more pics......

Mickeroo · 07-08-2005 8:10pm #1

heres some photos i took on august bank holiday down in achill. I'm very pleased with how the turned out, of course that doesnt mean they're any good...but i would really really really really really really really appreciate some constructive criticism...thanks!

miss_gonzo · 08-08-2005 7:33pm

those are ****ing great! thats all I can say.....just lovely.

qz · 08-08-2005 7:36pm

Very nice!

Valentia · 08-08-2005 7:56pm

The photographs that I have seen are really good. Great work.

Sorry to go on about this, but that site keeps timing out or is sooo slooooow it's a complete pain. As I mentioned elsewhere I'm on the 2Mb broadband pack so it's not at my end, others have had the same problems with DA. It kinda spoils the excellence of the work.

Shrimp · 08-08-2005 8:22pm

In general, most of them are good enough. But it seems tt you are just making them black and white / sepia for the sake of it. Because see pros doing it, or whatever the case may be. You should think about it, what kinda of effect do i want the view to get when I make this B&W instead of colour, or Sepia instead of B&W. It seems as if you are relativly new to photography? Are you? With practice you will develop your own style, and your photos will become more noticable. In general the composition is good, and the subjects and ideas are nice. Keep them coming.

waldo · 08-08-2005 10:09pm

You need to give a bit more though to your composition, as well as your choice of subject matter.

The cliff: light is flat. its just a cliff. how is it different or artistic. the boat is badly positioned. Maybe in evening light it might be different.

Keel Beach: the sky is nice, but you could have positioned the beach a bit better. It cuts the photo in two; one side dark, the other light.

Keem beach: way too much contrast.

Innocense: subject matter is ok, but again the composition could be better. why not zoom out and get more of that angry sky.

I'd aslo have to agree with shrimp about the use of sepia.

Shrimp · 08-08-2005 11:47pm

Yeah, I was going to analyse each pic, whihc i think i might do in a little while. You will find it helpful as I will tell you exactly what you did wrong and right.

Shrimp · 09-08-2005 1:01am

I am going to give you some C&C on your pictures. I may sound harsh at times but I am just telling you what I think, and it's purely from a technical point of view. Ok so here we go, I'll Name the pic, then give C&C on it, then I’ll give it a rating out of 10.

Time to think: This is in conceptual photography, I myself don’t see why it is. Usually conceptual photos symbolise something. This one just doesn't do that. As conceptual photography goes this would not work. But then again, if you were to put this is Waterscapes, it would. Looking at the picture now, I immediately see a few things wrong with it. Firstly a crooked horizon, whether on purpose or not, it doesn't look good, as it is only a slight slant, and it's barely noticeable, a simple rotate and crop is all that’s needed. The picture needs more contrast. It has great contrast potential. The Powerful white ripples in the sky would contrast greatly with the lapping marble tides. Other than that I think this pic was good. I like the sense of distance created by the repetitive clouds, and far off mountains. 6/10

Cliff: Nothing great about it. I'm sure this was a high cliff, but you don’t get a feel of it looks at it, even with the small boat. The boat is awkward there. My eye keeps going back to it. I personally wouldn't have bothered uploading this picture. If you really do want to keep it, Photoshop out the boat, and increase saturation, using the curves tool. 4/10

The reviews are getting shorter.

Where is everybody?: Again does nothing for me, the title doesn't suit it, and you need more contrast. Especially with a pic such as this. I think this pic would be so much nicer if it was in colour. 5/10

Deserted Village: Very like "Where is everybody?". I would like this pic so much more if you had gotten focused on those cliffs on the right hand side, zoomed in a bit and got the jagged cliffs disappearing into he distance. That would have been a nice pic. 4/10

Keel Beach: This photo I actually like, it had great potential. I wish I was there when you took the photo, because I would have suggested getting closer to the edge so that the cliff you are standing on isn't in the pic and to aim down slightly in order to get more or the village in the shot. As you can see it is there at the bottom, also i would have waited for the hand glider/plane to get out of the way. I think the sepia was a fine idea for this one it works, but maybe lower the saturation a bit, it's a little too amber. Other than those faults, I like it. 6/10

Tee-Hee: I know you say that photo is not really for artistic purpose, but i think the sepia is pointless, takes away from the photo and it looks crap to be harsh. I'm not gonna rate this photo because from an art point of view. It wouldn't get on the scale.

Sorry if you think I am harsh, I am just saying what I think. Actually I'm not sorry, if I was then I wouldn't be writing this review. Ah well... C&C is the Key.

Keem Beach: This one is very like "Keel Beach". It's too dark, I dont like the way you have to squint to see the mountain range. It doesn't cut it. 5/10

Innocense(Spelt wrong, I presume you meant Innocence): This one is extremely like the first one, you need to make more contrast. 4/10

Is it just me or am I beginning to see a trend here with B&W and Sepia photos, they can be effective, but to me they have lost effect in your gallery as you have so many of them. Don’t just do it in B&W for the sake of it and u seen it done before, do it because you want to get a reaction from the viewer. It doesn't always work to think.. ah well I’ll slap that into b&w and make it look artsy. Just think before you do it.

So Here We Are: Again, very dark. I mean all i can see in that picture is some bird in white with her lower back exposed (doesn't make for a great photographic pose), the composition is all over the place. 2/10

Free: This one is lame, no question about it. I don’t even know why I am commenting on it. Take it of DA, it's no good. 0/10

Shes Watching You(Should be an apostrophe after the small “s” in she): You should know better than to be climbing on statues, this one looks like it could well be of some historical value. Remember there is a photographer’s etiquette that one should follow. Photographers have been known to cause some unwanted attention. As a photo goes, there isn’t much going on in this picture; again the black area is way to dark. 4/10

Overall Rating: 4.5/10

I would defiantly recommend you get some tutorial mags, or surf the interweb for some tuts. You need it, and don’t we all. Keep snapping, I look forward to reviewing more of your photos. I have posted these comments on DA as well.

Oriel · 09-08-2005 9:15am

"Innocense(Spelt wrong, I presume you meant Innocence):"
"It seems as if you are relativly new to photography? Are you?"
"With practice you will develop your own style,"
"This photo I actually like"
"In general, most of them are good enough." - Good enough for what? For you?
"That would have been a nice pic. 4/10"
"This one is lame, no question about it. I don’t even know why I am commenting on it. Take it of DA, it's no good."

Shrimp, do you practice being patronising? Or does it just come naturally?
Let's get one thing straight - your photographs leave a lot to be desired yourself, and you're in no position to "teach" photography to somebody else. Don't start to claim that the last post was "just your opinion", as it came across as much more than that.

Mickeroo, sorry to use this thread for Shrimp-slating, but the guy's just done it again.

Shrimp, can I have a photo of you please?

Valentia · 09-08-2005 9:36am

Have to agree with you there Sin. I haven't read such pompous drivel and ill informed nonsense in a long time. I would classify it as a " How to fcuk up some perfectly well taken photos for dummies".

I have spent a lot of time in the West of Ireland and some time on Achill. Mickeroo's pics have an amazing sense of feeling for the place. More contrast me arse! To me, and I'm sure to Mickeroo, they transport me there. They are really well composed. Maybe not along the rule of thirds (not all anyway) and maybe they don't adhere to the guidelines of the last guide book that Shrimp was reading but aren't they all the better and more original for that.

Shrimp, putting rules on taking pics will destroy your creativity, that's a fact. Oh and another thing, a person doesn't need to be a brilliant spellar to take good pics.

K!LL!@N · 09-08-2005 9:48am

Shrimp wrote:

Yeah, I was going to analyse each pic, whihc i think i might do in a little while. You will find it helpful as I will tell you exactly what you did wrong and right.

Haha, time to pull your head out of your arse.
I think the fumes are getting to you.

Killian

Shrimp · 09-08-2005 2:07pm

I knew I would get a lot of stick for posting my opinions, but to be honest I don’t really care what you think, especially if you are just going to slag me off every time I do, or feel insulted. I gave you my critique of the photos, and if you (not even the photographer) can't take it, then you must work on how to.

sinecurea wrote:

"Innocense(Spelt wrong, I presume you meant Innocence):"

What’s your point?

sinecurea wrote:

"With practice you will develop your own style,"

Again, what’s your point?

sinecurea wrote:

"This photo I actually like"

I see a pattern here, what’s your point?

sinecurea wrote:

"In general, most of them are good enough." - Good enough for what? For you?

Of course this was my opinion, so what I was saying was... I think they are good enough. What’s the problem?

sinecurea wrote:

"This one is lame, no question about it. I don’t even know why I am commenting on it. Take it of DA, it's no good."

TBH, that was just to get a few of you all stirred up. It worked too.

sinecurea wrote:

Shrimp, do you practice being patronising? Or does it just come naturally?

A bit of a contradiction in terms there...!

sinecurea wrote:

Let's get one thing straight - your photographs leave a lot to be desired yourself, and you're in no position to "teach" photography to somebody else.

Everyone can learn from everyone. Ok, what if I was to say something good about the picture, then maybe slip in a small negative comment. I'd be teaching him then, and I wouldn't get given out to. Well I don't operate that way, I speak my mind. Live with it.

sinecurea wrote:

Don't start to claim that the last post was "just your opinion", as it came across as much more than that.

Well, It was my opinion, that’s quite obvious, who else's opinion could it be?

sinecurea wrote:

Shrimp-slating

So you admit to slating me, that’s really big of you.

sinecurea wrote:

Shrimp, can I have a photo of you please?

May I ask why you'd want that now? (Expecting Sarcastic Response)

Valentia wrote:

Maybe not along the rule of thirds (not all anyway) and maybe they don't adhere to the guidelines of the last guide book that Shrimp was reading but aren't they all the better and more original for that.

Shrimp, putting rules on taking pics will destroy your creativity, that's a fact.

I never mentioned that rule at all, in fact I don’t really recommend that, that rule is always used, I find it restricting. I don’t know why you just decided to mention that, quite obscure!

Valentia wrote:

Shrimp, putting rules on taking pics will destroy your creativity, that's a fact. Oh and another thing, a person doesn't need to be a brilliant spellar to take good pics.

I never put his photos down to his spelling. I was merely correcting him as it was just a simple typo he may not have noticed.

Look guys, you may think I sounded harsh in my approach. If I had chosen my words a little more caringly, and stuck in a few comments here and there saying that I think your photos are still great, and that I wish I could take ones like it, I'm sure your responses would have been noting of the sort of ones I received. Well lads, I don’t glam up my words to make it sound nice. I say what I think, I speak my mind, don’t like it?? hard luck. Like it or loath it, I'm not changing to suit you. I don’t know, and don’t have any interest in knowing you. I owe you nothing, and have no reason to put my arm out for you. I'm not going to put on a false face in order to make you content with my response. I shouldn't have to think that someone may get a bit annoyed if i say there photos are crap, I have the right to my opinion, and I don’t have to worry about what sinecurea, or Valentia, or whoever might think, and this applies not just to the photography forum, but anywhere on boards, or the internet. Your opinion of me as a person doesn't bare any effect on me, as you don’t know me in order to have an opinion of me.

Thank you for reading,

Yours Continually

Youssef

Oriel · 09-08-2005 2:30pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by sinecurea
Shrimp, can I have a photo of you please?

May I ask why you'd want that now? (Expecting Sarcastic Response)

Well I'm stuck for a photo for the new competition...

waldo · 09-08-2005 3:16pm

I think some of you are missing the point here. While shrimp’s choice of words is in criticisms is rather unfortunate, there seems to be a general reluctance to give honest opinions on photos that people request criticisms on. Mick has posted his pics because he wants to improve. He shows a good natural ability to see good photographs, but good composition can make or break a photograph, and this will only come from lots of practice. (you also had a crappy overcast day, which didnt help). You should be your own biggest critic.

As for the rule of thirds, I think it is often a good idea to follow it. It can give better balance to a photograph in most cases.

Metacortex · 09-08-2005 4:22pm

Shrimp wrote:

Free: This one is lame, no question about it. I don’t even know why I am commenting on it. Take it of DA, it's no good. 0/10

.

Art. Subjective.

Theres some connection there.

Don't ever tell anyone to take down an image just because you don't like it. Having looked through your own gallery i could say the same thing on at least 27 of your images.
But i won't, because you thought they were worth posting into your gallery, so again, subjective.

Personally, i liked that 'Free' image. It has a good theme and its done well.

Shrimp · 09-08-2005 4:40pm

Thank you Waldo, exactly, I may have sounded harsh, but alot fo the time people put pictures up not expecting to get a harsh critique. Again, if I had said that I thought his pictures were good, but the conditions were a bit unfortunate, and that like all of us,he could take great pictures with some practice. Then I wouldn't have gotten all these complaints. I dont mind taking critisism, nor do I mind giving it out.

Metacortex, I already explained that I was just stirring **** when I said that. It's up to him what he puts in his gallery.

Zombrex · 09-08-2005 5:02pm

while I don't think Shrimp's comments were that "constructive" (what is the point of calling a picture "lame") and I disagree with is assement on some of the photos ("Free" is actually a very good photo, either by accident or on purpose the photographer managed to get the bird directly over the sun, lending to a excellent composition where the bird is in the centre of the swirling sky, yet the detail of its underbody is still visible, quite hard to do especially with auto light meter), the author did ask for critisim, so I don't think it is particularly fair to go after Shrimp just because he expressed his opinion. The OP can choose to ignore it if they wish, just because someone posted it doesn't mean they know what they are talking about (no offense Shrimp

) ... critisies what he commented on, not that he commented.

K!LL!@N · 09-08-2005 5:02pm

waldo wrote:

I think some of you are missing the point here. While shrimp’s choice of words is in criticisms is rather unfortunate, there seems to be a general reluctance to give honest opinions on photos that people request criticisms on. Mick has posted his pics because he wants to improve. He shows a good natural ability to see good photographs, but good composition can make or break a photograph, and this will only come from lots of practice. (you also had a crappy overcast day, which didnt help). You should be your own biggest critic.

As for the rule of thirds, I think it is often a good idea to follow it. It can give better balance to a photograph in most cases.

We're not missing the point.
Choice of words is very important.
No one's asking for sugar coating of criticism.
It's the manner in which it's done.
It's the air of superiority that Shrimp tries to impose in his "criticisms".
There's a time and place for correcting people's spelling and grammar, and this forum isn't the place.
There are enough pedants frequenting the various other boards.
We can do without them here.

Mick can call his work anything he likes, spelling mistakes included ( if indeed it was a spelling mistake ).

It was lame to tell Mick that he should remove a photo from his gallery just because Shrimp didn't like it.

Turning around and saying you're just trying to stir things up is even more lame and has no place in a legitimate critique.

So get a clue, please.

Killian

waldo · 09-08-2005 6:22pm

I never said I agreed with shripm's comments. They were way too harsh, especially the "lame" one of the bird (one of the better, more imaginative photos). Not exactly constructive.

Shrimp · 09-08-2005 7:31pm

You are all focusing on how I was too harsh, and trying to be superior. I wasn't you have made me look like that. I was not intending for my opinions to be taken as pompus comments. I just didn't like some of the photos. The subjects where definalty good, in most cases, but it was the way they were taken which brought the photos down. I wasn't going to say in my critisism that I thought a picture was nice, if it wasn't. Would you?

Mickeroo · 17-08-2005 11:09pm

wow all this fuss over little old me

thanks to everyone(including shrimp) for the comments, it's much appreciated, and i'm glad some people actually like the stuf

cheers

more pics......

Comments