Got a thin skin? Then look elsewhere. Post a link to an image that you've made, and invite others to offer their critiques. Honesty is encouraged, but please be positive in your constructive criticism. Flaming and just plain nastiness will not be tolerated. Please note that this is not an area for you to showcase your images, nor is this a place for you to show-off where you have been. This is an area for you to post images so that you may share with us a technique that you have mastered, or are trying to master. Typically, no more than about four images should be posted in any one post or thread, and the maximum size of any side of any image should not exceed 950 px.
Moderators: Greg B, Nnnnsic, Geoff, Glen, gstark, Moderators
Forum rules
Please note that image critiquing is a matter of give and take: if you post images for critique, and you then expect to receive criticism, then it is also reasonable, fair and appropriate that, in return, you post your critique of the images of other members here as a matter of courtesy. So please do offer your critique of the images of others; your opinion is important, and will help everyone here enjoy their visit to far greater extent.
Also please note that, unless you state something to the contrary, other members might attempt to repost your image with their own post processing applied. We see this as an acceptable form of critique, but should you prefer that others not modify your work, this is perfectly ok, and you should state this, either within your post, or within your signature.
Images posted here should conform with the general forum guidelines. Image sizes should not exceed 950 pixels along the largest side (height or width) and typically no more than four images per post or thread.
Please also ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is.
by Mr Darcy on Tue Nov 14, 2006 9:15 am
I have been playing with reflections in my images of late.
These are a some of my better results.
All are taken with a D70s with the 18-200VR. Since I bought it, it hasn't left the camera. I am beginning to wonder why I have an SLR.
The only PP was to convert the RAW images to JPG, with some exposure adjustment along the way, though they are mostly as shot.
The first image uses the reflection to highlight the isolation of the figure in the foreground
In this case the image is the reflection. The mirror was a polished stone wall. The low exposure and gritty texture of the wall lend a "covert operation" feel to the image.
This image uses the same wall as a mirror. This time though, the texture of the wall is more in evidence. Combined with the clouds, it creates a feeling of snow in the air (it was actually quite warm)
Here I have used glass as a mirror. This allows for multiple layers in the image. There are the shoes in the foreground, their reflections, then the viewer, then finally the background all adding to the complexity of the images. The most subtle is the third, though I think that the second is the most powerful.
Finally, I find this a disturbing image. It reads as an advertising image, and at the same time as the opposite. THe result is quite uneasy, but powerful
Regards GregK
-

Mr Darcy
- Senior Member
-
- Posts: 3414
- Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 11:35 pm
- Location: The somewhat singed and blackened Blue Mountains
by gstark on Tue Nov 14, 2006 9:42 am
Greg,
I love the first of these.
Ordinarily, I'd say having the subject looking "out" of the image, as is the case here, is not a good idea, but in this case you've broken this rule to good effect.
With the subject facing as he is, this just adds to his apparent isolation and almost adds a touch of loneliness to the image.
By way of contrast, the second image seems to suffer, at least for me, from some sort of optical interference. I'm unsure if this is as a result of your PP, or moisture on the lens, or .... ??
But I'm seeing perhaps some exposure adjustment around the head of the gentle on the left, and none of this on the other gentleman. I'm guessing that this image may have been shot through the branches of a tree, and what I'm seeing is the results of some OOF branches impeding the view. For me it doesn't really work.
Image 3 has an almost painterly feel to it; I'm thinking French Impressionism perhaps? Shame the merry-go-round was closed and unilluminated; that would have made this image into a gem.
As an aside, and for your future reference, could you please note that it's best to include a smaller number of images in your post, and/or in any one thread. As a guide, four would be the maximum under normal circumstances. Please take a moment to review the FAQ for more details.
Keep up the good work, and let's see more of it.
g. Gary Stark Nikon, Canon, Bronica .... stuff The people who want English to be the official language of the United States are uncomfortable with their leaders being fluent in it - US Pres. Bartlet
-

gstark
- Site Admin
-
- Posts: 22924
- Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 11:41 pm
- Location: Bondi, NSW
by Mr Darcy on Tue Nov 14, 2006 10:12 am
Sorry.
I did read the FAQ, but must have missed the limit of 4 photos per post. Will comply in future.
Oops. Correction. I didn't read the FAQ. I read the Sticky "How to Post".
The second shot had no PP, except for conversion from raw. The uneven lighting came from the shadows both on the wall and the subject. I tried "correcting" the exposure PP, but everything I tried reduced the impact of the
composition for me. It became a very ordinary shot of two people on a bench. The photo works for me BECAUSE it is badly exposed.
Thanks for the critique.
Greg
-

Mr Darcy
- Senior Member
-
- Posts: 3414
- Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 11:35 pm
- Location: The somewhat singed and blackened Blue Mountains
Return to Image Reviews and Critiques
|