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.
I have a total lack of respect for anything connected with society, except that which makes the roads safer, the beer stronger, the food cheaper, and the old men and old women warmer in the winter and happier in the summer. Brendan Behan
Great shot, its simplicity, colors, detail and framing make for a super image.
Bill,
Feel Free TO EDIT My Photos, But Please Tell Me Why
I have gone over to the dark side, no more film.
Canon T2i, 18-135 IS
Digital Point&Shot - Canon Powershot A470
I am going to make a leap and assume you do and that you meant you would like to see the whole window. Well, that would be another picture. As would be a view of two windows side-by-side. Or a window and a door. Or the whole building - or just one of the panes. Those aren't the pictures I took. I took this one and though you may not like this view, it will have to do.
I am going to make a leap and assume you do and that you meant you would like to see the whole window. Well, that would be another picture. As would be a view of two windows side-by-side. Or a window and a door. Or the whole building - or just one of the panes. Those aren't the pictures I took. I took this one and though you may not like this view, it will have to do.
Tuna
OK, Frog. I'm thinking I was a bit short with you for your "from the hip" comment...let me try to elaborate on what I think you are asking/"critiquing".
At the time, instinctually, this is how I framed it - I don't remember even considering stepping back to show the whole thing. I suspect the whole window would have been too formal with no other point of interest to add (as in "The Girl and the Blue Door" where complete, formal framing had the woman for added interest (scale)). Here, the framing allows for something else (detail) to take a front seat.
I suppose I'm looking at it as: the top of the window IS there - where else would it be?
OK, Frog. I'm thinking I was a bit short with you for your "from the hip" comment...let me try to elaborate on what I think you are asking/"critiquing".
At the time, instinctually, this is how I framed it - I don't remember even considering stepping back to show the whole thing. I suspect the whole window would have been too formal with no other point of interest to add (as in "The Girl and the Blue Door" where complete, formal framing had the woman for added interest (scale)). Here, the framing allows for something else (detail) to take a front seat.
I suppose I'm looking at it as: the top of the window IS there - where else would it be?
Tuna
Tuna, I think the "debate" over the whole window being included or not is an interesting one as it comes up in certain situations from time to time. I understand where frog is coming from in that we sometimes do need to have the entire subject in the frame and perhaps on occasion we get in too tight. This is a different shot as you say if the entire window were included.
I think what we have here is that the window is not actually the subject, rather the color, texture and detail that is part of and surrounds the window is the subject.
If you had included the window in its entirety, then the window would be the subject and the detail and other stuff a side treat that could not be completely enjoyed because of the distance involved in framing.
This reminds me of a thread by Jetrim where he shot a rag on an old window and included the entire window. I felt it was best to go after the rag and texture by isolating a smaller part of the scene. He reshot the image again at a later time and i thought it made all the difference in making it a much more enjoyable photograph Red rag on a grungy window
This for me is the same situation where getting in tight on the detail is what the photograph is to be about.
Also, thank you for re-stating your comment to frog in a more deserving manner.
As I implied in my original reply I think the components of simplicity, color, detail and framing make the photograph, and to change any one of those would deminish the results or make an entirely different photo. :thumbsup: as is.
BTW have you PP'd this photo or are the colors as recorded on the Ektar100.
Bill,
Feel Free TO EDIT My Photos, But Please Tell Me Why
I have gone over to the dark side, no more film.
Canon T2i, 18-135 IS
Digital Point&Shot - Canon Powershot A470
BTW have you PP'd this photo or are the colors as recorded on the Ektar100.
So far, in my experience, Ektar has the expected latitude of negative film for exposure but also seems to have an extended latitude in color capture allowing for greater subtle gradience in PP. Though I haven't been able to truly replicate the bold, deep saturation capable in some slide film, I can come pretty close in PP and still retain good shadow detail (again, good exposure latitude throughout). Also, much of my latest B&W work has been converted from Ektar - good scanning properties, good B&W tonality is easily achieved, allows for strict control of contrast...overall, a thoroughly capable film.
Thanks for sharing the photo, and Ektar info. :thumbsup:
Bill,
Feel Free TO EDIT My Photos, But Please Tell Me Why
I have gone over to the dark side, no more film.
Canon T2i, 18-135 IS
Digital Point&Shot - Canon Powershot A470
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Frog
