Please post no more than five images a day and respond to as many images as you post. Critics, please be constructive, specific, and nice! Moderated by gahspidy and mtbbrian.
By posting on the Photo Critique forum you agree to post only your own photos, be respectful, and give back as much as you receive. This is a moderated forum and anything abusive or
off-topic will be removed.
Like a couple of your abstract shots I commented on last week (I think...), this one is a bit *too abstract*. You need to give a better sense of what it is you're capturing, even though the point is to not show the whole subject. IOW, it's good to give the viewer a real hint about what they're seeing, and then take away just enough to make them wonder. At least that's my approach; obviously these things are subjective so there's really no "right way".
Here I think you've abstracted to the point of completely obscuring what it is that you've shot. This could be a part of a painting, a muddy puddle, a satellite picture of the Nile Delta... any number of things. And at least the way I look at it, I sort of lose the will to "figure it out" as soon as I realize there's no "hint" or larger context. That's not to say you should spell it out for us (verbally or otherwise), just that I get immediately stumped and so it sort of short-circuits my interest in the photo / why you took it.
Another example was the one where (I think) you zoomed in on part of a concrete wall, in order to show the converging lines made by the concrete seams. Now, had that shot been cropped a bit less and (for example) shown the shadown from a tree or a person (or even a car)... it might've drawn the viewer in a bit more to wonder "where is this wall; what's that person doing there?" That's not to say such shadows existed there, but rather you should seek out those abstract scenes with the "extra element of interest"....
Keep them coming; I'm sure you'll hit the mark just by using a bit "wider" eye.
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
