a couple of autumn pictures

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by name, Nov 5, 2005.

  1. name

    name Guest

    name, Nov 5, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. name

    JimmyG Guest

    Neither show any semblance of fall color nor do they have any compositional
    quality worth mentioning. Study, study, study.
    JimmyG, Nov 5, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. > Here are a couple of pictures I made this autumn:
    >
    > http://images5.fotopic.net/?iid=ydsbz0&outx=600&noresize=1&nostamp=1
    > http://images4.fotopic.net/?iid=ydsbrj&outx=600&noresize=1&nostamp=1
    >
    > Which one do you like best and why?


    Neither.

    > Comments, criticism or suggestions would be appreciated.


    They're dull (as in uninteresting). On the bright side, they're sharp.

    Here's a question for you: what are these photos of? This is not a
    rhetorical question. Tell me what you think you've photographed, and why
    it's interesting or appealing to you.
    Derek Fountain, Nov 5, 2005
    #3
  4. name

    Stacey Guest

    name wrote:

    >
    > Hello there.
    >
    > Here are a couple of pictures I made this autumn:
    >


    >
    > Comments, criticism or suggestions would be appreciated.
    >


    My eye wanders around the image looking for the subject or something
    interesting... There is none.

    Try shooting B&W for a while and see if you can get something interesting.
    It's a great way to figure out if your images are boring or not.
    --

    Stacey
    Stacey, Nov 5, 2005
    #4
  5. name

    name Guest

    name wrote:
    > Hello there.
    >
    > Here are a couple of pictures I made this autumn:
    >
    > http://images5.fotopic.net/?iid=ydsbz0&outx=600&noresize=1&nostamp=1
    > http://images4.fotopic.net/?iid=ydsbrj&outx=600&noresize=1&nostamp=1
    >
    >
    > Which one do you like best and why?
    >
    > Comments, criticism or suggestions would be appreciated.
    >
    > greetings, Niek


    Thanks for all the constructive criticism so far.
    I see I used the wrong links to refer to these pictures, so here are
    the correct links:

    http://images.fotopic.net/ydsbz0.jpg
    http://images.fotopic.net/ydsbrj.jpg
    name, Nov 5, 2005
    #5
  6. name

    JimmyG Guest

    You should quit while you're ahead.

    Try making a panorama out of them by cropping out as much of the blue as
    possible (Sky AND water).
    JimmyG, Nov 5, 2005
    #6
  7. name

    name Guest

    Derek Fountain wrote:
    > > Here are a couple of pictures I made this autumn:
    > >
    > > http://images5.fotopic.net/?iid=ydsbz0&outx=600&noresize=1&nostamp=1
    > > http://images4.fotopic.net/?iid=ydsbrj&outx=600&noresize=1&nostamp=1
    > >
    > > Which one do you like best and why?

    >
    > Neither.
    >
    > > Comments, criticism or suggestions would be appreciated.

    >
    > They're dull (as in uninteresting). On the bright side, they're sharp.
    >
    > Here's a question for you: what are these photos of? This is not a
    > rhetorical question. Tell me what you think you've photographed, and why
    > it's interesting or appealing to you.


    Just photos of a little lake (a section of it).
    I like the pictures because they give an impression of the nice
    atmosphere there (in my opinion).
    I agree though there are not a lot of autumn colors in the picture.
    name, Nov 5, 2005
    #7
  8. name

    Frank ess Guest

    name wrote:
    > Derek Fountain wrote:
    >>> Here are a couple of pictures I made this autumn:
    >>>
    >>> http://images5.fotopic.net/?iid=ydsbz0&outx=600&noresize=1&nostamp=1
    >>> http://images4.fotopic.net/?iid=ydsbrj&outx=600&noresize=1&nostamp=1
    >>>
    >>> Which one do you like best and why?

    >>
    >> Neither.
    >>
    >>> Comments, criticism or suggestions would be appreciated.

    >>
    >> They're dull (as in uninteresting). On the bright side, they're
    >> sharp.
    >>
    >> Here's a question for you: what are these photos of? This is not a
    >> rhetorical question. Tell me what you think you've photographed,
    >> and
    >> why it's interesting or appealing to you.

    >
    > Just photos of a little lake (a section of it).
    > I like the pictures because they give an impression of the nice
    > atmosphere there (in my opinion).
    > I agree though there are not a lot of autumn colors in the picture.


    I kind of agree with Derek Fountain, to this extent: while similar
    views have been captured and displayed innumerable times, often to
    good or excellent effect, these are not among the better ones.

    Consider no fewer than three aspects of photography:
    TECHNICAL - sharp, balanced masses, realistic color/tone
    REPRESENTATIONAL - records the objects and relationships before the
    camera
    INTERPRETIVE - how the image interacts with the viewer's physical and
    historical characteristics

    "Name" has done a decent job of placing the first two within view; two
    further considerations limit their appeal in the third 'dimension':

    LUCK - or patience, or karma...
    DISCRETION - or judgement, or 'eye'

    Unfortunately, the potential for a striking photo of clouds reflected
    in a pond's surface was not fulfilled: too few clouds, and of the
    wrong shape, and the pond was neither still enough nor contrasty
    enough.

    "name' shows courage and good cheer in exposing these images. His
    'eye' told him there was something there and that it was not quite
    what he'd hoped. In fact, there is more there for 'name' because
    'name' was there and stored information in 'name's' self that is not
    available to the rest of us.

    Discretion or judgement would tell a photographer which such storages
    can be counted on to be more universally distributed in a viewing
    audience (viewdience?), and if the appropriate cues are present in
    images. A matter of anticipating resonances, and producing the mallet.
    And recognizing the absence of bell-ringers in images, the better to
    select them for non-distribution.

    --
    Frank ess
    "One time, I got up the next morning and looked in the mirror
    and there were two of them up in my hair."
    - JEAN LEMEAUX, on the travails of removing those little stickers from
    her
    fruits and vegetables.
    Frank ess, Nov 5, 2005
    #8
  9. name

    none Guest

    On Sat, 05 Nov 2005 06:34:39 -0800, name wrote:
    > http://images.fotopic.net/ydsbz0.jpg


    I like the idea of the one endangered/dying tree struggling against the
    background of a forest of overwhelming size and domination. Sadly, I don't
    know that the photo really really does a good job of presenting it.

    -Mike
    none, Nov 5, 2005
    #9
  10. > Just photos of a little lake (a section of it).

    Yep, that's about right. :eek:)

    > I like the pictures because they give an impression of the nice
    > atmosphere there (in my opinion).


    No, I don't think they do. It's just a line of trees. There's no
    particularly striking colour, or symmetry in the reflections. They're
    taken at the wrong time of day to produce any atmosphere (try sunrise or
    sunset). A polarising filter would help deepen the colours of the trees
    and sky, if that were the aim. I think the major problem is that, as
    Stacey pointed out, there's nothing for the eye to fix on.

    Also, the smaller versions are soft - make sure sharpening is the last
    step in your process, after resizing.

    Some tips: try looking for something to frame the shot - perhaps some
    overhanging braches on your side of the water? Look for a old log or
    something which can be placed in the foreground to draw the eye into
    the shot. A bird or something on the water would also help the eye fix
    into the shot.
    Derek Fountain, Nov 6, 2005
    #10
  11. name

    Mickey Mouse Guest

    All criticisms are valid. However I do see what you see. I was once given
    some very sound advice and I pass it on two you.
    Many look but only a few can see. Look at you pictures and crop them with
    your mind. Find the picture within the picture. Sometimes, there are many
    pictures within a picture. You must know that a picture tells a thousand
    words, but your pictures don't speak. They don't convey the feeling that
    made you take the pictures in the first place. However the pictures are
    there, I can see them, so must you. Go back and take the same pictures
    again but this time think about the light and time of day, think about
    filters and how they can convey the mood. Don't just look, but see as well
    the pictures within the frame, there are quite a few there. You must make
    the observer feel what you feel.
    Hope this makes some little sense for you... good luck

    Mickey




    "name" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > Hello there.
    >
    > Here are a couple of pictures I made this autumn:
    >
    > http://images5.fotopic.net/?iid=ydsbz0&outx=600&noresize=1&nostamp=1
    > http://images4.fotopic.net/?iid=ydsbrj&outx=600&noresize=1&nostamp=1
    >
    >
    > Which one do you like best and why?
    >
    > Comments, criticism or suggestions would be appreciated.
    >
    > greetings, Niek
    >
    Mickey Mouse, Nov 6, 2005
    #11
  12. name

    George Kerby Guest

    On 11/6/05 5:14 AM, in article
    436de57f$0$25854$, "Mickey Mouse" <.> wrote:

    > All criticisms are valid. However I do see what you see. I was once given
    > some very sound advice and I pass it on two you.
    > Many look but only a few can see. Look at you pictures and crop them with
    > your mind. Find the picture within the picture. Sometimes, there are many
    > pictures within a picture. You must know that a picture tells a thousand
    > words, but your pictures don't speak. They don't convey the feeling that
    > made you take the pictures in the first place. However the pictures are
    > there, I can see them, so must you. Go back and take the same pictures
    > again but this time think about the light and time of day, think about
    > filters and how they can convey the mood. Don't just look, but see as well
    > the pictures within the frame, there are quite a few there. You must make
    > the observer feel what you feel.
    > Hope this makes some little sense for you... good luck
    >
    > Mickey
    >
    >

    MAN! All that from a rodent!

    I guess Goofy will be discussing Existentialism next...


    _______________________________________________________________________________
    Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
    <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
    George Kerby, Nov 6, 2005
    #12
  13. name

    Mickey Mouse Guest

    Unfortunately that would be a little off topic. I do think however one
    should not completely denigrate another persons effort without constructive
    criticisms. I only have one word for you though.....
    Ohhhhmmmmmmmmmmm.
    lol

    Mickey






    "George Kerby" <> wrote in message
    news:BF93884B.2E247%...
    >
    >
    >
    > On 11/6/05 5:14 AM, in article
    > 436de57f$0$25854$, "Mickey Mouse" <.> wrote:
    >
    >> All criticisms are valid. However I do see what you see. I was once
    >> given
    >> some very sound advice and I pass it on two you.
    >> Many look but only a few can see. Look at you pictures and crop them
    >> with
    >> your mind. Find the picture within the picture. Sometimes, there are
    >> many
    >> pictures within a picture. You must know that a picture tells a thousand
    >> words, but your pictures don't speak. They don't convey the feeling that
    >> made you take the pictures in the first place. However the pictures are
    >> there, I can see them, so must you. Go back and take the same pictures
    >> again but this time think about the light and time of day, think about
    >> filters and how they can convey the mood. Don't just look, but see as
    >> well
    >> the pictures within the frame, there are quite a few there. You must
    >> make
    >> the observer feel what you feel.
    >> Hope this makes some little sense for you... good luck
    >>
    >> Mickey
    >>
    >>

    > MAN! All that from a rodent!
    >
    > I guess Goofy will be discussing Existentialism next...
    >
    >
    > _______________________________________________________________________________
    > Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -
    > http://www.uncensored-news.com
    > <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source
    > <><><><><><><><>
    >
    Mickey Mouse, Nov 6, 2005
    #13
  14. name

    George Kerby Guest

    <<<<<<grin>>>>>>


    On 11/6/05 2:25 PM, in article
    436e66b5$0$26602$, "Mickey Mouse" <.> wrote:

    > Unfortunately that would be a little off topic. I do think however one
    > should not completely denigrate another persons effort without constructive
    > criticisms. I only have one word for you though.....
    > Ohhhhmmmmmmmmmmm.
    > lol
    >
    > Mickey
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > "George Kerby" <> wrote in message
    > news:BF93884B.2E247%...
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> On 11/6/05 5:14 AM, in article
    >> 436de57f$0$25854$, "Mickey Mouse" <.> wrote:
    >>
    >>> All criticisms are valid. However I do see what you see. I was once
    >>> given
    >>> some very sound advice and I pass it on two you.
    >>> Many look but only a few can see. Look at you pictures and crop them
    >>> with
    >>> your mind. Find the picture within the picture. Sometimes, there are
    >>> many
    >>> pictures within a picture. You must know that a picture tells a thousand
    >>> words, but your pictures don't speak. They don't convey the feeling that
    >>> made you take the pictures in the first place. However the pictures are
    >>> there, I can see them, so must you. Go back and take the same pictures
    >>> again but this time think about the light and time of day, think about
    >>> filters and how they can convey the mood. Don't just look, but see as
    >>> well
    >>> the pictures within the frame, there are quite a few there. You must
    >>> make
    >>> the observer feel what you feel.
    >>> Hope this makes some little sense for you... good luck
    >>>
    >>> Mickey
    >>>
    >>>

    >> MAN! All that from a rodent!
    >>
    >> I guess Goofy will be discussing Existentialism next...
    >>
    >>
    >> _____________________________________________________________________________
    >> __
    >> Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -
    >> http://www.uncensored-news.com
    >> <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source
    >> <><><><><><><><>
    >>

    >
    >



    _______________________________________________________________________________
    Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
    <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
    George Kerby, Nov 6, 2005
    #14
  15. name

    Mickey Mouse Guest

    George, are you still trying to load your digital with film? I've, got some
    bad news for you!

    Try some meditation, and ponder for a while....lol

    P.s. Goofy says Hi!

    Mickey


    "George Kerby" <> wrote in message
    news:BF93DBB3.2E307%...
    > <<<<<<grin>>>>>>
    >
    >
    > On 11/6/05 2:25 PM, in article
    > 436e66b5$0$26602$, "Mickey Mouse" <.> wrote:
    >
    >> Unfortunately that would be a little off topic. I do think however one
    >> should not completely denigrate another persons effort without
    >> constructive
    >> criticisms. I only have one word for you though.....
    >> Ohhhhmmmmmmmmmmm.
    >> lol
    >>
    >> Mickey
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> "George Kerby" <> wrote in message
    >> news:BF93884B.2E247%...
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> On 11/6/05 5:14 AM, in article
    >>> 436de57f$0$25854$, "Mickey Mouse" <.>
    >>> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> All criticisms are valid. However I do see what you see. I was once
    >>>> given
    >>>> some very sound advice and I pass it on two you.
    >>>> Many look but only a few can see. Look at you pictures and crop them
    >>>> with
    >>>> your mind. Find the picture within the picture. Sometimes, there are
    >>>> many
    >>>> pictures within a picture. You must know that a picture tells a
    >>>> thousand
    >>>> words, but your pictures don't speak. They don't convey the feeling
    >>>> that
    >>>> made you take the pictures in the first place. However the pictures
    >>>> are
    >>>> there, I can see them, so must you. Go back and take the same pictures
    >>>> again but this time think about the light and time of day, think about
    >>>> filters and how they can convey the mood. Don't just look, but see as
    >>>> well
    >>>> the pictures within the frame, there are quite a few there. You must
    >>>> make
    >>>> the observer feel what you feel.
    >>>> Hope this makes some little sense for you... good luck
    >>>>
    >>>> Mickey
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>> MAN! All that from a rodent!
    >>>
    >>> I guess Goofy will be discussing Existentialism next...
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> _____________________________________________________________________________
    >>> __
    >>> Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -
    >>> http://www.uncensored-news.com
    >>> <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source
    >>> <><><><><><><><>
    >>>

    >>
    >>

    >
    >
    > _______________________________________________________________________________
    > Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -
    > http://www.uncensored-news.com
    > <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source
    > <><><><><><><><>
    >
    Mickey Mouse, Nov 7, 2005
    #15
  16. name

    Stacey Guest

    Derek Fountain wrote:

    > Look for a old log or
    > something which can be placed in the foreground to draw the eye into
    > the shot. A bird or something on the water would also help the eye fix
    > into the shot.


    Yep, it needs SOMETHING other than a shot of a tree line. Even if you shot a
    curved bank of the lake it would have some interest. It's like a straight
    line of trees with a straight bank with water at the bottom and sky at the
    top. It needs something different, this is a ugly gimp edit but if the lake
    bank was curved along with the straight tree line it might pull your eye
    around into the red tree?

    http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2005-1/937049/testlake.JPG

    --


    Stacey
    Stacey, Nov 7, 2005
    #16
  17. name

    name Guest

    Stacey wrote:
    > Derek Fountain wrote:
    >
    > > Look for a old log or
    > > something which can be placed in the foreground to draw the eye into
    > > the shot. A bird or something on the water would also help the eye fix
    > > into the shot.

    >
    > Yep, it needs SOMETHING other than a shot of a tree line. Even if you shot a
    > curved bank of the lake it would have some interest. It's like a straight
    > line of trees with a straight bank with water at the bottom and sky at the
    > top. It needs something different, this is a ugly gimp edit but if the lake
    > bank was curved along with the straight tree line it might pull your eye
    > around into the red tree?
    >
    > http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2005-1/937049/testlake.JPG
    >
    > --
    >
    >
    > Stacey


    I didn't have a shovel handy, otherwise I would have relocated the red
    tree to the side of the pond create a more appealing composition. :)
    name, Nov 7, 2005
    #17
  18. name

    Stacey Guest

    name wrote:


    >
    > I didn't have a shovel handy, otherwise I would have relocated the red
    > tree to the side of the pond create a more appealing composition. :)


    Yes, you could have possibly walked to a different point. And no, the red
    tree didn't need to be in the center. Maybe this is just a poor choice of
    subject altogether?

    Please ignore the sugestions and keep taking really boring images which you
    will probably do anyway. And yes, it ticks me off I just wasted my time
    trying to help you only get this smart ass remark.
    --

    Stacey
    Stacey, Nov 7, 2005
    #18
  19. name

    Mickey Mouse Guest

    Dear name,
    What Stacey was trying to say is C O M P O S I T I O N. Stacey was obviously
    trying to be helpful and your shovel remark was unfair. Perhaps it was your
    attempt at humour. Read Stacey's comments again and take note because she's
    right Stacey wasn't bagging you. If she/we didn't care about your interest
    we would not have answered.

    Mickey


    "Stacey" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > name wrote:
    >
    >
    >>
    >> I didn't have a shovel handy, otherwise I would have relocated the red
    >> tree to the side of the pond create a more appealing composition. :)

    >
    > Yes, you could have possibly walked to a different point. And no, the red
    > tree didn't need to be in the center. Maybe this is just a poor choice of
    > subject altogether?
    >
    > Please ignore the sugestions and keep taking really boring images which
    > you
    > will probably do anyway. And yes, it ticks me off I just wasted my time
    > trying to help you only get this smart ass remark.
    > --
    >
    > Stacey
    Mickey Mouse, Nov 7, 2005
    #19
  20. name

    name Guest

    Mickey Mouse wrote:
    > Dear name,
    > What Stacey was trying to say is C O M P O S I T I O N. Stacey was obviously
    > trying to be helpful and your shovel remark was unfair. Perhaps it was your
    > attempt at humour. Read Stacey's comments again and take note because she's
    > right Stacey wasn't bagging you. If she/we didn't care about your interest
    > we would not have answered.


    Yeah ok, sorry... but I was just trying to say that often you're not
    completely free to compose the picture because of circumstances,
    direction of sunlight, etc..

    >
    > Mickey
    >
    >
    > "Stacey" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > name wrote:
    > >
    > >
    > >>
    > >> I didn't have a shovel handy, otherwise I would have relocated the red
    > >> tree to the side of the pond create a more appealing composition. :)

    > >
    > > Yes, you could have possibly walked to a different point. And no, the red
    > > tree didn't need to be in the center. Maybe this is just a poor choice of
    > > subject altogether?
    > >
    > > Please ignore the sugestions and keep taking really boring images which
    > > you
    > > will probably do anyway. And yes, it ticks me off I just wasted my time
    > > trying to help you only get this smart ass remark.
    > > --
    > >
    > > Stacey
    name, Nov 7, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. A. D. F.

    autumn (photorate)

    A. D. F., Sep 21, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    319
    A. D. F.
    Sep 21, 2003
  2. Ina Sterk

    Nature's colorfull gift: autumn

    Ina Sterk, Nov 6, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    287
    Ina Sterk
    Nov 6, 2003
  3. G. Hoppenbrouwers

    Autumn

    G. Hoppenbrouwers, Oct 16, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    430
    Mike Fields
    Oct 17, 2005
  4. Annika1980

    AUTUMN EAGLES LOVE THE 20D !!!

    Annika1980, Nov 6, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    18
    Views:
    483
    Mike Fields
    Nov 9, 2005
  5. Jules Vide

    Northeast Autumn High Resolution Photographs

    Jules Vide, Jul 1, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    291
    Jules Vide
    Jul 1, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page