C&C Panel

sNarah

I think it might have been the full 2 years since I put images up for C&C but I'm having some serious issues with this panel. I won't explain anything yet, I will tell yous why afterwards.

I need full and honest opinions on the panel - if you think it's bull, do say so, and elaborate why. Covering up "bad" critique in happy-daisy comments doesn't serve me any purpose so trash it if needed.

Here it goes... (I can put up full res of each image later but fecking interwebs is too slow at home so this will have to do for the time being)
(also their is NO white border around the middle image)



Only honest and constructive opinions please - positive and negative. More details later

artyeva

instant reaction: me likey

erm... i think the different orientations are a bit jarring. jaring? by that i mean the 3 on top are more detail-ey, and the bottom 2 set the scene more. so maybe i would put the two portraits on the top. or no.... maybe i do like the idea of seeing detail first and then stepping back from it. that's actually the way i take photos so i probably would have done the same thing as you so scrap what i just said...

the weakest aspects of them if you could call them weaknesses is the small stripe in the bottom left of the one with the door - i find it a bit distracting. and the fact that the top of the fishboxes is too close to the horizon. it looks too... i don't know the word, segmented? it kinda leaves an empty flat plane at the top of the frame. if you wanted the 2 portrait ones to be more ''setting the scene-y'' then i probably would have stepped back and crouched down a bit for the fishbox one if that makes sense.

i've just re-read that and if you can make sense out of the above then fair play :pac:

i do like them, loooove the colours, and being a beachcomber i love the subject matter. what're they for?

edit: i forgotted to say : what they actually ''said'' to me is - ''ooh she's doing a little narrative on the decline of the fishing industy''

nilhg

The click through to pix.ie for a better look brings up a protected content page for me.......

Be glad to offer my tuppence worth when I get a proper look.

sNarah

Mh yeah, I have that pic set on private - fixed that now.

Eva, yeah, that does make sense You're very good! Will explain it all later!

EDIT -- I should add the display goes:

Building - ropeys- X- ropeys - Fishboxes, as a panel next to eachother.

Arciphel

OK here goes...

Is it intended to be a documentary type panel? To me, it looks like something a novice at our club would shoot on a Sunday before panel hand in night on the Monday, like that you were in a location and needed five images so you just took them in the space of ten minutes.

I normally like your stuff, but I find this kind of underwhelming and they don't sit together in any cohesive manner as a panel at all except for the cross-processed effect of the images. I tried to view them large to see them in detailed but I wasn't allowed...

Pic 1 I think is lacking in contrast a bit and under-saturated.
Pic 2 the sky seems to have no detail in it and is completely washed out. I like the composition and the X on the orange background is interesting enough.
Pic 3 seems to be lacking in contrast also, maybe the image is veiled a bit if you were shooting it wide open to accentuate the depth of field? I like the smooth background bokeh though.
Pic 4 the crack in the lower left corner is distracting, and also the bright line on the extreme right of the frame is abrupt and not really framed properly.
Pic 5 I like, the colours of the boxes are interesting and the vertical orientation and strong rule of thirds is technically satisfactory if that's what you were going for, but it is a bit off - in the kind of way that a judge will wonder if this is deliberately breaking the rules (which is good) or being sloppy, which is bad. I'd also like to see the right end of the rail at the bottom, it feels clumsily cropped the way it is as we can see it arc downwards but then it is cut off. Nice detail in the sky though, it's a nice atmospheric image.

smelltheglove

Ah Arciphel gives great advice.

I like the top half, don't like the bottom. I agree the first is lacking contrat but I like the 3 images together. I do not like the background, I think the compostion is the strongest in the 2nd and 3rd, I think the last image needs to be straightened, horizon seems a bit off to me, could be wrong but the compostion of the 4th and 5th do nothing for me personally.

as I said, I like the top half, I like the editing, I would prefer more contrast int he first and a different background for definite, this reminds me of cardboard.

humberklog

With each of them it looks as though your mind and eye were gathering more of the scene than what the camera's picked up. To my eye each scene wants to be tuned to the left a little. I'm imagining that if you had rotated the camera a handful of degrees to the left, as opposed to just having more image on the left, you'd have got the pictures to convey what your were seeing/feeling.

Curious question: was it a view finder camera?



I'll disagree with Arc just to explain what I think clearer. I like the crack in pic4. I'd often position myself to incorporate such lines. They can throw a little bit extra into a pic's overall interestingness. The problem is the dark door on the left. A little bit more rotation on the spot would allow that door to have a much more comfortable existence in the shot.

AnCatDubh

overall - a 3 out of 5 - that is because I love #1,#2,and #3 but #4 and #5 are not up to the earlier standard set by #1,#2#, and #3. Aesthetically, the two vertical v the three horizontal doesn't sit well in my viewing of the subject. I don't like the border around #2 - i've recently put borders on 40 pages of images and imho they work - the difference I think is for the aesthetic i'm thinking of its an all or nothing, and in the particular case I personally felt the images which were multi page layout (some not dissimilar to the panel above) just needed that little something to set the off on a black background.

All that said, I like the processing on the set presented here, and imho the first three are really good. The other two document something but don't scream out anything in particular (at least to me) - though as I look at it again the last one has much potential with the skies which you had available to you, and the processing you are using.

I think I know why you are asking for opinion but i'm curious to know the motivation in taking the images, and what you hoped to convey (if anything) in the panel.

FoxT

I have no idea what your goal is here, so can just comment on the photos in isolation.

- Consider reducing the panel from 5 photos to three or 4, or, 2 panels of 2.
- The style you have chosen is implemented well, and is implemented consistently on all 5 photos.


I like 1 & 3 - these detail shots leave something to the imagination. I dont like 2 - a bit boring.

As a pair, 4 & 5 are, for me , much more powerful than 1&3. Both talk about, emptiness & abandonment. 1 & 3 just talk about fishing.

There is a lack of cohesion overall in the 5. I think 1& 3 fit well together, and 4&5 do. But they don't fit with each other....

Cheers, FoxT

sNarah

Happy days - thank you all for the feedback.

ACD probably smelled from afar that I put these images up in a competition in our camera club. Whereas I had anticipated that they would probably not do well - I decided to stick with them as I am rather fond of them. Needles to say - they got absolutely trashed, destroyed and hammered. The critique from the judges was correct - though they gave them no merit at all - so this certainly is not a dig towards judging standards.

It made me wonder if I have lost (did I ever have any...) the way of looking at my own images in an "objective" manner or am I clouded by my own personal preferences. I did enter the images as a sort-of "bold statement", trying to stand out from the usual images one would find at novice competitions (children, babies, flowers). I failed utterly at making this statement and looking back now - I should have not entered these specific images.

Perhaps I should reflect on my work more, which is what this question is all about, I seem to be uncapable of doing that and have a clouded opinion of my own work. So my "idea" of these images didn't reflect the reaction they provoced, which is why I wanted to get a, let's say, second opinion here - as in the past it has been proven that for instance my pics which do well on Pixie, are not succesfull in the club and the other way around.

Does anyone else suffer from this sometimes? Cloudy opinions/idea's about shots you like (how faulty they may be?)

Randall Floyd

You should do what Garry Winogrand did. He used to hold off on developing rolls of film he had shot in order to sever any kind of emotional attachment he had to particular frames, he maintained it allowed him to view his work more objectively.

dave66

Sarah,

Just because club judges trashed your shots does not make them poor or bad images, to me it means that they didn't see what they were looking for. Personally, I think the top 3 work well as a triptych - but that's the thing about photography, it's personal and subjective. Don't be over critical and don't doubt yourself or your ability to decide what is a good shot. For me, I make photographs for me in the first instance and if others like them then great, if not then fine. On another forum I frequent, my signature is "My artist's statement: If you like the shot good, if not move on, I really don't care" it took me a long time to get to that stage, well over 30 years.

From seeing the work you share, I think you have a great eye, you choose what you share well. Don't take what club judges (that's not a dig at them either) to heart.

sNarah

Thanks Dave - You are right off course and usually I just pick my images for what I like about them. And you know me by now - so, really I don't care too much about technicalities nor whether or not people like them.

Though, to some extent, sometimes I find it's important to create an image that is both creative and "technically" correct but it's hard to do. And also, to be the judge of your own work, which is what made me doubt my own judgement!

The thing is, what the judges said was right. (A snippy comment excluded which I wasn't impressed with). They were very harsh on most entries (keeping in mind this round is only for non-advanced members). I'm just wondering why or how I missed some "unforgiven" faults re. sharpness and compostion.

magicbastarder

also, camera club judges can tend to focus on 'concrete' issues - exposure, focus, etc., and will often overlook issues it's less easy to judge like feel.

pbt20

IMHO and as others have pointed out, the top three would make a great panel. The other two lack something. I would be too afraid to put something up for C+C

redto

sara

the bottom two do nothing for me, sort of remind me of 'snaps' the top three kind of work but lack punch and kind of bleed together. On my screen I seem to be looking at them all at once as opposed to 3 seperate but connected photographs, maybe if they were bigger and seperated as in framed and displayed or full screen they might work better for me.

just my opinion and I dont know much

FoxT

..That the judges have been very unfair. Their role is (or ought to be) to offer constructive critique , to explore questions like
- what was the message/emotion/image you wanted to convey?
- why did you choose this particular route?
- what other routes did you consider, and why did you reject them?
- are there other possibilities which you did not consider, which may have been more appropriate?

From your description, it sounds like they just rolled their eyes & said 'its ****e' . If that is the case, then they have failed you. While some of the photos appeal to me more than others, all are well executed , and you deserve better.

-FoxT