Author Topic: Please critique (Read 5991 times)

SalSanto · « **on:** July 07, 2009, 11:23 »

Hello, I am brand new to the photography world. I've always had an interest in photography but never had enough financial support to begin my hobby. I recently inherited a brand new Canon SLR and started shooting about 3 months ago. To-date, I fell as though this is my best photo taken. I am getting used to shooting in full manual mode and have learned a ton about ISO, Shutter Speeds, DOF, Metering, White Balancing etc. I would love to hear what I could have done better in this photo so that I may improve on future shots.

This Photo was taken with 1/15, ISO 200 F5.6 (flash not fired) Spot Metering and a flash light for the spot light. I shot it in RAW and adjusted the saturation and sharpness with use of the software that came with the camera.

Please critique

massman · « **Reply #1 on:** July 07, 2009, 11:49 »

Is it a dog?

SalSanto · « **Reply #2 on:** July 07, 2009, 11:54 »

Yes, it's my Pug. I guess I still have a lot of homework to do if you were not able to make that out on your own. Hahaha! Oh well, thanks for your honesty

)

massman · « **Reply #3 on:** July 07, 2009, 12:02 »

It's always hard to tell from a small image. If you need feedback on technical aspects of the photo you will need to post a crop so the detail can be seen.

I don't shoot animals or pets so maybe I'm not the best to judge, but over all I would say that it's not a bad effort, too much black for me and I would like to see the face, I'm sure there is a great expression in there waiting to make someone go 'aah'. Keep shooting.

Squat · « **Reply #4 on:** July 07, 2009, 12:03 »

You could have use some addition light to give it some impact. Even a reflector to add more shadow details. You don't want the obvious question like massman just said, "what is it?".
If you wish to emphasize the rembrandt type lighting to get nice chiaroscuro of light and dark, you could work with your placement of addition bounce to get the texture off the dog's fur. Back lit to get some separation with a well adjusted rim light. Or else it just looks like another dog in the dark.
Furthermore, why did you choose to shoot at 1/15 for a dynamic subject. The dog may be sleeping but there is still the camera vibration that could blur the image.
Which is why I suggest additional ambient lighting so you could shoot at a faster speed. Even fill flash can add interest to the image. Then use photoshop to control how much of the dynamic range you want to pull out of this lighting .

You want to make the dog seem to be three dimensional and coming out of the dark. If you know what I mean.

puravida · « **Reply #5 on:** July 07, 2009, 12:28 »

Quote from: massman on July 07, 2009, 12:02

It's always hard to tell from a small image. If you need feedback on technical aspects of the photo you will need to post a crop so the detail can be seen.

I don't shoot animals or pets so maybe I'm not the best to judge, but over all I would say that it's not a bad effort, too much black for me and I would like to see the face, I'm sure there is a great expression in there waiting to make someone go 'aah'. Keep shooting.

yes, massman is right.

Quote from: tan510jomast on July 07, 2009, 12:03

You want to make the dog seem to be three dimensional and coming out of the dark. If you know what I mean.

yes, tan is right too.

Sal, if you want to get the umphh out of the image, you have to work at it, not just find a picture.
it's like a product shot. you don't want someone to ask you, what is that? is it an onion? no, it's a cloth rabbit! ohhh!.
to successful bring out the essence of the image, you want to give it depth, texture, detail, composition, and ambience.
as tan said, don't be lazy. you have to add light to where there is not enough, and you have to take away light to where there is too much.
it's not like you are a photojournalist and you are at the scene of a crime or a fire, and you have to make do with all there is. still, as a photojournalist, you walk around the area, you look high and low, you stoop, you stand on a box,etc.. to catch the vantage point.
same thing if you are shooting your pet, or even a box of matches. if not, what makes the buyer wants to choose this photo from the others?

in other word, don't make it "just a snapshot".

SalSanto · « **Reply #6 on:** July 07, 2009, 12:33 »

Thanks for the follow up massman! I'm not only new to photography I’m new to this website as well. I will take your advise and post a crop going forward.

SalSanto · « **Reply #7 on:** July 07, 2009, 13:01 »

massman / tan510jomast, thank you both very much for your feedback!

tan510jomast, I used 1/15 because anything lower was bringing in too much light. I also had the camera mounted to a tripod to help avoid camera shake. I was trying to accomplish the same settings as you would see in a Broadway show. The same settings where all the lights go out and one of the stars would come out on stage and sing a sad song under the theater’s spotlight. 3 months ago I was buying throw away cameras at Rite Aid to take my photos. In your opinion, am I on the right track or could I have saved my time and taken the very same photo with the camera's Full Auto settings? I just want to make sure I’m excelling and moving forward rather than just convincing myself that I’m headed in the right direction.

massman, please feel fee to comment as well.

Squat · « **Reply #8 on:** July 07, 2009, 13:25 »

Quote from: SalSanto on July 07, 2009, 13:01

massman / tan510jomast, thank you both very much for your feedback!

tan510jomast, I used 1/15 because anything lower was bringing in too much light. I also had the camera mounted to a tripod to help avoid camera shake. I was trying to accomplish the same settings as you would see in a Broadway show. The same settings where all the lights go out and one of the stars would come out on stage and sing a sad song under the theater’s spotlight. 3 months ago I was buying throw away cameras at Rite Aid to take my photos. In your opinion, am I on the right track or could I have saved my time and taken the very same photo with the camera's Full Auto settings? I just want to make sure I’m excelling and moving forward rather than just convincing myself that I’m headed in the right direction.

massman, please feel fee to comment as well.

SalSanto,
I feel it's better that you shoot with more fill to get details in your shadow, so they don't block.
Don't worry if it looks too much on camera RAW. You can play with the variations in Photoshop.
Many times, I would have shot something final in rim lighting or profile lighting, only to wish I could have add more here, taken off there,etc..
Now, I shoot for as high as I can for the highlight without clipping, and fill as much for the shadows to get the subtle details without blocking.
Then I will play around with the highlight/shadows on Photoshop until I get as many variations as I want. If you shoot with a high res DSLR, you can end up with more than one final image but creative cropping. Whereas if you just crop in and shoot with that restricting lighting , you end up with no variations. If the final shot fails, you have nothing.

Also, if you study the stage lighting of a good movie, there is shadow detail too. It's not just blocked shadows. It's not so apparent with your eyes, but if you study the lighting of the old masters of the movies like Cecil Beaton, you will see the dramatization take into consideration both highlight and shadow.

Squat · « **Reply #9 on:** July 07, 2009, 13:31 »

and Thank You SalSanto for allowing me to share some ideas with you. I wish you all success in your new career.

SalSanto · « **Reply #10 on:** July 07, 2009, 14:11 »

Oh no, I'm far from making a career out of this. I'm just loving photography as a recreational hobby. Thanks for the best wishes, regardless

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Please critique (Read 5991 times)

SalSanto

massman

SalSanto

massman

Squat

puravida

SalSanto

SalSanto

Squat

Squat

SalSanto

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors