ClubSNAP Photography Forums

Go Back   ClubSNAP Photography Forums > Photo Galleries > Critique Corner

Notices

Critique Corner Post your image in here to get serious and honest feedback from fellow photographers. Please read FAQ before posting.


 
Thread Tools
Old 3rd December 2008   #1
Slyanius
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 66
Default Forsaken

Hi,

first time posting in the Critique Corner.

I saw this lonely forgotten football while talking a walk with my new D90. Love the texture on the ball and the "forsaken" feeling it gave me. I feel that the "flap" peeling off the ball might be a tad distracting but decided to leave it in as it gaves the ball more character.

Totally no post-processing was done on this shot.




1. in what area is critique to be sought?
Everything and anything!

2. what one hopes to achieve with the piece of work?
Is the "forsaken" feeling strong enough?

3. under what circumstance is the picture taken? (physical conditions/emotions)
This pic was taken under harsh sunlight, at -2.0EV.
Slyanius is offline  
Old 3rd December 2008   #2
pfurr
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 327
Default Re: Forsaken

could have done w a shallower dof to emphasize the isolation and forsakeness of the ball.
for pp-ing i think it'll do great w a gritty noisy black and white or duotone colours.
__________________
my tumblr!
pfurr is offline  
Old 3rd December 2008   #3
wyred
Member
 
wyred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: AMK
Posts: 56
Default Re: Forsaken

A shallow dof as pfurr has mentioned, and I'm thinking perhaps a much lower angle (?). Less of the ground and more of the sky.
__________________
Nikon D80 - 18-55mm
Flickr | DeviantArt

Last edited by wyred; 3rd December 2008 at 12:23 PM.
wyred is offline  
Sponsored Link
Old 3rd December 2008   #4
aselley
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Singapore
Posts: 401
Default Re: Forsaken

Agree on the DOF but wonder how it would look with less sky and maybe more ground...make it look totally alone in a wide open and un-ending space?

Seeing it desaturated would maybe improve the sense of old.
__________________
Canon 400D + BG-E3 . EF-S 17-85mm 4-5.6 IS . EF 75-300mm 4-5.6 IS
http://aselley.zenfolio.com/
aselley is offline  
Old 3rd December 2008   #5
Slyanius
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 66
Default Re: Forsaken

Thanks for the feedback. Maybe one of these days I'll track back to that location and reshoot the ball. It might not be easy to get more sky though. As it is I already had to kneel, squat and almost lie down on the rough tarmac with painful pebbles(ouch!) to get this shot.
Slyanius is offline  
Old 3rd December 2008   #6
wildsoyabean
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 694
Default Re: Forsaken

try black and white for the isolation feeling? and a tighter crop or go lower?

feel that the hdb buildings quite a distraction
wildsoyabean is offline  
Old 3rd December 2008   #7
wyred
Member
 
wyred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: AMK
Posts: 56
Default Re: Forsaken

Originally Posted by aselley View Post
Agree on the DOF but wonder how it would look with less sky and maybe more ground...make it look totally alone in a wide open and un-ending space?

Seeing it desaturated would maybe improve the sense of old.
You're right. After thinking about it, more sky will give the feeling of being lost/helplessness. Whereas more ground will make it look lonely/ignored.
__________________
Nikon D80 - 18-55mm
Flickr | DeviantArt
wyred is offline  
Old 3rd December 2008   #8
aosis
Member
 
aosis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 572
Default Re: Forsaken

maybe u can change it to B&W and darken some areas and make it like the first scene of "Kungfu" where Stephen Chow obsoleted "Shao Lin Soccer".
__________________
My Shutterstock Images
aosis is offline  
Old 4th December 2008   #9
Slyanius
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 66
Default Re: Forsaken

I still haven't found the time to redo this shot, but I've a question. Will shooting the same image with a wide-angle lense have a better effect?
Slyanius is offline  
Old 4th December 2008   #10
m3lv1nh0
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Serangoon North
Posts: 2,040
Default Re: Forsaken

Yes, an UWA will help.. maybe 10mm? Also, lied down on the floor and shoot at eye level with the ball.. almost like we are looking from the ball's point of view.. if that make any sense.
__________________
Weddings . Blog . Facebook
m3lv1nh0 is offline  
Old 5th December 2008   #11
kritikosN1
Deregistered
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 31
Default Re: Forsaken

The photo need more depth.

The ball could have look better with a little fill.

This shot could have been done better at a distance(100mm++) to narrow down the background.

3/10
kritikosN1 is offline  
Old 6th December 2008   #12
nigel84
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 802
Default Re: Forsaken

Originally Posted by Slyanius View Post
I still haven't found the time to redo this shot, but I've a question. Will shooting the same image with a wide-angle lense have a better effect?
Yes, shooting with a wide angle is much agreed, however you might also follow what melvin had said below

Originally Posted by m3lv1nh0 View Post
Yes, an UWA will help.. maybe 10mm? Also, lied down on the floor and shoot at eye level with the ball.. almost like we are looking from the ball's point of view.. if that make any sense.
Originally Posted by kritikosN1 View Post
The photo need more depth.

The ball could have look better with a little fill.

This shot could have been done better at a distance(100mm++) to narrow down the background.

3/10
Krit, just as i was browsing along all other threads, i realized that you have an interesting point system that you would dish out to TS-ers. May i ask, how you gauge and benchmark those pics? To you, what is considered a 8/10 pic and wats a 5/10 pic? Since nothing is perfect, i would not ask whats 10/10.
__________________
My Humble Flickr --> The pavement of my thoughts
nigel84 is offline  
Old 6th December 2008   #13
Slyanius
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 66
Default Re: Forsaken

Thanks for all the valuable comments. I kinda figured that shooting with a wide angle will be better, but I only have the kit lense(18-105) at the moment. About lying on the floor... I'll try that as soon as I find the time to go back to that location. The angle I shoot the ball already requires me to either use liveview or shoot blindly.

One thing I learnt on that shooting trip... wear more rugged clothing and prepare lots of insect repellent.
Slyanius is offline  
Old 7th December 2008   #14
frametology
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Upper Thomson
Posts: 400
Default Re: Forsaken

Originally Posted by nigel84 View Post
Krit, just as i was browsing along all other threads, i realized that you have an interesting point system that you would dish out to TS-ers. May i ask, how you gauge and benchmark those pics? To you, what is considered a 8/10 pic and wats a 5/10 pic? Since nothing is perfect, i would not ask whats 10/10.
yes, i would like to know too. you seem overly critical of people's postings. so what's an 8/10 shot for you?
frametology is offline  
Old 7th December 2008   #15
writing with light
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 146
Default Re: Forsaken

I know that I am going offtrack here, maybe Krit can post a photo taken by himself in the critique corner in which he feels is 10/10. Sometimes its better to show ppl that you can walk the talk before you can give these kind of critiques, just like ppl like Night86mare, who post high quality photos. These are ppl that I feel have the right to give proper critiques.
__________________
Leica IIIa [Skopar 25mm, Jupiter 8, Industar 61, Jupiter 11,], canonetql17, Himatic7sII
writing with light is offline  
Old 7th December 2008   #16
frametology
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Upper Thomson
Posts: 400
Default Re: Forsaken

Originally Posted by writing with light View Post
I know that I am going offtrack here, maybe Krit can post a photo taken by himself in the critique corner in which he feels is 10/10. Sometimes its better to show ppl that you can walk the talk before you can give these kind of critiques, just like ppl like Night86mare, who post high quality photos. These are ppl that I feel have the right to give proper critiques.
yes to the first part. and no to the second.

you can be a great photographer, but that doesn't mean you'll give great critics. you need to feel enough for the photo before you can actually comment on it. and face it, not every picture makes you want to post a reply right?

oh, i'm not saying nightmare isn't good ah. i'm speaking in general. haha.
frametology is offline  
Old 7th December 2008   #17
kritikosN1
Deregistered
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 31
Default Re: Forsaken

Quote:
Krit, just as i was browsing along all other threads, i realized that you have an interesting point system that you would dish out to TS-ers. May i ask, how you gauge and benchmark those pics? To you, what is considered a 8/10 pic and wats a 5/10 pic? Since nothing is perfect, i would not ask whats 10/10.
The score is an average of atleast 2 person and rounded to the nearest whole.

Writeup's Purpose(Crafted) or Memo(Crafted) is out of 4
- If you write a dramatic english novel but we cannot see it, you get a 0. If your photo got no purpose, you get a 0. Stay simple and truthful you might still score in this part.
Originiality(Crafted) or Luck(Candid) is out of 5
- This is the hardest part to score.
Bonus marks of 1 for full manual aka film on pre 1988 camera.
- Only after you manage to get a 4/9 from the top.

For example, this picture manage to score 3 for purpose.

Forget to add...
Instant zero(or maybe 1-2)
Obvious mimic.
Shooting at mode other than M,A,T(S)
Photos that makes you press your palm on your face.

Last edited by kritikosN1; 7th December 2008 at 04:07 PM.
kritikosN1 is offline  
Old 7th December 2008   #18
Slyanius
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 66
Default Re: Forsaken

Going OT mself... still no time to reshoot the ball.

Looks like a few of CSians are using my thread to talk about Krit's harsh ratings. I did a search on his previous comments in other threads and none of it was pretty. If anyone did anything right, he would brush it off as "luck, or attribute of the lense, not skill" .

Seriously dude, relax. Photography is not a religion. I had fun taking that photo. I'm sure the other posters had fun taking their photos too. If I were to grade someone's photos, one category would be:

"How much fun did you have while taking this photo?"

If you had fun, well done!
Slyanius is offline  
Old 7th December 2008   #19
PyeeL
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 609
Default Re: Forsaken

True, I agree Photography for most of us is about fun.
But then again, Bokeh is really an attribute of the lens!
PyeeL is offline  
Old 7th December 2008   #20
Slyanius
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 66
Default Re: Forsaken

Originally Posted by PyeeL View Post
True, I agree Photography for most of us is about fun.
But then again, Bokeh is really an attribute of the lens!
Not if the user doesn't know how to control the aperture.
Slyanius is offline  
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +8. The time now is 09:47 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2002 - 2009 ClubSNAP.com
Page generated in 0.13383 seconds with 7 queries