Jerry Nemeth wrote:
This is good advice!
I always use diffused flash fill light when shooting outdoor images.

offcamera or on?

Jerry Nemeth wrote:
This is good advice!
I always use diffused flash fill light when shooting outdoor images.

Philip Brown wrote:
offcamera or on?

Off camera, of course!

Philip Brown wrote:

offcamera or on?

Try both methods and see the difference.

Orca Bay Images wrote:
Try both methods and see the difference.

unfortunately, my current camera is somewhat crippled when it comes to offcamera.
The A5000 has no hotshoe.

while I presume slave mode would work fine for indoor shooting, since you can reflect the builtin camera off the walls to trigger.
I would imagine that it was not work well, for outdoor, with no walls?

Philip Brown wrote:

unfortunately, my current camera is somewhat crippled when it comes to offcamera.
The A5000 has no hotshoe.

while I presume slave mode would work fine for indoor shooting, since you can reflect the builtin camera off the walls to trigger.
I would imagine that it was not work well, for outdoor, with no walls?

You asked, off or on? If you don't have one of the options open to you, use the one that is and learn how to make it work for you.

Philip Brown wrote:
I have two quasi similar shots.

One is cropped in from 100mm
One was a hasty shot at 200mm, and the framing breaks some "rules" about cropping near elbow.
But i LIKE it.

opening up the floor for debate.

Please note: they dont work in low res.
So please click through,  full screen the browser, then lemme know your thoughts


(yes I did this before. but stop being logical. This is ART, not logic! )

EDIT: since I didnt make this clear earlier, I started this thread because I like the mood the colors evoke in the second one .
But for latecomers, there's a more general portfolio critique lower down.

I have the same issues.  In the end, its YOUR art and not someone elses.  As long as you like what you're doing, forget what other people think.  I prefer up close and personal photography which sometimes requires cutting arms and legs but it brings the observer in close as if they are right there with the model.

7th Level Photography wrote:
I have the same issues.  In the end, its YOUR art and not someone elses.  As long as you like what you're doing, forget what other people think.  I prefer up close and personal photography which sometimes requires cutting arms and legs but it brings the observer in close as if they are right there with the model.

It's fine to get in close and lose peripherals -- happens all the time -- but cutting off at the ankle, wrist, or elbow is just sloppy.

If you like what you're doing and you're going to defend sloppy work with the "it's my art" shield, asking for feedback starts to give the appearance of looking for unabashed adoration. "Forget what other people think?" Do you realize what forum you're in?

Orca Bay Images wrote:

It's fine to get in close and lose peripherals -- happens all the time -- but cutting off at the ankle, wrist, or elbow is just sloppy.

If you like what you're doing and you're going to defend sloppy work with the "it's my art" shield, asking for feedback starts to give the appearance of looking for unabashed adoration. "Forget what other people think?" Do you realize what forum you're in?

Exactly what I was thinking. 

Imagine going to a restaurant and ordering your favorite dish, then finding out it tastes like crap when you take the first bite.  You complain to the chef, but his response is, "It's my art; I don't care what you think."  More than likely, very few people will actually like what he's serving. 

Photography (or any art form) is the same way.  Yes, you can be bold, you can experiment, and you can break some of the rules.  If the picture looks like crap though, then no amount of hype, fluff, or Photoshop will turn it into art.  If you want to convince yourself it IS art though, then, just like the bad chef, you'll simply keep producing garbage and will never push yourself to learn to how to create something appealing to the masses.  Basically, you've only scratched the surface, yet you've fooled yourself into believing you're a master of your craft. 

Sometimes, "good enough" just isn't good enough.

Philip Brown wrote:
What is it with the personal attacks?
this forum is supposed to be about critique of photos. not people.

Which ones are personal attacks?

Philip Brown wrote:
side note:
I got a spyder pro today.
Compared my beach shots calibrated, vs uncalibrated.

UNcalibrated, the ocean is a BEAUUUUTIFUL shade of cerulean blue.

calibrated.. it's.. meh.

sigh.

Take your calibrator back for a refund and enjoy your "art."

Philip Brown wrote:
side note:
I got a spyder pro today.
Compared my beach shots calibrated, vs uncalibrated.

UNcalibrated, the ocean is a BEAUUUUTIFUL shade of cerulean blue.

calibrated.. it's.. meh.

sigh.

You're probably not even at the stage where calibration is all too relevant to what you're producing.
I get the impression you're a bit of a suck it and see kinda guy and that's ok. But it seems as though if you already like a shot, you're unlikely to listen to why it actually sucks from those who know.
If you are serious, my advice would be to learn more through schooling and or assisting professional photographers, paying attention to the details. You have to learn walk before you can fly, so I find it amusing watching you "ask" for opinions and or critiques only to see you throw it back at people. Especially when those who offer them, "evidently" know what they're talking about.
Good luck.

David Kirk wrote:
Uhm...I think it is definitely a glamour shot.  If not, why that choice of wardrobe...particularly with the pants undone?

Her expression is anything but quiet and compemplative or thoughtful looking.

Maybe it really rocks in that environment - I don't know I didn't try it.  Lots of images look great without me having to follow instructions on how to view them.

If you like it that's great, but the point of starting a critique thread is too hear other opinions, not to defend yours.

Couldn't agree more. There is nothing about these images that stand out in any kind of good way, I don't see any indication of an artist working on his craft here. Instead, I see:

- Someone dismissive of opinions before he even hears them (suggesting glamour photographers will all hate these is just a stupid thing to say, you won't find a single BW landscape in my work, but I love Ansel Adams, and am very familiar with his work, style, and techniques)

- Someone that thinks if they explain to someone how to view an image "the right way" we will all suddenly experience his genius

- Someone who, with every comment, talks about how he feels about this image/model. There's nothing wrong with having a particularly strong connection to an image you took, or even to a particular model, but you still need to know how to objectively look at your own work and understand the difference between something you have an emotional connection with, and something that is objectively good work

- Defending uncommon cropping decisions for good/artistic reasons is perfectly acceptable, chopping someone's foot in half because you didn't check before you took the picture, is not. How does chopping her foot enhance the image in any way that could be considered good? Do you think that creates tension or something? If so, how does that fit with the overall feeling of this image, which you've already explained, in detail, you feel is basically "serenity"?

If you look through this entire thread you will notice a lot of "rookie mistakes" made in these images have been pointed out, from the ill-fitting swimsuit (easily fixed with clips that should be in your bag), to the harsh lighting (shoot at a different time of day/use fill lights/reflectors/diffusers), distractions in the background (remove them in post, or wait till they walk by), poor choices in posing and cropping (hyper-extended elbows, and feet cut in half), no connection to the model (face is too dark to see anything in the eyes, and overall expression feels completely disconnected), and several more.

These look like images from someone at the beginning of their photography journey, and that's fine, but you've been on this site for 2 yrs now, and if you're legitimately trying to be a photographer, perhaps you should spend more time studying your craft and that of your peers and ppl who's work you admire, and a little less time trying to defend sub-par work as "excellent, but misunderstood by everyone else", (including those that do it for a living). If you want to shoot to get images that appeal to you, there's no issue with that, but I certainly wouldn't bring work with that goal into a critique forum of photographers. If you're trying to become a photographer, you might want to start by dropping all your "justifications" for things, just present your image, and listen to what is said. If no one else sees what you see, odds are, you're the one that's wrong. having said that, not everyone here is worth listening to, but some definitely are, and some of those are even in this thread, and they have all said the same thing, these images have serious problems. You should be able to see many of those if you learn to look at your own images critically, instead of looking at them through your own personal emotional connection with them.

I'm not trying to be harsh, but I know it sounds that way, I hope this helps you.