The Kitchen

[gparr]

Kelby,
The posted image is so small it's very difficult to evaluate. It appears to be a well executed image with a very nice composition. Your horizon line is not splitting the frame and you're putting attention on the sky, which is where it should be in this shot. The cloud and color reflections in the water are very pleasing. What's bothering me is the top third of the frame. If that's the moon (I truly can't tell), I wouldn't change a thing about this image. If not, I would crop down to just above the large cloud because that white spot is a distraction. The horizon line also suggests some barrel distortion in the lens. Not something you can control, but a minor distraction.
Gary

 

[gparr]

Dave,
For a lot of obvious reasons, it is preferred to not photograph in the middle of a sunny day. For flowers, it's primarily because the lighting is harsh and it really destroys the delicacy of the petals. However, many flowers are only open in the middle of the day. Therefore, you need to use some type of diffusing device to soften the light.

In general, you had success with this shot, in spite of the light and it's not a bad image to view.

Some things that would improve it:
--A diffuser would soften the light, allow you to bring out petal (bracts in this case) detail, prevent blowing out the yellow in the bracts, and bring out better detail in the center
--You clipped the petal/bract tips at the bottom. Back up a bit, include the entire bloom, and give it some space in the frame
--Two ways you can go with the composition. You can use the rule of thirds by backing up, using the stem, and placing the bloom in the top third of the frame. Or, as you attempted here, you can use what I call the target composition. That is to place the bloom in the center of the frame and crop the image square, with a little space around the bloom. Either approach is effective.
--Your background is very distracting. It would have been nice if the background was all sky and clouds or some undefined/OOF building wall or foliate. Splitting a delicate flower with a solid manmade structure detracts from the bloom.
--Watch your edges. Whatever that is just below and to the right of the bloom should either be removed or included. It keeps pulling my eye away from the bloom because I want to know what it is.

Gary

 

[gparr]

This is an interesting shot. One thing is for sure--If you are outdoors with a camera and see "God rays," capture them. They always make a nice image.

I don't know if you did it intentionally or not, but this is an interesting composition that shouldn't work, but kinda does. You have a very heavy bottom third that should dominate the frame, but you added so much clean sky that you offset the heaviness and balanced it. At the moment I write this, I'm rather enjoying the shot.

Were I to shoot the same scene, I would have never considered what you did. I would have shot a horizontal image with just a sliver of ground, kept the cloud bank in the bottom half, and let the rays fill the top half to the top cloud. It would have been much more conventional than what you did.

You've expanded my horizons a bit so thanks for that.

Gary

 

[revhtree Verified Admin]

Gary just want to say thanks for taking the time to critique these photos. It's not an easy task considering how active this thread has been. Thank you.

 

[gparr]

Thanks. Glad to do it and I learn things.
Gary

 

[Anthrax15]

Thank you for the advice Gary! Is the editing done ok for that picture? I used Lighroom 3.

Another.


IMG_0759-2 by Anthrax15, on Flickr

 

[gparr]

With this upgrade I can't get to the code for posts so that I can't include the image with my comments. Posters in this thread will have to adjust until I can figure out an alternative. Irritating.

Anthrax,
The processing in the rays image seemed fine. You could try to mess with the contrast a bit to bring out the rays more, but it looks like it's going to get grainy/noisy if you do very much, and it's a rather contrasty image to start. You also might work to bring out a little more detail in the cloud bank.

Regarding your B&W of the man, it's not immediately obvious what you're trying to say with the image. I feel that the man should be relating to something else in the frame, but it's not clear what that is. If you just wanted to show a profile of a person but use en extreme composition, I suppose it would work if the man dominated the image. But he doesn't. The background is too in focus and the trees actually dominate the image. I'd be curious to see this same approach with a much less dominating background.

Also, the vignetting is much too heavy and very distracting. I'm not sure why you did it at all. Vignetting can be effective, but it takes a gentle approach and can be quickly overdone.

Gary

 

[clowns101]

Hey Gary, here's another image I'd like to get some advice on:

There are some spots in the back that are over highlighted, I had my camera set for proper exposure, and this is the result I got after I edited the image in Cs5. I didn't adjust the highlighted tones at all.

Also, I have the canon 430 EXii and a Impact umbrella set that I use. I want to use fill flash on my pictures to bring light into the eyes. However, most of the places I use to take pictures, is hard to get to, and around water where my flash could easily get wet.

Aside from using a reflector, what else is there I could do to bring light into the eyes? When I tried using the flash on the hot shoe, the lighting was to direct, and blew out to many details, same with the on camera flash.

Thanks for all of the advice again.

 

[Brad Syphus]

I need tips and ideas.

 

[gparr]

Sorry Brad, I don't have a way to include the full-sized image in this post for easy reference.

The fish is well exposed and rather sharp. Just a small touch of blur in the fish, but sufficiently sharp enough. I think you'd be much happier with your fish images if you'd fill the frame more with the fish. There are too many distractions such as the partial fish in the upper left, and the bright coral areas in the bottom and at the right. Those brighter areas all try to pull the eye away from the fish. Try to shoot in areas that have more consistent/darker backgrounds. There's lots of debris in the water that needs to be cloned out. You'd also be happier with this shot if the fish was parallel to the camera or swimming slightly toward it. With its snout headed away from the camera it looks like you missed the shot. In general, your shots are very good, though they tend toward the dark side. Your skills are sufficient enough that you need to work on filling that frame. Once you develop that ability, your images will be much more captivating.
Gary

 

[Brad Syphus]

Thank you Gary. I remember that you had told me about my pictures needing to be brighter. I have been trying to work on this. Thank you for taking the time in helping us all. And now I have more to work on.:wink:

 

[gparr]

Sorry, Austin. Didn't see this one.

It appears to be in focus, so that's an excellent start. The blown highlights in the background are a distraction. Seems that a different angle would have eliminated them. The biggest issue with this one is the one you've pointed out--she looks dull and you need to either reflect some light onto her or use fill flash. Assuming you have an assistant, my first choice would have been a reflector, probably silver.

I don't understand why on-camera fill flash (not from the built-in flash. yuk!) caused so many problems. Fill flash is not a full blast from the flash. It's a much smaller burst. Did you have the flash on a manual setting or use it's automated fill flash setting (not necessarily preferred)? Experiment with your flash in your hours of boredom and figure out what settings work best in what backlit conditions.

I like the way you've framed her with the rocks and your DOF choice, though I might have blurred the background just a bit more. All of that action is better defined than I care for.

I'm not a big fan of the 3/4 pose you chose for this subject. She doesn't really have the body or the attire to make that pose flattering. You might be happier with a head-to-chest pose. Less body in the shot would also put more emphasis on her face.

If I'm doing people photos to show clothing or an attractive body I, obviously, include as much of the body as possible. If I'm doing a portrait because I want the viewer to connect with the person, I generally want the face to dominate the frame. A chest-to-head shot would be very flattering for this one, particularly with that beautiful hair.

Do some posing research. There are many ways to pose "larger" women such that you de-emphasize their size and bring out their attractive features. She has very nice face and hair. Use those features to make an attractive portrait. Posing and photographing women is a very challenging aspect of the hobby. Study what the pros do and practice. Your subjects will appreciate the extra effort to bring out their good features and hide the rest. It's a rare woman that doesn't have good features that will make a beautiful photograph. It's also a relatively rare photographer who can consistently deliver good female photographs, regardless of the subject. That's why the pros get paid the big dollars.

Men, in general, don't give a rat's behind and basically just want the photo session to end. However, the same principles of posing generally apply to men, though the lighting is much different. Head to the library. There are many photography books that can help you with this type of portraiture.

Another small item: When hands are on hips, keep the fingers together. It's much more attractive.

Gary

 

[acolbert]

Tuna by Alex

Here's an image from a restaurant shoot I had earlier this year.

Let me have it Gary!

 

[clowns101]

Thanks Gary.

I haven't got a reflector yet, I really need to get one. However, a lot of people have told me to go with a gold reflector to make their skin warm. Is there a preference?

I had the camera flash set on 1/32 power. I have been messing around with the flash in my hours of boredom...now that basketball has started, I'm not as bored, lol.

Is there any good posing books out there? I have one, and it's OK, I recently got another one from a friend, it talks about extremely weird ways to pose people. Any suggestions would be great.

 

[gparr]

Austin,
A standard 5-in-1 reflector will give you silver, gold, silver/gold mix, white, black, and a diffuser. They come in several diameters.
Photoflex MultiDisc Circular Reflector, 5 Surfaces, DL-32MULTI

I suggested silver for this shot because I was looking for a little sparkle. She's already more than warm enough. You have to play with reflecting surfaces in different lighting conditions to see what gives the most flattering appearance.

Tough to help you with fill flash because I can't be there to see the situation. You'll just have to practice. You're fortunate in that you seem to have several willing models. Use them to learn.

I don't know any current titles. Just go to the library. There will be a ton of them--portraiture, fashion photography, weddings, blah, blah, blah. Check out a few and study the techniques. Study the work in the People and Wedding forums at fredmiranda.com: Specialized in Canon - Nikon SLR Cameras, Forum, Photoshop Plugins, Actions, Reviews, Hosting and Digital Darkroom. Buy fashion and fashion photography magazines.

When you study and emulate the work of others, don't become a slave to their styles. Evaluate your results, keep what you like, and reject what you don't like. Develop your own style.

Gary

 

[gparr]

Alex,
Photographically, this image needs some help. Your DOF is much too shallow, rendering only the top beet (I assume their beets) cubes in focus. Even those are not particularly sharp. The rest of the image is out of focus and basically makes it of no value. Your lighting is much too harsh, generating blown highlights and making the food look unappetizing. I'm smelling handheld on an automatic setting?

I'm not a food photographer, but I have had some exposure to food photography when I was editor at a company that published a couple of food magazines. Food photography is difficult to do well. If you're going to do it, soft boxes and diffusers are critical tools. There is an art and a science to photographing food and you need someone who knows how to "plate" food in an attractive way. An unattractive plate photographed well is not of much value. If you're going to try to have your food photos published, there are some specific rules that govern what you can and can't do to food to make it attractive. You'll have to learn those rules because if they're not followed you won't get published.

Before you do all of that, you need to work on your photography fundamentals so that you can at least get your subject in focus.

Gary

 

[butts182]

gary, can you recommend a good zoom lens for scenic or landscape pictures? thanks.

 

[icedgxe]

Taken with my point and shoot.

 

[gparr]

gary, can you recommend a good zoom lens for scenic or landscape pictures? thanks.

Assuming Canon: 17-40L

 

[gparr]

I'm glad you were "there" with a camera to capture this shot. Beautiful flowers with an insect on them rarely fail to please the eye. Given what I'm sure were restrictions inherent in using a P&S camera (primarily lens "reach") you did a nice job of composing this image. You had nice even lighting and, as a result, achieved a good exposure.

The image isn't as sharp as it could be, even with a P&S camera. I'm confident that there was a bit of camera movement when you pushed the shutter button, causing the slight blurring. Even for P&S cameras, a tripod is a plus.

The biggest issue I have with this image is something you can control. I find the dark leafs surrounding the flower to be distracting and they certainly aren't contributing to the image. My suggestion for a better composition and a stronger overall image is to crop them out and present an image frame filled with the bloom (see below). I also did some minor levels and curves adjustments to put some life in the flower.

Gary