Author Topic: too snapshotish? don't understand... (Read 6504 times)

frozensage · « **on:** February 09, 2012, 19:02 »

http://www.flickr.com/photos/45642175@N06/6846292305/#in/photostream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/45642175@N06/6720428755/#in/photostream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/45642175@N06/6720419727/#in/photostream

maybe with the 2nd one I can understand if the quality is up to par cause I had to do alot of pp to increase the brightness but the other two I wouldn't know what is so snapshotish about them?

wut · « **Reply #1 on:** February 09, 2012, 19:10 »

Indeed they're, it doesn't look like you've put ~~much~~ any effort into it

lbarn · « **Reply #2 on:** February 09, 2012, 19:25 »

The the thing that bugs me the most about them is where is the sky? Did you clip it out? Did you brighten up the overall scene so much they sky got burned out? Those bright colored objects against a bright blue sky could be interesting...............

markrhiggins · « **Reply #3 on:** February 09, 2012, 19:36 »

seems like it was a bright day. You lifted exposure to expose the subject and burnt out the sky. Subjects lighting is still poor

ShadySue · « **Reply #4 on:** February 09, 2012, 19:36 »

Yeah, against a blue sky would be nice, but if you get a white sky you have to work round it, and as far as possible find a position which avoids the sky being in the photo. Looks like in this situation you'd get a messy background, though.
Other than that (I sympathise, we have white sky most of the time) the cropping is odd IMO. Maybe just have two or three lanterns if you can't get a row against a plain background.

Ed · « **Reply #5 on:** February 09, 2012, 19:41 »

Good topic...composition could be better.

Take some time to watch this and keep the comments in mind next time you run across the situation in order to make more interesting images:


The Rule Of Thirds - photography tutorial with Mike Browne

The first image leads the eye too

??

Second and third image...have the subject smack dab in the middle of the frame.

lbarn · « **Reply #6 on:** February 09, 2012, 19:52 »

Ed,

I wish you could get a certain agencies "outsourced reviewers" to view your link and find them one on the effects of perspective..............

frozensage · « **Reply #7 on:** February 10, 2012, 01:12 »

so 2 problems... sky is too bright (really cloudy day) and crop it down so there are less laterns... what about that shot with the alleyway sky too bright?

Till · « **Reply #8 on:** February 10, 2012, 04:02 »

I think the biggest problem is poor composition. That's why pictures two and three look indeed like snapshots. In both pictures the upper third is not used. That looks strange, since you took a pictures of something that's usually high up. So you would expect it to be more on top of the frame and not on the bottom. This might be a different story, if you had a nice blue sky and isolated the lanterns against it.
The first picture needs a perfect angel to look right, since even small differences in the lines make it look wrong.

microstockphoto.co.uk · « **Reply #9 on:** February 10, 2012, 04:41 »

Also, the lantern one should probably be editorial: although I don't have a clue about what's written there, there are 1+ billion people who can read it.

Perry · « **Reply #10 on:** February 10, 2012, 07:05 »

frozensage, could you explain why you think these images are NOT "snapshotish"?

(I think they are snapshotish: they need better composition, light, styling, weather etc. to rise above the "snapshot" level)

michealo · « **Reply #11 on:** February 10, 2012, 07:10 »

They aren't too snapshotish for flickr

gillian vann · « **Reply #12 on:** February 10, 2012, 18:42 »

yes I have to agree, the blown out sky is the thing that says "I shoot in Auto". I liked your arched doorway image, although that's just me, I love stuff like that. I find that type of image is not often accepted and doesn't sell well, although it's a lovely image for a travel story.

disorderly · « **Reply #13 on:** February 10, 2012, 19:03 »

In the first image, I find the perspective lines problematic. The lines of the doorway on the right feel awkward, as does the wall on the left. I'd consider stretching the top left and top right to make the whole thing more perpendicular. I also notice that the brick walk isn't straight; it moves up from left to right. Also, you cut the corner of the leftmost plant, so the leaf seems to enter the scene from nowhere.

In the second, the lower row of lanterns is cut off at the middle. Given all the empty (and dull gray) sky above, why not reposition lower down to show less sky and more lanterns?

The blown out sky in the third is distracting, and so is that little bit of building in the upper right. At minimum I'd edit that out. Better would be to change viewpoint a little to the right to lose that bit of building and the leftmost lantern you cut off. Best would be to reshoot on a day when the sky isn't so dull.

ruxpriencdiam · « **Reply #14 on:** February 11, 2012, 00:19 »

You can fix the perspective all you want and add a sky but you cant without a whole lot of work rebuild the top right side of the building wall that is blown out creating uneven lighting.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #15 on:** February 11, 2012, 01:16 »

You have got highly geometric subjects and you have positioned yourself in relation to it in such a way that the result is not pleasing to the eye. You need to consider how lines and shapes interact, how to avoid a cluttered appearance and how lines lead the eye from place to place. Careful use of depth of field might come into consideration, as well.

Perry · « **Reply #16 on:** February 11, 2012, 03:45 »

Lanterns look best when they are lit, and they are best shot at the blue hour http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_hour (not when it's completely dark).

This of course requires planning (waiting for the right time and a tripod), but it's just things like this that make the images less "snapshotish"

frozensage · « **Reply #17 on:** February 11, 2012, 07:37 »

Quote from: disorderly on February 10, 2012, 19:03

In the first image, I find the perspective lines problematic. The lines of the doorway on the right feel awkward, as does the wall on the left. I'd consider stretching the top left and top right to make the whole thing more perpendicular. I also notice that the brick walk isn't straight; it moves up from left to right. Also, you cut the corner of the leftmost plant, so the leaf seems to enter the scene from nowhere.

In the second, the lower row of lanterns is cut off at the middle. Given all the empty (and dull gray) sky above, why not reposition lower down to show less sky and more lanterns?

The blown out sky in the third is distracting, and so is that little bit of building in the upper right. At minimum I'd edit that out. Better would be to change viewpoint a little to the right to lose that bit of building and the leftmost lantern you cut off. Best would be to reshoot on a day when the sky isn't so dull.

looks like I will throw those lantern shots in the bin since I have already wasted enough time trying to make them work. Interesting what you said about the alleyway image, I'll see what I can do with them, perhaps I tilted the original shot too much trying to straightening it up.

too bad I can't reshot these cause it was taken whilst overseas last month

rinderart · « **Reply #18 on:** February 11, 2012, 16:59 »

These are walkaround snaps my friend.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: too snapshotish? don't understand... (Read 6504 times)

frozensage

wut

lbarn

markrhiggins

ShadySue

Ed

lbarn

frozensage

Till

microstockphoto.co.uk

Perry

michealo

gillian vann

disorderly

ruxpriencdiam

BaldricksTrousers

Perry

frozensage

rinderart

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors