a couple from the Southside

joolsveer

I was at a loose end in town this morning while waiting for some shoppers so I took a few shots. Please view and comment.

lostexpectation

is that the same guy?

joolsveer

lostexpectation wrote:

is that the same guy?

I don't think the first guy has an earring.

joolsveer

some more shots but I crossed over the bridge too


temptation on Good Friday


Lost?




warriors

Shrimp

eh.. post reserved..


I'll be posting a reply soon, just kinda busy at the mo ...:)

PurpleFistMixer

Good contribution there Shrimp.

As far as the photos go.. hmm, well, I'd be sort of reluctant to take photos of art (ie the warriors one) 'cause if you take it too flat on it may as well be a scan, and you haven't really made a photo as it were? It's a bit of a hazy area, I suppose, but I figure if you're photographing other peoples' art, you should use surrounding scenery or angles to make it into something new, ie, your own photo.

Dimy

Your photo's really need more post-processing, but to be honest only one photo interested me, the Primary Colour building. But this image is slightly angled... I took the liberty of processing it a little and here's the result:



I rotated it 0.58 degrees counter clockwise to get rid of the angle, I added some contrast and played with the levels. Then made a combination of a colour, sepia and B&W layer.

The photo itself is not bad, but it needed some more work imho.

Shrimp

Alot of them are just boring snapshots with no real point or subject. I could be terribly wrong, but, dont take this wrong, you should start looking at some other photographers strong styles then try and replicate them, not so that you can take the credit, but rather so that you can vary your work! everyone does it!

dimy, you seem to love the whole 50 sepia, 50 b&w... with a lil colour.. nice effect!

Dimy

Shrimp wrote:

dimy, you seem to love the whole 50 sepia, 50 b&w... with a lil colour.. nice effect!

Yeah I think that effect works really well for urban photography, but doesn't work on everything.

Oh and joolsveer another thing... try a different angle instead of a straight-on approach, something like this (a similar picture from myself):



And I'm sorry to say but the other photo's are indeed boring with no real subject. But keep trying. The one that comes close to be reasonable is "Lost", the only problem in that photo is that you have an even number of subjects, you usually get a better composition if you have an uneven number of subjects, also it would have been better with a wider aperture to get a blurry background and sharp focus on your subjects. But I think you used a point and shoot camera for that photo or didn't you? In that case you probably can't do much about it. That picture is also a little over-exposed (mainly the faces of the women).

Shrimp

You went a little mad with the burn tool dimy

joolsveer

a few more from today.

Please feel free to criticise and make appropriate suggestions.

Shrimp

What is it you are trying to convey in your photos? It seems like you just post every photo you take, perhaps you should be more strict when it comes to deciding which photos to keep and which to delete.

Just out of curiosity.. what digicam do you have?

Dimy

Shrimp wrote:

You went a little mad with the burn tool dimy

I didn't burn a thing :rolleyes:
It's the B&W layer, in most of my pics with this color effect I have it on "Overlay" blending mode and about 50% or less opacity, in this picture I kept 100% opacity for the B&W layer. I kinda like it but yeah..maybe overdone a bit

joolsveer

No Shrimp I don't post every snap I take. For instance I took about 200 today and I have no intention of posting more than a fraction of that number.

I currently use a 350D as well as some other cameras. I would prefer to take photographs rather than talk about camera gear.

If I am criticising other people's work I will try to be positive and constructive and I hope that others will treat me in the same way. I hope that I would not say that someone else's work is dull and boring (even when I consider that some of it is or at least that the subject matter does not appeal to me) because it obviously ment something to the photographer.

You may think that I am dull and boring for holding such views but I would hope that by increasing the number of photos that I take and viewing examples of good photography from whatever source that I will improve my own technique and develop an eye for subjects that appeal to me and those close to me.

joolsveer

To continue the story

Dimy

Shrimp wrote:

What is it you are trying to convey in your photos? It seems like you just post every photo you take, perhaps you should be more strict when it comes to deciding which photos to keep and which to delete.

Just out of curiosity.. what digicam do you have?

The last 3 pics aren't so bad actually, maybe the grandpa and the kid I'd try to get them a bit closer in the frame rather than at a distance, making them the focus of the picture, even though there's a lovely background. I love St Stephen's Green Park No comments on the two doors picture, I think it's good, just to bad the red door is badly painted. As for the last photo... I don't know what to comment...there's something "likeable" about it but can't quite put it into words. Not a great photo, but certainly not your worst.

P.S. If you have a 350D why don't you make more use of depth of field?

joolsveer

Dimy wrote:

The last 3 pics aren't so bad actually, maybe the grandpa and the kid I'd try to get them a bit closer in the frame rather than at a distance, making them the focus of the picture, even though there's a lovely background. I love St Stephen's Green Park No comments on the two doors picture, I think it's good, just to bad the red door is badly painted. As for the last photo... I don't know what to comment...there's something "likeable" about it but can't quite put it into words. Not a great photo, but certainly not your worst.

P.S. If you have a 350D why don't you make more use of depth of field?

Maybe I'm different but the very thing which appealed to me about the doors was that one was imperfect!

I have two film slrs that I bought back in the seventies when stop down metering was the norm so I appreciate depth of field issues. My preference is not to use long focal length lenses where possible as I like to get close to my subjects. It could be Dimy that I'm old school and you are new to photography after all you seemed surprised at the "Golden Mean" although it was certainly used by one of your compatriots - Rembrandt - who never used a camera.

We must get used to the arrogance of those who seem to know everything but appear to have problems producing results.

Dimy

lol... here I was trying to give constructive feedback... nevermind then, you're too "old school" apparently whatever that's supposed to mean. I'm very well aware of Golden Mean and Rule of Thirds... and that's the problem, I don't see any of it in most of your snapshots. Well good luck anyways people say you're never too old to learn... :rolleyes:

Fajitas!

joolsveer wrote:

Maybe I'm different but the very thing which appealed to me about the doors was that one was imperfect!

I have two film slrs that I bought back in the seventies when stop down metering was the norm so I appreciate depth of field issues. My preference is not to use long focal length lenses where possible as I like to get close to my subjects. It could be Dimy that I'm old school and you are new to photography after all you seemed surprised at the "Golden Mean" although it was certainly used by one of your compatriots - Rembrandt - who never used a camera.

We must get used to the arrogance of those who seem to know everything but appear to have problems producing results.

To be honest, Dimy was only trying to help you. You said C&C would be welcome. If they are to be welcome, you should be accepting, whether it is positive or negative. That is the point of putting your photos up here.

As for you being 'Old School', I don't see how that reflects in your work.

Now, would you consider yourself good at photography, or would you consider yourself as still learning?

Before you say I'm arrogant, I'm not, and try my best not to be. If I wanted to be arrogant, I could be, and righteously so.

Fridge

There's no point posting you pictures up, asking for criticism and then not accepting it. You don't have to agree what people say, but consider it, and remember everyone's opinions are valid, as anyone who sees your photos are your audience.

I think something you sould consider doing is:
when you see something you would like to photograph, ask yourself why. What do you like about what you see in front of you?
I'd like to know what is it that you wanted to get in this picture:
The location doesn't look that attractive, or rugged enough to be interesting, so I would assume it's not the trees, building, or carpark you wanted. If it is the couple, maybe you should have cut out more of what was around them, to concentrate on them more. But maybe it isn't them either. It's really unclear. I think most people would go "what exactly am I supposed to find interesting here?"

I think you need to manipulate what you see more. Don't just photograph something that looks good anyway. Take something that one wouldn't usually stop to look at, and make it into a great photo.
With more practise you'll get there. Just look for the right people to walk in to photo, the right moment, something that will make the photo memorable for the way it was taken. A photo just exactly recording something like the sculptures doesn't really have any effect on people. They'll only think of the sculpture, unless you photograph it in an interesting way.

joolsveer

What I like about this scene is the couple walking along the "fitness track" towards the wooden building and the roller on the right hand side with its relationship to rugby. If I had the facility of rearranging these elements to give a more pleasing composition I would of course.

Dimy

joolsveer wrote:

What I like about this scene is the couple walking along the "fitness track" towards the wooden building and the roller on the right hand side with its relationship to rugby. If I had the facility of rearranging these elements to give a more pleasing composition I would of course.

And that's what I meant earlier why you don't make use of depth of field.... if it's about the couple and the background like in this case is not all too interesting.... why not focus on the couple with a wide aperture and blur out the background? But that's just my arrogant newschool me talking... I gotta catch a plane now! take care

joolsveer

Dimy wrote:

lol... here I was trying to give constructive feedback... nevermind then, you're too "old school" apparently whatever that's supposed to mean. I'm very well aware of Golden Mean and Rule of Thirds... and that's the problem, I don't see any of it in most of your snapshots. Well good luck anyways people say you're never too old to learn... :rolleyes:

I may be almost 53 but I don't think I am yet too old to learn. I am also happy to learn from any source including those people a fraction of my age. I would like to put in on record Dimy you were very helpful when you suggested that I google for Virtual Photographer when I was having problems converting to black and white and I appreciate the help. You also suggested that I post my snapshots someplace else.

Both the "Golden Mean" and "Rule of Thirds" are no rules as such, they're more like guidelines how to make an interesting composition, however... in some cases it's better to centre a subject in the picture. Like all "rules", there's always an exception that proves the opposite. I must honestly say I didn't hear about the Golden Mean and Rule of Thirds untill a few months ago, but it's something I already did in my pictures as I always try to make a good composed shot.

Dimy wrote:

Yeah especially 1,2,3 and 4 seem overexposed and 5,6 and 7 are not very interesting snapshots imo. To be honest I think the only picture with potential is "Graceland", the others are snapshots, but you mentioned that in your topic title. Anyway, what Shrimp is trying to say is that you're on -->Arts-->Photography forum here... if you want to post "Holiday Snapshots" I don't think you should post them here as it doesn't fit the forum topic.

Dimy on 22/01/2006 wrote:

....I just started playing with SLR camera's so will have a lot to learn . Are there any photography courses you can take in Dublin? Or maybe a recommended book about SLR photography?

Dimy wrote:

For now I'll just play around a bit and teach myself . I don't have any friends who are into photography, just my cousin who's a photographer artist... but he's living in Holland and I don't have contact with him.

For a guy who took up an SLR first in January he appears to have learned an awful lot more than I have in 40 years of snapping. What is his secret?

joolsveer

Fajitas! wrote:

To be honest, Dimy was only trying to help you. You said C&C would be welcome. If they are to be welcome, you should be accepting, whether it is positive or negative. That is the point of putting your photos up here.

As for you being 'Old School', I don't see how that reflects in your work.

Now, would you consider yourself good at photography, or would you consider yourself as still learning?

Before you say I'm arrogant, I'm not, and try my best not to be. If I wanted to be arrogant, I could be, and righteously so.

The reason I post photos on the net is to get feedback from people generally - both photographers and non-photographers. I accept that I will get negative comments as well. I sincerely want to improve my "snapshots". It is just when the comments become so negative from a single source that it gets my goat. I would not call anybody arrogant but that doesn't prevent me from saying that particular comments are arrogant.

I wouldn't consider that I have stopped learning until I shuffle off.

joolsveer

another one or two from yesterday's walk around town. I assure you that should you offer constructive comments they will be taken on board in the same spirit as they are given. By the way what is C&C?




the castle was closed

elderlemon

Won't comment on the compositions but looking at the earlier photos one suggestion I'd make is to pick a different time of day. They all appear to be taken around noon and all have very hard lighting. You'd be surprised how an ordinary photo can look really good when you get the lighting right. Try going out at dawn or late evening and get that nice soft lighting working for you. Instead of having the light overpower the photo you could make it an integral part of it.

Fridge

I really like the one with the gate in front of the castle.

joolsveer

Fridge wrote:

I really like the one with the gate in front of the castle.

Thanks Fridge.

Dimy

What can I say....I'm a genius and learn very quickly ;-) I'm not sure what you're trying to proof joolsveer, I was merely trying to help, whereas Shrimp simply put down all your photo's I at least found some of them not so bad and gave my ideas how to improve on them. Maybe your analog photo's are a lot better, but your digital ones for sure need a lot of improvement. Maybe I'm new to SLR photography, but I do have an eye for composition and know my how to post process digital photo's in photoshop, which you for sure will put down with a comment like "real photographer's don't use photoshop"... but that's BS. Happy snapping and consider this my last reply/help or comment on any of your snapshots. :rolleyes:

joolsveer

Dimy wrote:

What can I say....I'm a genius and learn very quickly ;-) I'm not sure what you're trying to proof joolsveer, I was merely trying to help, whereas Shrimp simply put down all your photo's I at least found some of them not so bad and gave my ideas how to improve on them. Maybe your analog photo's are a lot better, but your digital ones for sure need a lot of improvement. Maybe I'm new to SLR photography, but I do have an eye for composition and know my how to post process digital photo's in photoshop, which you for sure will put down with a comment like "real photographer's don't use photoshop"... but that's BS. Happy snapping and consider this my last reply/help or comment on any of your snapshots. :rolleyes:

__________________

---

Flickr Profile: http://www.flickr.com/photos/dimy/
DSLR Gear: Canon EOS 350D, Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO DG Macro,Canon EF-S 18-55mm, Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II,2 GB Sandisk UltraII
PC: AMD Athlon 3000+, 512MB DDR400, 200 GB SATA HD, Ati Radeon 9800 Pro 128MB

Dimy wrote:

Hi all,

I've been following this board for a little while now as I've always been interested in photography but never invested some money in a decent camera. Up until now I was using a Kodak point and shoot digital camera (easy share DX4530) but thanks to all the advise I read here I decided it was time to move on and buy something more serious...so from today on I'm a proud owner of a Canon EOS 350D.
I'm charging the battery now and can't wait to try it out and ruin my first few pictures! This camera was highly recomended on the board by several people, so thanks for that...I'm sure I won't be disappointed with it. For now I'm using the standard 18-55mm lens that came with the kit, but as I gain more experience with the camera I'll probably by some decent lenses for it as well. I'll be going to Brasil for a 10 day holiday in 2 weeks time so will for sure find good use of my new camera there and post some pictures on here for comments/advice.

Thanks for all your help Dimy and if rehearsing some of your recent comments is objectionable to you you might be more careful in your language in future so you don't have to eat your words so often.

Shrimp's youth is probably the reason he is immature - what is yours?

I am sorry that you feel that should be less helpful in future and I hope that you turn out to have the genius of some of your more artistic compatriots.

I will do my best to continue my "happy snapping" and posting my snapshots for constructive comment.

Slán agus beannacht

Dimy

As this is not a reply/help or comment to any of your snapshot, I can post this final message I don't understand what you're trying to say with my quotes from previous posts.... I suppose it only proves I've learned a lot very quickly. I also don't see where I have to "eat my words". In january I didn't know a lot about SLR photography but since then I've been using my camera on a nearly every other day, reading tons on websites about the subject and read quite a few magazines so I don't consider myself a novice anymore. And as for "my excuse", I don't see how I need to excuse myself for recognizing bad photo's that don't belong on an Arts/Photography forum (again, some of your shots have potential, but you need to be more selective in what you post here... I like your door- series in the other thread, that's a good example of what you can post). And that's it, I'm done talking.

joolsveer

Dimy wrote:

As this is not a reply/help or comment to any of your snapshot, I can post this final message I don't understand what you're trying to say with my quotes from previous posts.... I suppose it only proves I've learned a lot very quickly. I also don't see where I have to "eat my words". In january I didn't know a lot about SLR photography but since then I've been using my camera on a nearly every other day, reading tons on websites about the subject and read quite a few magazines so I don't consider myself a novice anymore. And as for "my excuse", I don't see how I need to excuse myself for recognizing bad photo's that don't belong on an Arts/Photography forum (again, some of your shots have potential, but you need to be more selective in what you post here... I like your door- series in the other thread, that's a good example of what you can post). And that's it, I'm done talking.

Thank you for your comments Dimy. If you will accept one piece of advice I would suggest that you ask the "snapper" before editing his/her photo to illustrate your talents in post processing.

Again I would like to thank you for your constructive comments and help. I only objected to your destructive phase.

Zillah

Joolsveer, I believe that what a lot of people are saying is that most of your photos lack much of a subject. Whatever their composition, they don't really tell a story, or capture a moment. Many of them seem to be an unparticular instant, and the photo would have been much the same ten seconds later, or several feet in another direction. For example, the gutter picture. What makes it interesting for you? From my point of view it seems to be much like any other gutter, not shot from an interesting angle, it has nothing I wouldn't expect to see from simply looking down.

EDIT: And before someone tells me Im not being constructive, I can't yet. We have to know what we're trying to do with the photo before we go about it.

joolsveer

Thanks Zillah for your comments which I take on board. From time to time I have been collecting shots of street furniture, manholes, yellow lines, cobbles etc. and this is my motive for taking this shot. It may not be the best shore I've seen and it may not be the best representation of that particular shore. In fact I might just go back to take the shot again but I don't expect it be the same scene as it may be cleaned by the council and empty of water the next time.
My motive in posting it here was to promote discussion on what is or is not an appropriate shot for publication on this forum.

I don't claim to know the difference between a snapshot and a fine art photo but when I see a photo I know if it appeals to me.

Zillah

joolsveer wrote:

From time to time I have been collecting shots of street furniture, manholes, yellow lines, cobbles etc. and this is my motive for taking this shot.

Im afraid I don't understand. Why did you ever start? Are you putting together a series, and when viewed as a whole they will present a greater meaning?

If its just a habit you've gotten into then perhaps you should take a step back, consider the individual photo, and think about what makes it different from anything else, what makes it a worthwhile piece of the world to seal onto film. Once you do that I think you'll better understand some people's reactions.

It may not be the best shore I've seen and it may not be the best representation of that particular shore. In fact I might just go back to take the shot again but I don't expect it be the same scene as it may be cleaned by the council and empty of water the next time.

But in the end, it is just a shore, and unless im mistaken, a shore like any other? Is there anything else you want to convey with the image? Or is it literally just a picture, without meaning or purpose?

My motive in posting it here was to promote discussion on what is or is not an appropriate shot for publication on this forum.

I think any sort of photography is fine, but if you're going to posts photos that are for the most part, snapshots for the sake of snapshots, then don't be suprised if people simply say "They're just snapshots". Don't get me wrong, some do convey a meaning or a sentiment, but most are of the snapshot variety.

joolsveer

Zillah wrote:

Im afraid I don't understand. Why did you ever start? Are you putting together a series, and when viewed as a whole they will present a greater meaning?

Yes Zillah I am putting together a series particularly as during my lifetime there have been many changes in streetscapes, street furniture, street surfaces. My interest in this project is primarily in the Dublin 7 area as this was the area I was born in. As it becomes more gentrified many of these features are disappearing.

Heres one I took yesterday.



a previous shot