Audi R8

Jesus, that escalated quickly.

You know yourself the shot isn't great but to be honest I've seen far worse in professional portfolios and magazines. The fake lens flare on the left of the shot is probably the most notable 'faux pas'.

For all the criticism about poor lighting, I don't really agree. Yes, the sky is blown and there are methods and equipment which will help you reduce and/or overcome that. However, on that day, at that time in that location you exposed for the subject, which is black. Either you or the camera did the job and brought us a well-exposed picture of the car. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, none of us were there when you took the shot and we didn't work to your limitations.

This forum is becoming a bit aggressive lately and it's annoying that the negativity is always aimed at relatively new or amateur members. If you don't like the shot, that's fine and by all means post constructive feedback. Spreading the same point over half a dozen posts isn't helping. I haven't really seen any cause for argument here.
 
Graham... I've just re-read the thread, and all the crit he received was perfectly acceptable, and not aggressive in the slightest. The problem arose when Martyboy84 starts arguing defensively with those giving crit. If he isn't prepared to accept crit, he shouldn't post in a feedback & Critique forum. Everyone in here has posted perfectly reasonable crit and given helpful tips and advice.


Circuit Hero said:
For all the criticism about poor lighting, I don't really agree. Yes, the sky is blown and there are methods and equipment which will help you reduce and/or overcome that.
Click to expand...

Which is what everyone was suggesting; that this shot could have been better at a different time of day, or if additional lighting was used to lower contrast. Isn't that what a critique thread is about? Pointing out things that can be improved, and suggesting them? Or do you think it's just about giving as much praise as possible and ignoring issues that would actually help the OP?

You can't say that you don't agree with our assessment of bad lighting, then concur with us that the sky is blown out. What kind of response is that, and how will that help the OP?

Circuit Hero said:
This forum is becoming a bit aggressive lately and it's annoying that the negativity is always aimed at relatively new or amateur members. If you don't like the shot, that's fine and by all means post constructive feedback.
Click to expand...

That's exactly what we did Graham.



No one was giving any "negative" feedback, unless you think pointing out problems and offering solutions is negative. This went pear shaped when the OP started becoming repetitively defensive when anyone suggested there were problems with the image, and that it wasn't his fault because his mate told him to shoot it there. Cool story... but does that negate the issues the image has? Does that mean we just ignore them and give affirmation that the processing attempts to cover up the cracks should be rewarded somehow?

If he knew it was a crap location and lighting, he should have said to the owner of the car (who I'm assuming is not a photographer) that this will look crap.. and suggest something else. If he wasn't aware, or confident enough to do that, then he now realises that's what he should have done. He knows the image has the problems we're pointing out, yet seems annoyed that we're pointing it out. What did he want from a crit thread?

There's a real attitude in here lately that concise, honest crit is negative. This is the second thread this week that proper crit has been judged as negative, and deemed inappropriate.

Yet again.. being "nice" is more important than being useful in here.
 
Last edited:
Circuit Hero said:
I haven't really seen any cause for argument here.
Click to expand...

I was going to reply to this last night but decided sleep was a better idea. You're absolutely right, there wasn't cause for argument at all and had the OP accepted the honest opinions he was receiving all would have been well but that didn't happen, hence the ensuing 'argument'.

That being said, it seems Martin's accepted our points and things have settled down. Nothing more to say here to be honest.
 
I'd like to give me 2pence worth. Get some outdoor flash units and stands, then you can shoot in that light :)

I do agree about the fence though, does distract from a beautiful car.

Keep on shooting, use artificial light where there is none or do two exposures, one for the sky and one for the car and then some PP, though getting a flash or a torch and doing some light painting will reduce your PP and enhance your pics.

Its all about learning. Ive taken some stick off some people on here - I dont even remember who as I dont take that part in, why let critique fester - but I DO take in the crit about the images themselves and how to improve them.

I think I have improved - MAINLY because of the help I have had from TP :)

I seem to be getting less bad critique so either thats a good thing or people just give up looking at my threads :D but I wont let that go to my head, someone always comes along and points something out I missed and how to improve and I love it :)
 
Why is he referring to himself as "we"?.....

Thank you for the feedback. Nothing wrong with a friendly undertone!

Help for that situation should it arise again was exactly what I was after. The fence didn't go down well at all it seems! I thought that it would add something else but it does take away from the car. Maybe if there had been a little more distance?


I'll read up more on exposures and extra lighting. I saw it as a chance (despite possible condition s) to expose... Myself to more scenarios and extra practice.

Thanks all.

Marty
 
Pookeyhead said:
Which is what everyone was suggesting; that this shot could have been better at a different time of day, or if additional lighting was used to lower contrast. Isn't that what a critique thread is about? Pointing out things that can be improved, and suggesting them? Or do you think it's just about giving as much praise as possible and ignoring issues that would actually help the OP?

You can't say that you don't agree with our assessment of bad lighting, then concur with us that the sky is blown out. What kind of response is that, and how will that help the OP?
Click to expand...

As I say, hindsight is a wonderful thing. This image would have also been better if he had shot it during a nuclear weapons test and if he had arranged for Kate Beckinsale to drape herself naked over the bonnet. The point I was trying to raise is that he was working to clear limitations (location, direction of the sun, the clients demands) and wasn't given free reign. I think it's also safe to assume that he doesn't have the necessary supplementary kit to facilitate the criticism of some (external flashes, filters etc).

Perhaps it's because my background is primarily photo-journalistic, but getting the result comes first, getting a good result comes second. The car is well exposed; the scene isn't. It's not about a "that'll do" attitude, but I appreciate that people work to limitations and giving people the arena to lecture on what they would have done with a blank canvas isn't constructive or helpful, it's patronising. The point was raised, it was defended, that really should have been the end. I'm not saying I whole-heartedly agree with either party, I just think the way the conversation turned was unnecessary and harmful as it likely puts people off showing their work in the section.

I'm all for useful constructive criticism and wouldn't blow smoke up somebodys hoop just to please them (I offer my fair share of crit on these boards). I'm simply saying this isn't that bad, certainly not enough to warrant a two page hissy fit.

Let's move on from this, I'm sure we all have more important things to do than bicker on the internet.(y)
 
I'll look past the fact I don't like many elements of the location and just deal with what you did have - the light is a big challenge and possibly with grad filters, you could have harnessed it better. The same applies if you had extra lighting. I suppose if anything this kind of thing teaches you about mistakes and not having the right kit.

Personally, not having any say in terms of location or lighting, I'd have opted for a much longer lens if it was possible to work from further away. That longer lens, combined with a low f/number could have rendered that fence more OOF, which would have placed more promenace on the car.

The faux lens flare isn't to my taste and the sky has been worked far too much in areas, but I like the feel of the processing, the contrast and the tinting. I'm a sucker for a vignette too.

PMN said:
....as the photographer you should have been directing the whole thing.....
Click to expand...

I take slight issue with that - the guy's mate wanted his car shot in that location. There are many pros who've had to work under constraints like that (often against their better judgement but done it nonetheless) and this guy, as a favour to a mate, has made that compromise also, rightly or wrongly.
 
Last edited:
You're a gentleman sir.

A few ideas for me should the problem arise again.

He's just bought a new car.. I'm going to heavily suggest a different location and time. I think my head may explode if faced with a similar situation!
 
Martin - do you aim to do more of this, maybe semi-pro? I think there is some good advice hidden away in this thread about you doing the prep on location and lighting. Do what you've said; suggest locations (etc) and see what 'the client' wants - if you can wow them with creativity then it helps not only build your own confidence, but the confidence in you from others.

RE: bum steers on locations - I had it plenty of times while in my previous job, often turning up to venues that were like birdcages... loads of bare tree branches, poor/uneven lighting, not enough shooting space. Some times I managed to get that changed but in many cases, it was where the angler wanted to be to catch fish and I just had to work around it.

Experience, that's all it is :)
 
Than you for that :).

It's all I've ever wanted to do.

I'm all about the experience. I'll go through hell if need be! As long as a few years down the line I get a chance to do this even par time.

Cheers :)
 
specialman said:
I take slight issue with that - the guy's mate wanted his car shot in that location. There are many pros who've had to work under constraints like that (often against their better judgement but done it nonetheless) and this guy, as a favour to a mate, has made that compromise also, rightly or wrongly.
Click to expand...

He's posted the images in the feedback section, which bit of that don't you understand?
 
specialman said:
Why so aggressive?
Click to expand...

A typical response from someone who can't answer the question. There's no aggression from my perspective, I just expect those who post images for crit to accept people's opinions decently. If you disagree then that's fine but don't expect my outlook on this to change because it won't.
 
Last edited:
I think it's more a case of you expect those who post to accept your opinions.

I don't see why you're getting so wound up about things. It's an image that has been posted that you take much issue with... move along, you're just working yourself into a lather
 
There are ways of wording things my friend. Doesn't hurt to be nice?

This is not at you (really it's not) but a general outlook. People who act in a certain way, normally aggressively or near on patronising. From my experience generally have no power of any form in the real world. It's all water of a ducks back as 9/10 the same tone or whatever wouldn't be used in person.

I'll let people say what they want to say. I'll take in anything constructive or anything lighthearted. The rest vanishes pretty quick.

You don't get anywhere being nasty as they say.

Not everyone thinks like me though. So people especially novices like myself will be put off. The photographers In have met and talk with generally are some of the most helpful people I've ever spoken with.
 
specialman said:
I think it's more a case of you expect those who post to accept your opinions.
Click to expand...

Yes that's right, I do expect the people I reply to in crit threads to accept my opinions. Absolutely 1000% I do, unless I've massively missed something that's the entire point of posting for crit? Whether you choose to take on board or ignore the opinions people give is entirely up to the individual but it really isn't unreasonable for those who take the time to give opinions to expect them to at least be accepted.

Martyboy84 said:
People who act in a certain way, normally aggressively or near on patronising.
Click to expand...

Can I just ask who that comment was aimed at?
 
Last edited:
Like I said in that second paragraph.. No you!

I just picture those are the kind of people who are normally a bit off. Regardless if they are on not. Some people especially novices, will take it all to heart.
 
Its all good matey.

Now... On to my next actual shoot..... (tomorrow)...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top