Please critique these PHOTOGRAPHS i took

ten out of ten · Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 10:23 am

I started a new topic in the right subforum so you can tell me how my photographs are coming along. Here are some ones that I think are p. ok.

this one seems like it could be better, but I don't know how:

Joined: 25 Jan 2008 Posts: 942 Location: greenville, sc

Joined: 08 Dec 2005 Posts: 9009 Location: SOMEWHERE EXTREME

i just want to turn over all those upside-down stones

ten out of ten · Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 10:35 am

brent wrote:

:\

you seriously live in greenville? I spent spring break there Sad

It snowed. Remember that?

Joined: 25 Jan 2008 Posts: 942 Location: greenville, sc

no i do not live in greenville

Joined: 25 Jan 2008 Posts: 942 Location: greenville, sc

the door does though
also its where trish was born

ten out of ten · Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 10:37 am

Dezro wrote:

i just want to turn over all those upside-down stones

yeah, the reason they are upside down is so that a player can look at variations. In games they are all played right-side up, but it makes it remember which stones to remove when practicing.

Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 10:54 am

3, 4, & 5 are the best ones imo

5 I think I just like the subject matter.
3 isn't all that interesting, but I have no complaints.

4 is probably the overall winner. I like that it nearly implies a story (but not one with any actual events... just the story of a moment in life).
It's also nicely composed.

Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 11:45 am

the only one i think it at all interesting is of the card

the one of trees could be better if there was anything interesting about it, but as it is, it's some unremarkable trees

Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 11:56 am

Think about focus. In most of these pictures everything is in focus. In 3, the subject is in focus and the background is not. This gives it depth, and often makes the picture more interesting!

ten out of ten · Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 11:58 am

trainwreck wrote:

the only one i think it at all interesting is of the card

the one of trees could be better if there was anything interesting about it, but as it is, it's some unremarkable trees

Tyler that is actually the worlds smallest letter which my girlfriend sent me through the world's smallest postal service

ten out of ten · Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 12:01 pm

Andrew wrote:

Think about focus. In most of these pictures everything is in focus. In 3, the subject is in focus and the background is not. This gives it depth, and often makes the picture more interesting!

I don't know how to adjust the focus! it is a digital camera so it always auto focuses. With the small picture, I was using the digital macro feature for taking pictures of things that are really close, so it did that by itself.

I think it has something to do with ISO or SLR?

Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 12:10 pm

You may need to get into either a semi-manual mode or full-on manual to be able to adjust the focus. You should be able to do a google search for how to do that kind of thing with your particular camera.

ten out of ten · Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 1:33 pm

google says it does not have manual focus

http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/content/Canon-PowerShot-SD1100-IS-Digital-Camera-Review-17786/Control-Options.htm

Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 1:42 pm

It doesn't have manual focus, but it does have different focus settings

Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 3:47 pm

I like 3, 7, and 8.

Three is pretty great as is. Well done. Good depth of field.

1 could be really good with a shallower depth of field (more blur). Maybe try it with a macro!

7 and 8 could use some more saturated or punchy colours - judicious use of saturation or tweaking curves/contrast would make them pop more.

I would do a closer crop in 8, eg

(i also tweaked the curves to add more contrast)

A way you can force the camera to blur out the background is zoom in a bit on your subject, lock the focus by holding down halfway on the shutter, recomposing the shot as necessary, and shooting. This will force the camera into a shallower depth of field. You can also try about 3-4ft away portraits in macro mode - that can look good too.

Joined: 19 Feb 2005 Posts: 3741 Location: Cumming

i like 1 and 3

but its kind of a shame that the table is so shiny in #1

ten out of ten · Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 4:05 pm

Thanks Dr. Mr, I will try out those techniques!

frozenpixie wrote:

i like 1 and 3

but its kind of a shame that the table is so shiny in #1

yeah I know - I even used the least shiny polyurethane there was but it still turned out way too shiny

Joined: 16 Mar 2005 Posts: 1503 Location: old london towne

t Dr Mr; please explain 'tweaking the curves'

thx

Posted: Fri Apr 10, 2009 8:12 pm

so lots of editing software has a tone curves or colour curves tool. there are four types: RGB, R, G, and B. You can adjust the amounts of each of these channels individually, allowing you to bring out highlights, lowlights, or midtones, as well as making colour corrections.

Posted: Fri Apr 10, 2009 8:17 pm

Please explain it in a sexier way

Posted: Sat Apr 11, 2009 10:15 am

a tone curve is a lot like a nipple. if you play around with it the right way, you may discover something that you didn't even know was missing from your photo/life