Critique please of my recent work :)

barratt1988

barratt1988

Messages
1,013
Name
Phill
Edit My Images
No
Hey,

I wanted to upload some of my recent work and get peoples opinions of the sort of work I do. don't be shy :)

Thanks

___________

7K1_0169_E_.jpg


7K1_0054_E_.jpg


7K1_0048_E_.jpg


7K1_0282_E_.jpg


7K1_0278_E_.jpg


7K1_0278_B_W_E_.jpg
 
Its purely personal but I have a pet hate of water being smoothed out due to long exposure to make it look "creamy". So many people do it its become naff and rarely do you see a photo where the water looks natural, ie individual droplets. Ok some cameras won't do 1/8000 sec so its understandable in that case not to be able to do it, but at even 1/4000 sec should produce a reasonable shot
 
realspeed said:
Its purely personal but I have a pet hate of water being smoothed out due to long exposure to make it look "creamy". So many people do it its become naff and rarely do you see a photo where the water looks natural, ie individual droplets. Ok some cameras won't do 1/8000 sec so its understandable in that case not to be able to do it, but at even 1/4000 sec should produce a reasonable shot
Click to expand...

Obviously your opinion is valid but if I wanted that sort of shot I could never have achoeved it anyways. The show was taken at f8 without any nds. I dont agree the lighting is flat but there wasnt much of it around. Id have needed to be in silly iso ranges to get anywhere nearto that sort of speed
 
barratt1988 said:
Obviously your opinion is valid but if I wanted that sort of shot I could never have achoeved it anyways. The show was taken at f8 without any nds. I dont agree the lighting is flat but there wasnt much of it around. Id have needed to be in silly iso ranges to get anywhere nearto that sort of speed
Click to expand...

I never said anything about lighting being flat. As for shutter speed this is where a higher up the camera range benefits
 
Last edited:
realspeed said:
I never said anything about lighting being flat
Click to expand...

Haha I no it was posted previous. My point was due to the low lighy levels id have struggled to get any thing more that 1/30.

But personally I like the milky water
 
nice set of pics, like the contrast in 1 and 2, find the leaves in the foreground distracting in the waterfall shot
 
JakeT1992 said:
The shots all look good.
But where are you hosting your images, as the quality of these is pants?
Try hosting with Flickr.
Click to expand...

There picture where uploaded to this site as I dont like flikr. And this site only allows 200kb images... bit of down sizing from 140mb tiffs
 
#1 is a beauty and the next two with the valley mist are crackers as well. Agree with some of the others about the colour vs BW shots and prefer the colour on this occasion.

If you want to show larger images and hate Flickr (like me) try pix.ie it's easy to use and displays at a size you chose. The link in my sig will take you there if you want a look.
 
Big Andy said:
#1 is a beauty and the next two with the valley mist are crackers as well. Agree with some of the others about the colour vs BW shots and prefer the colour on this occasion.

If you want to show larger images and hate Flickr (like me) try pix.ie it's easy to use and displays at a size you chose. The link in my sig will take you there if you want a look.
Click to expand...

Thanks andy. I may take a look. I like having them on my Facebook photography page.. only problem is people hate to click links and TP and facebook doesnt work
 
Hi nice set, I'll try and give my feedback by shot.
No 1 stands out as the best of them all, I also like no 2, on a personal note I'm not sure about 3 purely from a composition point of view. To me it says , "it's a rock" I'd prefer it to be more off centre and show more of the mist. Quite like 4 too. I prefer the colour version of the last 2 however I think possible raising the camera to capture less of the foreground and more of the waterfall, may have been better
 
Last edited:
ChrisHeathcote said:
Hi nice set, I'll try and give my feedback by shot.
No 1 stands out as the best of them all, I also like no 2, on a personal note I'm not sure about 3 purely from a composition point of view. To me it says , "it's a rock" I'd prefer it to be more off centre and show more of the mist. Quite like 4 too. I prefer the colour version of the last 2 however I think possible raising the camera to capture less of the foreground and more of the waterfall, may have been better
Click to expand...

Thanks for the feedback.

Number 3 was difficult at it was taken with a long lens to get the compression. The last shot isnt my fav but was difficult to compose I tried raising the shot but it didnt give much to the shot. As that is the bottom of the waterfall n then its just water lol
 
They're all good - but since you're asking for critique here's my 2pth - remember this is minor detailed critique, not intended to be a slating:

1. Lovely colours & sharpeness. Is the horizon off are is it just the hills? I think the foreground lead-in lines could be improved by moving to one side a little, and it's a little unbalanced, somehow the slightly dull foreground rock and position of the sun don't quite gel.

2. Best of the set IMO, love the mist and sky and the shapes really work as a whole. Is the horizon off again? I'd remove the bright area at bottom right, too.

3. Beautifully exposed but doesn't quite hang together for me. Even with the telephoto compression the foreground, rock, mist and sky seem a bit separate.

4. Not a big fan - presumably this was taken quite wide angle? The bright leaves at the bottom distract from the focal point under the bridge. I wonder whether cropping and/or a b&w conversion would improve it?

5. The waterfall has the same problem - too much foreground, not enough space above the waterfall - and having the focal point dead centre doesn't quite work. I think the degree of motion blur is about right, though. However the rocks and trees near the waterfall look a bit out of focus.

6. B&W waterfall - this b&w treatment doesn't add anything to the original, it just emphasises the busyness without drawing attention to the structure of the image.
 
juggler said:
They're all good - but since you're asking for critique here's my 2pth - remember this is minor detailed critique, not intended to be a slating:

1. Lovely colours & sharpeness. Is the horizon off are is it just the hills? I think the foreground lead-in lines could be improved by moving to one side a little, and it's a little unbalanced, somehow the slightly dull foreground rock and position of the sun don't quite gel.

2. Best of the set IMO, love the mist and sky and the shapes really work as a whole. Is the horizon off again? I'd remove the bright area at bottom right, too.

3. Beautifully exposed but doesn't quite hang together for me. Even with the telephoto compression the foreground, rock, mist and sky seem a bit separate.

4. Not a big fan - presumably this was taken quite wide angle? The bright leaves at the bottom distract from the focal point under the bridge. I wonder whether cropping and/or a b&w conversion would improve it?

5. The waterfall has the same problem - too much foreground, not enough space above the waterfall - and having the focal point dead centre doesn't quite work. I think the degree of motion blur is about right, though. However the rocks and trees near the waterfall look a bit out of focus.

6. B&W waterfall - this b&w treatment doesn't add anything to the original, it just emphasises the busyness without drawing attention to the structure of the image.
Click to expand...

Thanks again all taken on board. All horizons are level as I use the spiritlevel in camera.

Thanks again
 
juggler said:
The calibration of digital levels can drift - and be reset. Maybe check it against a bubble level?
Click to expand...

Its correct dont worry. The camera is new and also I had my 2nd digital one mounted on the top as I misplased the hot shoe cover
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top