A portrait that I am not sure about.

Personally, I quite like the image, and think you achieved the look you were looking for although it does look like it has had quite a bit of pp work done to it. I won't try and give any suggestions for improvement as i'm not into clapping with one hand.

But seriously...this is the "Critique" section, and not everyone has the same point of view so there is bound to be members that don't like what you're posting. That's their opinion, and one they are entitled to whether you like it or not. If you are just looking for people to, as been said, "blow smoke up your arse" go and post in on Flickr.

I was going to stick up for you until I read your comments in the 70-200 thread where you really do show your true colours. Maybe not posting for another two years might not be such a bad idea.
 
DaydreamJay said:
I don't understand your points Matty, he said the eyes were over-sharpened and they aren't as there is no sharpening specifically on the eyes. They are only as sharp as the bits of the hat that are on the same focus plane.

And he said it was over-processed and it isn't as there is only a b&w conversion. He then complained that it was lacking contrast after I had had told him I had applied a low contrast filter.

So he was wrong, yet you have a go at me. Nice.
Click to expand...

Its the attitude you show, you could have disagreed without being arsey about it, but you didnt, and it came across as a dummy spit.

DaydreamJay said:
Seriously - I used to post pics in the critique section regular when I first got my DSLR. I got fed so much rubbish that I am surprised I even carried on taking photos. Obviously at the time I didn't realise that it was useless info as I didn't know enough to sort the wheat from the chaff.

I never said I thought the image was great, it was just one I had to hand that was similar to the first shot. I know it's not amazing, but for a natural light snapshot it is significantly better than the first (which I have realised isn't even in focus!)

You were wrong about it being over-processed and you were wrong about the eyes being sharpened, I mean how more sharp can you get than actually being able to see myself 15ft away in the reflection and being able to read what it says on my t-shirt... it's bound to look sharp it was a great lens, very shallow DOF though which might explain some of the comments.
Click to expand...

You could have just said that, but in a nice way, you didnt though.

I've spent the last two years constantly studying at least 20 hours a week. Did a years course with one of the most talented photographers I have met, subsequently hooked up with the most published glamour photographer in the UK and paid him for one on one training and now organise lectures and training courses in Yorkshire involving several top professional photographers. And even though now I am making a living out of it I still feel awkward when someone refers to me as a "professional photographer" as it does not feel comfortable.

So as you can see, I am very modest and did not upload this image to "show off" as it's just a snap. I know my limits and as long as they are less limited week on week I am happy.
Click to expand...

So the people on this forum now have no valid opinion because you paid someone to teach you things? Do you no longer have anything to learn?

I apologise for being a bit harsh but it was more of a knee-jerk reaction and was spurred by memories of several topics on here back when I was new to the game.
Click to expand...

the last paragraph is all you really needed to say, and if you had thought about what you were going to post and reread it before hitting submit you wouldnt even have had to have posted it.
 
Another (y) thumbs up for oli here that is a great example and taught me something i was unaware of so thanks i had no idea about filters back to the OP.i think the OP photo is a nice shot really good pose and a beautiful model. I must agree that the PP is rather smooth and over the top but i guess some people will like it and some wont.would be good if you could post the original image with no processing.just for a comparison etc.i have had great comments and also some awful comments where i thought my photo was great :LOL: looking back now i was probably wrong.best thing to do is not take it to hard and learn from it.no one can deny you have come along way in 2 years and for that you should be proud.chin up and keep togging :)
 
Last edited:
ACW said:
Wasted breath unfortunately I think Matt, at least there are a load of appreciative members on here that make it worth while :)

R.E the image. I also think the eyes do look over sharpened and the skin looks unnatural.

I agree that can be a good thing if you are going for that kind of look, but the subject in question doesn't suit this look. The blown out bottom right corner also distracts from the subject.

@OLI R.C interesting post there, thanks for the examples. Genuinely surprised by the effect the red filter can give.
Click to expand...

If you are actually surprised by what a red filter does then I am not even sure I can take your other comments seriously.
 
antihero said:
I was going to stick up for you until I read your comments in the 70-200 thread where you really do show your true colours. Maybe not posting for another two years might not be such a bad idea.
Click to expand...

My comments on that thread were my honest opinion. I have better shots on Instagram than what's in there. Buying the top gear doesn't make you a photographer.
 
matty said:
Its the attitude you show, you could have disagreed without being arsey about it, but you didnt, and it came across as a dummy spit.



You could have just said that, but in a nice way, you didnt though.



So the people on this forum now have no valid opinion because you paid someone to teach you things? Do you no longer have anything to learn?



the last paragraph is all you really needed to say, and if you had thought about what you were going to post and reread it before hitting submit you wouldnt even have had to have posted it.
Click to expand...

OK OK, yes I was a bit arsey about it but only because it was unfounded.
 
Would it be possible for the mods to create for Jason his very own section on the forum. It would only be for people that know absolutely everything about photography, and Jason would have to invite you to join.

If this could be done, it would mean that normal folk (us idiots that still appreciate that there is something to learn), wouldn't have to put up with the absolute bile this guy spits if someone doesn't agree that he is the best photographer in the world.
 
Thanks for this thread guys. I woke up on a bit of a downer, but this has cheered me right up. I think it's a case of.

If you've shagged the queen, he's shagged prince philip. Just so he could be one better. :LOL::LOL::LOL:
 
DaydreamJay said:
If you are actually surprised by what a red filter does then I am not even sure I can take your other comments seriously.
Click to expand...

*sigh*

Of course I understand the concept of a red filter. I just underestimated the effect it could have, which OLI.R.C took the time to explain and was then met with a blunt reply.
 
Hat is burnt out and face soft. I can see this was midday lighting, so not the best conditions.
 
DaydreamJay said:
Seriously - I used to post pics in the critique section regular when I first got my DSLR. I got fed so much rubbish that I am surprised I even carried on taking photos. Obviously at the time I didn't realise that it was useless info as I didn't know enough to sort the wheat from the chaff.

I never said I thought the image was great, it was just one I had to hand that was similar to the first shot. I know it's not amazing, but for a natural light snapshot it is significantly better than the first (which I have realised isn't even in focus!)

You were wrong about it being over-processed and you were wrong about the eyes being sharpened, I mean how more sharp can you get than actually being able to see myself 15ft away in the reflection and being able to read what it says on my t-shirt... it's bound to look sharp it was a great lens, very shallow DOF though which might explain some of the comments.

I've spent the last two years constantly studying at least 20 hours a week. Did a years course with one of the most talented photographers I have met, subsequently hooked up with the most published glamour photographer in the UK and paid him for one on one training and now organise lectures and training courses in Yorkshire involving several top professional photographers. And even though now I am making a living out of it I still feel awkward when someone refers to me as a "professional photographer" as it does not feel comfortable.

So as you can see, I am very modest and did not upload this image to "show off" as it's just a snap. I know my limits and as long as they are less limited week on week I am happy.

I apologise for being a bit harsh but it was more of a knee-jerk reaction and was spurred by memories of several topics on here back when I was new to the game.
Click to expand...


Sorry but this is over processed, you clearly don't agree, but it is.

I've seen alot of people who call themselves professional photographers and tbh their work is appalling. I have even struggled to see a good photo on talk photography.

You can do numerous one to one training / study all you like; this doesn't make you a good photographer and certainly doesn't make you professional. What makes you good is people liking and enjoying your work and very few do on this thread. Keep at the training as this portrait looks like a beginner playing with a new program they have discovered. If this was my photo it wouldn't have even made it off the camera. I mean, when you look at a photo, the eye is always drawn towards the brightest part which in this case is the large blown highlight on the rhs.
 
Last edited:
I hate seeing threads turn into wars but I am going to give my take on it as balanced as I can.

If it is a case of getting the shot or not getting it due to having to set up reflectors\ fill lights or diffusers etc Then get the shot if you shoot in raw they are easily corrected to a certain amount of degree.

As for the alleged post production being over done, Then I can say this I started my photography because of my background in post production so I started backwards I was a confident PS user and expanded to doing work for catalogs and photography Studios.

And I have noticed the current trend is people are trying to achieve this flawless skin and hair almost mannequin\illustration look it is popular in Fashion Photography. Hence the boom on people buying plugins such as topaz adjust and portraiture to name 2

Look up some of the work from Jill Greenberg or Dave Hill a lot of PP almost illustrated look when done well the pics look awesome but are not designed to portray realism.

These are not the same as the OP s picture but just merely demonstrating the smooth flawless look is very fashionable and is definitely not to everyone's taste.

I think it is very important for anyone doing Art, Design, Photography to get feedback and critique it helps you grow as an Artist in fact I get far more personally from Good constructive criticism than the people that say wow I love your work kind of theme. Sometimes you can spend hours,days or even weeks on a project post it for critique and get nothing back whip up something in 10 mins and you get pages of feedback. Feed back is unpredictable you can not think like everyone else so you should never post expecting great feedback. And You should never expect everyone to give the same feedback we all like different things hence Art and Photography is so hard because the truth is not everyone likes your style especially when you are trying to do something different.


As For post Production of images you need to ask yourself what is it for is it just personal to you then process it how ever you like, If you want it to reach a wider audience you need to put more thought into it.


Presets

The way I see Presets are a quick start to pre setting up an image for processing you could take an identical shot on 5 different cameras load them into lightroom apply exactly the same preset and the image will vary. Use the presets to get the image heading in the right direction.

Black and white conversions is probably 1 of the hardest things to convert you tend to find many standard presets are not enough contrast or to contrasty give 10 people an image and say convert it to black and white I am sure you will get 10 images back all looking different.


I like the shot and yes if it was my image I would tweak it a bit to more my liking for example balancing out the contrast of the eyes more as you can see 1 eye is full of light the other 1 is in shadow so it looks sharper.

When it comes to strong lighting in photography by choice or not you have to decide when you process the image do you want to build on the strong lighting or try to balance it out.

There is no definate right or wrong answer here if you like the image and it is what you , or your clients like then that is great.

I think the way forums work though and your just reading critique it is hard to understand how the poster meant it to sound in voice you can tell by tone but text you have not context to back it up so it is easily to get offended.
 
Total novice here! posted 23-06-2010
Click to expand...

From a total novice to a professional who knows best in TWO YEARS....that is just unbelievable and just about says it all. I’m hoping you will look back at these photos in a few more years and say to yourself….What the hell was I thinking. :)
 
I moderate on a forum in an entirely different discipline, woodturning. We get this all the time there too. People put up work for critique yet they cannot cope with anything other than praise and become defensive when challenged.

Maybe a two year course in self awareness might have been a more beneficial choice.
 
.
 
post up the unedited version with all the exif intact i wanna see this flawless skin the way god made it ;)
 
It seems they did not cover photoshop on the course Jay has been taken. PP is way to much.

Actually the first shot works much better.
 
:thinking: Still waiting for the original unedited shot from Jason.could you post it for us please? :shrug: thanks
 
DaydreamJay said:
Wow. What a difference a couple of years makes.

Different girl, different hat, same lighting.

525949_10150855363596313_563771521_n.jpg
Click to expand...

Looks like you've reduced the 'clarity' slider way too much in lightroom. There's hardly any detail in her right cheek at all. Coupled with her wispy hair she looks more like a mannaquin than a living person. I too would like to see an unedited version to compare. If they're the same I'll be the first to apologise. If you disappear from the thread then you give 100% credit to all the posters who have made comments you have refuted. I for one, would want to prove my point and shut everyone up ( inc me ) :LOL:
Also, why put a photo on FB to get you work if the pic is poor ?? It wouldn't do much for your business.
 
DaydreamJay said:
Yes Ian, to be honest I rarely come on here anymore as I came to realise that all I got was conflicting opinions and bad advice, oh and the odd smattering of up their own asses wedding photographers. Started coming back on recently but not participating much.

It's good to look back on old stuff though and see if there is progress.
Click to expand...

Think this is offensive to all those that offer their time giving critiques.
So, why did you come back and post another picture?? :thinking: Troll?
 
h14nha said:
Looks like you've reduced the 'clarity' slider way too much in lightroom.
Click to expand...

So why are the eyes sharp then?

Christ, this is entirely what I am talking about with this website - so many people pontificating about things they have no idea about.

And no I am not uploading this original image or indeed any original image that I own, get over it, move on.
 
Why post another picture if you don't like recieving the different opinions of your work on here? I suggest you bugger off again and don't come back...or grow up.
 
asphotographymk said:
It seems they did not cover photoshop on the course Jay has been taken. PP is way to much.

Actually the first shot works much better.
Click to expand...

It might work better for you as it's more your level. In fact scratch that, not sure you've attained that level yet having seen your effort in the 70-200mm thread :LOL:
 
On the Huh said:
Why post another picture if you don't like recieving the different opinions of your work on here? I suggest you bugger off again and don't come back...or grow up.
Click to expand...

Hey I am perfectly happy with criticism, but please allow me the right to respond to it if I think it's unfounded. :)
 
Jason........ i'm going to draw your attention to my words in the other thread.
 
But are they unfounded? I've met plenty of girls before with smooth skin and distinctive eyes, but they are much more natural looking than your subject.

TBH, it's not a great image is it? What with that light coming from the RH corner and hilghlighting her nostrels. And you still have a blob of blown white behind her hat.
Cropping the other image from way back when would be better.

Processing with presets...do you really know what's gone on?

Oh well, good luck. If you post another pic on here and you dis-agree with comments, at least be diplomatic, you might find that I will be too.
 
On the Huh said:
But are they unfounded? I've met plenty of girls before with smooth skin and distinctive eyes, but they are much more natural looking than your subject.

TBH, it's not a great image is it? What with that light coming from the RH corner and hilghlighting her nostrels. And you still have a blob of blown white behind her hat.
Cropping the other image from way back when would be better.

Processing with presets...do you really know what's gone on?

Oh well, good luck. If you post another pic on here and you dis-agree with comments, at least be diplomatic, you might find that I will be too.
Click to expand...

I like this post as you are actually being constructive and have thought it through. I never said it was a great image, just better than the first one, which it is. And yes it is a photo done with presets, it was just a couple of clicks. I am actually a miles better Photoshopper than I am photographer so I do "really know what's gone on" And what I really know right now is that this image has been seriously mashed by Facebook's algorithms.

I will upload the original to a webspace if someone can suggest one.
 
On the Huh said:
But are they unfounded? I've met plenty of girls before with smooth skin and distinctive eyes, but they are much more natural looking than your subject.

TBH, it's not a great image is it? What with that light coming from the RH corner and hilghlighting her nostrels. And you still have a blob of blown white behind her hat.
Cropping the other image from way back when would be better.

Processing with presets...do you really know what's gone on?

Oh well, good luck. If you post another pic on here and you dis-agree with comments, at least be diplomatic, you might find that I will be too.
Click to expand...

diplomacy is the key here....
 
Last edited:
Paul!!! you're a Pentaxian.... just noticed! Bruv we need to stick togevva lol x
 
Fair enough Jason, I know nothing about facebook. Most people use flickr or photobucket, which are not great to be honest, compared to originals, but seem to give a best-you-can-get represenation on a forum.

I am left wondering why you used presets if you are good at photoshop, I kinda would have done things myself, however, if you know what actions the presets have done, than good for you.

There is nothing wrong with dis-agreeing with critiques, but a better way of putting things accross may be worth thinking about.

Anyhows, good luck and hope you will stick around, if you can take the rough with the smooth.(y)
 
On the Huh said:
Fair enough Jason, I know nothing about facebook. Most people use flickr or photobucket, which are not great to be honest, compared to originals, but seem to give a best-you-can-get represenation on a forum.

I am left wondering why you used presets if you are good at photoshop, I kinda would have done things myself, however, if you know what actions the presets have done, than good for you.

There is nothing wrong with dis-agreeing with critiques, but a better way of putting things accross may be worth thinking about.

Anyhows, good luck and hope you will stick around, if you can take the rough with the smooth.(y)
Click to expand...

I use Facebook for my images solely for the reason that I need the exposure. When I shoot a girl and they add the photos I get loads of bookings. Unfortunately the image quality is awful.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top