Please help me choose 3 from 5

Paul SWD

Paul SWD

Messages
113
Edit My Images
No
I need to choose 3 from my very hard choice of 5 to show techincal abilty etc, please help me!

1012_snowfox_7448.jpg


1011_miami_6659.jpg


1006_dancing_ledge_9894.jpg


1005_playadelcarmen_9072.jpg


1004_islamujeres_7428-1.jpg
 
Last edited:
3, 4, 5 but sort out the sloping horizon in number 5
 
Although it depends on what/who you are showing off your "techincal abilty"[sic] to, I'm afraid the honest answer should be none of them.

1. Suffers from problems with the composition, and a lack of decent post processing (I suspect that the softness is down to lack of sharpening rather than missed focus).

2. Whilst a fun photo with good colour is basically a grab shot.

3. Has all sorts of problems with the focus, as the image should be crisp at least up until the near background ie the second cliff promontory; at the moment it looks as though a layer of gausian blur has been applied. There is also evidence of haloing around the furthest land point and on the horizon, probably due to missed HDR layering, and the slow capture of the water hasn't really worked in the foreground.

4. Just hasn't worked I'm afraid.

5. Is the best of the lot (although I like 1 as well) but the lack of attention to detail ruins it. The horizon is way off, and although I'm not a great fan of cloning, the canoe in the background is a bit distracting once you notice it.


Sorry to be so harsh, but you asked for a technical assessment. If you are submitting pictures for evaluation don't use these. You site has some good underwater photography, so one of the biggest things that you need to learn is to be more self critical.

One other thing, unless these are for print display only, you should be saving and presenting with the Exif intact.

Hope that helps a bit! :)
 
Last edited:
i'd take on board everything DemiLion says.. however, i do like #4.. i think you were trying to show a vibrant market place at night.. which is what it does.. ok, the guy central should have been sharper and 'still'.. but it does the job.

3,4 & 5 for me.
 
Hmmm I can see you getting a lot of different opinions here :D

See, I like 2 - to me it's probably not a grab shot, after all it's hardly the easiest subject and yet the focus is good, I (personally) like the framing.

1 to me is a pretty shot, but unfortunately not good composition for a start, that's the nature of animas of course, they don't always do what you'd like.

3 could be ok if it was a bit sharpened, currently looks soft.

4 I do like, shame the center isn't perfect focus but I still like.

5 looks to me like you were putting your camera down and accidentally caught the shutter.


Quick thing, they all look undersharpened, as though you've resized for the internet but then not done the appropriate sharpening needed for resized images, not sure if that's what's happened?
 
You say show technical ability but to who?

5 needs straightening badly, and there is an odd section of light which needs fixing near the fencing on the gantry section.
 
2 3 & 5 for me, 1 & 2 both seem to have focusing issues and not a good show of technical ability :)
 
littlemonster said:
Hmmm I can see you getting a lot of different opinions here :D

See, I like 2 - to me it's probably not a grab shot, after all it's hardly the easiest subject and yet the focus is good, I (personally) like the framing.

1 to me is a pretty shot, but unfortunately not good composition for a start, that's the nature of animas of course, they don't always do what you'd like.

3 could be ok if it was a bit sharpened, currently looks soft.

4 I do like, shame the center isn't perfect focus but I still like.

5 looks to me like you were putting your camera down and accidentally caught the shutter.


Quick thing, they all look undersharpened, as though you've resized for the internet but then not done the appropriate sharpening needed for resized images, not sure if that's what's happened?
Click to expand...

Exactly what they said basically ^ :p. Apart from number 5, which I really like :). So 2,3 (with some PP) and 5!
 
Thanks for the input, really appreciate it, I dont have anyone local to me to help with this sorta stuff and fins it really hard to be self critical, sorry.

The thing is about #3 I've burned the sky a lot as it was over exposed as I never had the correct ND filters and looks messy up there, theres also a blue colour cast top left, I'll try and work on it more, a lot of the problems is maybe because of the compression in the size of the images, I thought the fox was pretty sharp, must look more at home later and see if I can improve them. I'm thinking 2,4 & 5 at the moment but wuill work more on 3 to see what I can do, thank you
 
Rather than using dodge and burn on No3, if you used RAW you could create an HDR by converting the original file twice, one with the correct exposure for the foreground and one for the sky, then layer and merge in PS.

It would probably end up looking a bit less forced if done subtly.
 
Thanks DemiLion, and thanks for your previous comments,
Actually I think I used mask in Lightroom to knock the exposure down, I've always thought of doing HDR but never got round to it, I understand the concept, will see. Usually too busy with my underwater ones!
 
If you're using LR3 you could use a diagonal grad which would/could end up looking as though you'd used a graduated ND in the first place! :)
 
But wouldnt that darken the top left edges of the cliffs too?

Regarding 1 and 2, the fox, altho not expecting him to be there, like the dolphin, was an easy shot to take because he was still (I just had to be quick)...but the dolphin was moving at a fast rate towards me, so choice in shutter speed was necessary, where it wasnt with the fox, so I would say the dolphin shows more technical ability, yes?
 
Paul SWD said:
But wouldnt that darken the top left edges of the cliffs too?

Regarding 1 and 2, the fox, altho not expecting him to be there, like the dolphin, was an easy shot to take because he was still (I just had to be quick)...but the dolphin was moving at a fast rate towards me, so choice in shutter speed was necessary, where it wasnt with the fox, so I would say the dolphin shows more technical ability, yes?
Click to expand...

Re the filter, the answer is Yes, it would darken some of the cliff depending on which angle you applied it at and how much you changed the graduation; but then again so would a glass filter and you have less flexibility in varying the effect.

WRT the shutter speed, I'd say that it was a fairly basic technical skill, unless you can show that you were having to adjust manual settings on the fly. That shot could have been easily achieved in Av mode for example, and when you balance that with the fact that head on speed is much easier to manage than cross frame (depending on your camera's AF ability)it isn't showing a great deal.

Without knowing what you are trying to demonstrate, and to whom, it's a bit difficult to assess.
 
I know it received some harsh criticism but I like 1 its got that cold feeling and as someone involved in fox control I think it is a great photo despite it not being pin sharp
doc
 
Thanks Mark, I was trying to get with an agency for my underwater photos, I showed them these 3
07_manado_4653.jpg

554a6491.jpg

1022_farneislands_5784.jpg

then they asked me
"Two or more of these images are very similar in subject matter, perspective or style. We would like to see a demonstrated range of diversity in technical ability and a variety in subject matter. So if you have anything else you can show us we would love to see it. We welcome you to return after the number of days specified and upload fresh samples of your work and we will re-process your application. "

So I thought they may want to see maybe land shots also even though thats not what I would be uploading to them

edited to add..the ones I sent them were PP'd more than the ones above
 
Reading their comment, and looking at your 3 submissions, I'd say that they were after more varied underwater shots - ie a couple of others where the subject isn't nose to lens.

You could always ask them if they want you to stay in the same genre (ie more underwater work) or expand on a different theme.

I'm not trying to be awkward btw - honest! :D
 
Thanks, I appreciate your help, I think my only option is to upload another 3

...its bloody hard trying to pick out ones on my own!!!

when they say a variety of subject matter thats where I think they want land shots, cant get much varied underwater than a mantis shrimp, whale shark and a seal!!
 
Last edited:
Yup, but they aren't varied if you look at it from the agency's point of view. Both the shark and the seal are shot from exactly the same perspective and in the same style. Remember they said:

"Two or more of these images are very similar in subject matter, perspective or style"

If you are trying to sell them UW shots, there's little point in uploading landscapes.

Try, for example:

A seascape of a coral reef
A flank shot of something colourful, like a clown fish
A texture shot of a wreck
A belly shot of a shark at a cleaning station
A shot of a conch
A couple of shots of divers on a wreck or in a cave

You've got all of those in your portfolio, so variety shouldn't be a problem - you just need to see it.

I still think that the best solution would be to have a quick chat with the agency if that is a viable option!
 
Thanks Mark,
I'll try and reply to them see what they say
If you wish, feel free to pick 3 for me :) more here too btw
 
Good stuff. You've got some good photography on there, you just need to play to your strengths.

Best of luck!
 
Paul SWD said:
then they asked me
"Two or more of these images are very similar in subject matter, perspective or style. We would like to see a demonstrated range of diversity in technical ability and a variety in subject matter. So if you have anything else you can show us we would love to see it. We welcome you to return after the number of days specified and upload fresh samples of your work and we will re-process your application. "

So I thought they may want to see maybe land shots also even though thats not what I would be uploading to them
Click to expand...

DemiLion said:
Reading their comment, and looking at your 3 submissions, I'd say that they were after more varied underwater shots - ie a couple of others where the subject isn't nose to lens.

You could always ask them if they want you to stay in the same genre (ie more underwater work) or expand on a different theme.

I'm not trying to be awkward btw - honest! :D
Click to expand...

Actually, I read that as a 'stock' reply. (Two or more, out of three!), (after the number of days specified)
I think, if the site accepts images which are not underwater (i.e. they are general), then submit some of the shots above.
However, I think 1 and 3 are very soft. I am not sure whether it is the compression/resize, as 2 looks quite sharp in comparison.
 
I tried to fix 3 last night, didnt still really look right the gradient darkened the cliff or the sea whichever way I turned it, tried to expose the darkened buit again with mask and didnt really look right, so gave up on it. I had a similar one too but sisnt really look that good either, if I have time I'd love to do more long exposures and get the proper filters, but not enough days in the weekend!
Looked at the fox and agree its nowhere near as sharp as the dolphin, which was taken at 1/750 by the way at 200mm with my 70-300, cant remember the aperture, I like 4 and 5 too so I'll use them too, thanks for your help everyone :)
 
I submitted these 3 in the end
1005_playadelcarmen_9072c.jpg

I'e always loved this one but was concerned over the noise, but hadnt realised I hadnt upgraded the photo sionce I got LR3, much better now
1011_miami_6659c.jpg

I loved this one too but didnt like the original red/orange in the reflection, so I toned it down and got this. Looking at it now I wish I had put a small gradient to turn the exposure on the top side down a bit, too late now
1711_tigerbeach_8494c.jpg

I had a thought that I best throw another fishy photo in and this ones pretty topical lately, had to wait to take this shot until the shark swam under the sun. LUckily got 3 in the shot. I've got other ones closer but this one has got a bit more to it than detail

I didnt choose the silhouttted couple by the pool because I didnt like the reflection in the pool, if it were flat calm with a better reflection, or polorised, it would have worked better.

Anyone agree with my thoughts here?
 
Last edited:
I did last time, it was just a copied type of answer again suggesting different ways to use my camera! It's ok, dont think 10-15% is a good enough deal anyway. Maybe I'm not cut out for all of this!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top