1/30, 300mm, f/11
Selectively brought down brightness in some of the white sky areas, brought out saturation and vibrance a little
apani.hill
2 Likes
This one just doesn’t do it for me. I don’t see enough obvious movement and I’m not finding a focus point. The reds need some detail and the polka-dot BG doesn’t work.
I have to agree with Diane on this one. It just looks too haphazard.
Hey @Diane_Miller and @Igor_Doncov thanks for looking and your feedback. Now I know why I wasn’t really sure about it. I posted another one from the same time, I hope to get your thoughts on that too if you don’t mind. It’s a slower shutter speed. It came out brighter, so I had to adjust the brightness and exposure slightly, I also did a slight crop…thanks!
I agree with @Igor_Doncov & @Diane_Miller about the initial post.
But I like the repost. Lots more movement and the leading diagonal lines may be for an exciting composition.
Maybe pulling back on the exposure would give the image a more affluent feel of the color, but remember, I’m the one where proper color is invisible.
Namaste
Much more interesting. Note I didn’t say “better”. Why is it more interesting? It has strong diagonals and smaller details that engage the viewer. Like @paul_g_wiegman, I would prefer stronger color and/or lower exposure, if the capture will support it without pushing things too far.
Thinking in terms of “better” or “liking” is too simplified. Some people will “like” an image that others feel is dreadful. I like some (not all, but some) images that critics have panned for being simplistically emotional, shallow, copycat, etc etc, and I completely despise some (not all, but some) that have made some photographers very well-known. But those are two ends of a spectrum and in between it’s possible to develop reasonably mature taste. We all have a tendency to love the images we have made, but we need to learn to separate our emotional attachment from the structure and presentation that other viewers will see.
Instead of taking a poll, we all need to think first about the kind of strong and weak points we see described in the critiques here, and try to think about how those relate to our own images. It helps to work up different versions or compare similar shots like the two above, and think about the ways they compare. Then in a post you have a stronger basis to ask more specifically about those points for which you have doubts. And certainly someone will often point out something you overlooked, but you then have a starting point of a more comprehensive view of the image to work from.
It’s better to live with an image for a while and come back to it a few days or weeks later with fresher eyes, then ask questions about it. You may find you can answer a lot of them yourself.
1 Like
I do like the second image more.
I found Diane’s comments very interesting. She made the distinction between better and different. With respect to your image I think she meant that you replaced one image with a different image. It’s a better image but is not an improvement on the original. It’s just a different image.
I also found Diane’s comments interesting. Particularly [quote=“Diane_Miller, post:6, topic:24726”]
But those are two ends of a spectrum and in between it’s possible to develop reasonably mature taste.
Every photograph has a story; some are as simple as little Sally’s first birthday, to the intense imagery of Joel-Peter Witkin. Sally’s parents are convinced it’s the best photograph ever taken, and many find Witkin not worth the paper on which it’s printed or worse. Witkin has had exhibitions all over the world, and Sally’s picture is in a shoebox.
She adds that it’s important to [quote=“Diane_Miller, post:6, topic:24726”]
live with an image
[/quote] and see what you think, days, weeks, or years later.
It’s illuminating how your work changes and matures over time.
I got a bit wordy, but was basically trying to avoid saying if I “LIKE” an image. (If you want likes, go to Facebook, but remember that people will only like your stuff because you like theirs.) Certainly I like some images and hate others, and other people will differ, often strongly. But most people (and I’d bet virtually everyone here) will try to look at why they initially have a strong reaction to an image – let’s say strong reaction instead of like or not like. And then ask why they had that reaction and does it say anything that the maker might find useful.
But I’m as guilty as anyone about opening a comment with “Wow – I love this image!” Then I try to say why and see if there is anything else to say. If an image doesn’t grab me, or has already had everything said about it, I won’t have much to say and probably won’t respond. Or maybe I just got an email that commands my attention and I never got back to the image. Or my husband just came in and announced it’s Happy Hour. We’re all busy.
