|
|
|
Jim Loy
{K:27748} 11/7/2009
|
ColoUr good. Crop good... never was a fan of centralisim. Maybe take a step or 2 to the left and cover that large blue spot wiff the top of the leafless tree. Same shot, a tad more balance and nothing dead-centRe. Have I mentioned I do not like centralisim?
|
|
|
|
Roger Skinner
{K:75036} 11/7/2009
|
Here's the excerpt re this compositional style that I include in my classes... so there
Centralised
As the name suggests this technique involves the centring of the main object/s in the frame as the compositional structure. Using this technique is not all that popular in fact some schools of thought exist which deliberately do NOT allow for this method to be used stating that organising your composition in such a way is boring. I take a contrary stand on this and use it deliberately to alter the visual hierarchy of the image. By visual hierarchy I mean the hierarchy of objects contained within the frame and the importance I want them to have. By altering their place in the frame I alter their importance.
|
|
|
|
|
Roger Skinner
{K:75036} 11/7/2009
|
I was also pretty peeved about the lack of detail.. hate this shrinking business
|
|
|
|
|
Jim Loy
{K:27748} 11/7/2009
|
yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah.... by centering it, you are going against the traditional form of not centering it. I ge it..... just not a big fan of th style. 10 Little Indians" by Nilsson on now...
|
|
|
|
|
Jim Loy
{K:27748} 11/7/2009
|
I hear ya there, Brother!!!!! My latest (cloudy harvest image) lost a lot in re-sizing.
|
|
|
|
|
Andre Denis
{K:61561} 11/7/2009
|
Sorry Roger,
I must be missing something here?
The fact that the main subject is in the centre isn't really the problem. I've seen a lot of great images of centered trees. Some dark and moody, some light and breezy. This one just doesn't cut it either way. Nothing interesting about the dead tree in the centre. And even if there was, the clutter of the small trees in the background would have distracted from it.
Maybe I just don't get it? I've seen a lot more interesting images from you.
Wow that sounds negative.
Andre
|
|
|
|
|
Roger Skinner
{K:75036} 11/7/2009
|
keke sheesh Andre.. if one pleased the world with every image it'd be a bloody marvel.. mate all I say is one man's fish is another mans poisson keke thanks for the honesty.. mate I can take it and thats what the CC section is all about.. they say dish it out
|
|
|
|
|
Radovan Magdalenic
{K:3436} 11/7/2009
|
Fantastic.Regards
|
|
|
|
|
Malules Fernandez
{K:34590} 11/7/2009
|
>Nice shot, Roger!
|
|
|
|
|
Andre Denis
{K:61561} 11/7/2009
|
Hi Roger,
Thanks for not getting all bent out of shape with my negtative review of this image. Too many people here seem to take a negative review far too seriously. As you say, you can't please all of the people all of the time. If we try to, we end up with mediocrity.
I think far too many people comment on this site with an "Emporer's New Clothes" mentality. That is to say, they plaster "Great shot" comments on most of the shots they open, simply because they don't want to upset anyone.
I was taught early on when reviewing an image, a good rule of thumb is to mention something negative about the image, no matter how much you liked it. Also vice versa, no matter how much you disliked the image, say something positive.
One of our photographic arts teachers used to use this method on "review night". Every one in the class would put what they considered to be their best or most interesting image of the week up on display for the night. We would all view the images without discussion at first. Then, we would all fill in on a sheet of paper, what we thought were positive and negative attributes of each image. (at least one of each) Then the discussions would start. I think that is a pretty good method for a photographer to get an accurate feel for how one of your images is being percieved by your peers.
Having said all that, I broke my own rule and didn't say anything positive. So, "nice blue sky"?
Andre
|
|
|
|
|
Roger Skinner
{K:75036} 11/7/2009
|
kekeke nice blue sky.. hell!!.. yeah that is pretty much the approach I take as well.. tho I try to find something positive.. u r right about the emperors new clothes tho.. not a lot of people on here call a spade a fu$%ing shovel.. which is what we need a bit more of..I do feel I can speak pretty freely with Owen O'Meara.. yesty I critiqued on of his images.. he replied and said he was fit to weep.. I replied.. read it and weep.. kekeke
|
|
|
|
|
Mark Southcombe
{K:2046} 11/8/2009
|
Good discussion going on here Roger. I like what Andre said about positive & negative comments going down on a sheet on review night. Maybe something like that could work with MDCC when discussing the assignments.
|
|
|
|
|
Andre Denis
{K:61561} 11/12/2009
|
Hi Mark and Roger,
Funny thing is I don't remember the name of that instuctor, but I sure remember those critique nights. At the very least, we all got a good sense of how our peers were percieving our images. Most people are a bit shy about giving even slightly negative comments at first, but when it is mandatory, WATCH OUT! There were a few cat fights :)
Andre
|
|
|
|
|
Andre Denis
{K:61561} 11/12/2009
|
Owen does a lot of good work with those B&W nudes in the gardens.
Andre
|
|
