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.
Sorry man. My titles are pretty much never intended to explain the picture to the viewer.
The line is from Apocalypse Now. Robert Duval says, "Some day this war is going to end." in such a way that he is clearly regretful that is the case. The picture is meant both to indicate my sadness at leaving a place that matters a lot to me while simultaneously playing on the imperial architecture in the context of our current war on, well, let me not say it....
My photography is awful on both a technical and a semiotic level....
I always try to be open honest and straight forward with my critiques. So here goes: It looks like this may be an HDR image, that said there is haloing around the dome and also on the left side. The black triangle in the upper right corner is very distracting, a different vantage point may have helped. The sky has an un-natural texture to it, perhaps from HDR PP. Most of the buildings have windows closely spaced except for the building that runs across the bottom of the frame. Personally, I'd loose that via crop.
I like the reflectivness and the differing building shapes, textures and sizes. Thanks for the titles explaination. Great movie with many quoteable moments.
Since it's a critique forum, I guess I can say that if the photograph is about some kind of war, then it's not a message that is clearly communicated to the viewers. If it's about some somber feeling, then it's under-exposed look - intentional or not - does seem to suggest that. Otherwise, it simply looks like just another under-exposed snap shot of buildings.
Then again, based on his response, it does not seem that the original photog really cares how the viewers think about this photograph at all.
Since it's a critique forum, I guess I can say that if the photograph is about some kind of war, then it's not a message that is clearly communicated to the viewers. If it's about some somber feeling, then it's under-exposed look - intentional or not - does seem to suggest that. Otherwise, it simply looks like just another under-exposed snap shot of buildings.
Then again, based on his response, it does not seem that the original photog really cares how the viewers think about this photograph at all.
Then perhaps he's just having a bad hair day. How about we all simply say: "Nice Shot!" "Good eye, great capture !" to cheer him up a bit?
Works pretty well for me. Might be a bit dark, as others have opined. There are also halos around the dome and the other buildings. Get rid of 'em. And the black triangle at above right... not sure, but taking that out that via the patch or content-aware tools might be a good idea. Sky texture and building below don't faze me.
Your titles remind me of Thomas Hawk's (the flickr dude with the awesome titles).
Last edited by draymorton; 09-12-2010 at 01:16 PM.
I like it. A little dark but I still like it. What's in a name? If it is personal that's fine. I think the upper right distraction should have been shot around or processed out.
I am like Barney Fife, I have a gun but Andy makes me keep the bullet in my pocket..
By the way, it is about a war, just not the one you are thinking. The fact that I often use titles whose intent is NOT to explain the picture is not an indication that I do not care what the viewer thinks. I do. However it is also an indication that I care that the viewer does think. If you think it sucks, fine. If you don't understand and want to what I meant, I am happy to try to explain. But I don't feel like holding forth on every picture I post, nor do I feel like altering the free associative way in which I think about my content.
This picture has only one vantage point. No other was possible. Some of the problems could be cloned out, and I agree that I left it a bit darker than I wanted, although it is difficult to understand why, at this point, anybody would be expecting generally high key.
By the way, it is about a war, just not the one you are thinking. The fact that I often use titles whose intent is NOT to explain the picture is not an indication that I do not care what the viewer thinks. I do. However it is also an indication that I care that the viewer does think. If you think it sucks, fine. If you don't understand and want to what I meant, I am happy to try to explain. But I don't feel like holding forth on every picture I post, nor do I feel like altering the free associative way in which I think about my content.
If you cannot handle the comments, then you should consider staying away from a critique forum. There's no need to make an disingenuous statement like this in your reply to a critique:
My photography is awful on both a technical and a semiotic level....
Apparently your sadness, for whatever, is still overwhelming you.
That isn't the case aging. Anyhow if you think I need comforting, so be it.
I am fine with the comments. Please keep them coming people no matter what you think.
I will try harder to keep from talking about my feelings. I am overly sensitive to my manifest weaknesses as a photographer, but it isn't debilitating I assure you.
Actually, I find your titles quite intriguing. Thats not to say I always understand, but its like a clue into the photo and the photographer.
To me, what is missing in this shot, compared to some of your other shots based on the subject, is a sense of the dramatic, ie, how nature seems to be battling the workings of humans. In this shot I see the human element but not much of the nature.
I like the picture. It is very fitting to your style. I feel like the triangle at the top right is what the picture would look like printed and snipped. There is a halo around the gold building on the right and on the black triangle. The texture in the sky and the exposure makes the triangle on the top right a little more acceptable. like, if it were and old photograph.
IMO- your titles always fit the picture very well. I thought the title meant the war between buildings/society vs nature. but, sounds like I could be wrong... then again, I guess I am not because you can call this art. lol Art is what you make it.
What is up with this place? First that dude that got all mad because people were critiquing him on the critique forum, then the painting by light guy and now this? With all negative comments aside, especially your self deprecating ones.
This is pretty cool picture. It reminds me of an old image. The bottom building looks like it's wider on one side and I that makes me feel like it's not level but that could be me. Sounds like the texture in the sky bothers some but I dig it. It adds to the vintage feel of it.
Sorry to get involved in the argument but I am getting over this place. what happened to playful bantering?
I don't see anything in Daqs posts here that suggests he cannot accept critique. . .quite to the contrary.
i agree with criticisms about underexposure and the haloing of some buildings, but i do love the composition here. I would just reduce the HDR evidence here and just use the Shadow/Highlight tool to bring out some shadow details and upping the exposure a stop to the RAW file.
I have come to learn and accept that your titles are not always immediately understood and quite often are vague and abstract in relation to your posted images, but that for me is not a positive or a negative . . .its just your way.
I think it is a fair observation that I do not reject criticism, but I often take it way too personally and in doing so I often react in a way that might lead people to not give fair critiques. It isn't an aspect of my personality that I like either. I can make the effort to minimize it, primarily because I do not *want* people to pull any punches.
This is a blend of the high and the low key rendering. An early critique called the low key something like a typical example of an underexposed snapshot.
Ok I understand why that was said, but I think but it is not underexposed. I deliberately chose the low key because it enhances the richness of the colors and the drama. I have every exposure I want to chose to make the final shot. But I chose the darker version,
But I always do that. So I accept that it looks like a lazy and random shot. Which to some extent it was. But my whole artistic endeavor, to the extent it is anything of the sort, is to try to turn l lazy and random shots into something interesting. Everything I shoot is about that.
So I need to try high to low key more, because I think I can improve whatever is in these shots. Please tell me which you prefer.
And for what it is worth, the phrase, "Some day this war is going to end," is the shorthand way that Lori and I have of reminding each other that this will all end eventually. It is kind of charming in that hipster douchebag sort of way. But it is our nature, and this played a big role in the naming of this shot.
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by AgingEyes
