| Author |
Message |
Nathan Servi
Member
|
# Posted: 13 Mar 08 16:32
Reply
Hello Everybody,
I recently took some photos of my nephews playing football, and was intending to to a nice photoshoot and print some big A2 posters for my family.
Out of the many many photos, few were very good, and some very "artistic". I absolutely love this photograph, and intend submitting it to a photography competition.
I converted it to B&W and it seems to be even better than the original colour one.
Which one do you prefer?
Which one is morel likely to impress ?
Would you change something in the photograph?
Do you have any other suggestions?
Looking forward to your advice and comments,
Hugs to all
Nathan
|
fotogravenswaay
Member
|
# Posted: 13 Mar 08 17:15
Reply
Hi Nathan,
I agree with you the B&W one looks beter, for myself I would add more contrast and crop the people away. IMO they are a bit distrackting.
kind regards ruud/fotogravenswaay
|
the critic
Member
|
# Posted: 13 Mar 08 17:16 - Edited by: the critic
Reply
Dear Nathan.
First of all keep trying because I believe you still lack a lot to learn.
Answering your questions.
-I dont like either of the two versions.
-Nor any of them impresses me, the subject is not special.
-Of course that it would change everything, and take this picture as what should not be done, at least you get a bad example, that's an improvement. 
-I have a lot of suggestions.
first of all in this case you need a flash or lamps, if you take interior-movement pictures in dark enviroments is really dificult stay on focus, one choice is to use a very high ASA, which would increase the grain in your photo, but says that extend to a size of A2 and this would complicate its definition.
- The compo is really really boring, your point of view is YOUR point of view, (boring boring boring), why? dont try take the picture from the ground.
-the elements in background only disturbing and dont contribute to the picture.
Dont send this photo to contests, because I am sure only lose your time and your money.
|
Dieuwertje
Member
|
# Posted: 13 Mar 08 17:46
Reply
Hi Nathan, I agree with Ruud that the b/w is the best one and indeed the people are a bit disturbing. The photo could have more contrast either.
I wish you good luck, Dieuwertje
|
giz
Member
|
# Posted: 13 Mar 08 18:21
Reply
@critic: Why don't you have any pictures ? I would like to see them!
And nathan, for me too the black and white and indeed a crop is not a bad idea!
greetings,giz
|
|
the critic
Member
|
# Posted: 13 Mar 08 18:27
Reply
Dear giz.
I dont have any pics because I am a critic. 
|
joris
Moderator
|
# Posted: 13 Mar 08 18:31
Reply
Makes me think of this picture...
Furthermore I always advice to be very careful when putting photos of friends and family online. Critical remarks on this kind of pictures strike much harder.
About the picture I think points of improvement could be.
- Isolate the ball from the body so that it really floats in the air
- Take the picture ‘en profile’ so that the leg kicking the ball is better visible
- Try to catch (even in silhouette) facial expression
- Crop the picture so that the ‘half’ people in the back are removed
Good luck
BTW I don’t think the critical remarks of ‘the critic’ are ok, I mean photographically spoken I don’t disagree but I would appreciate it much more if ‘the critic’ would show some vulnerability and expose his own pictures. Also I think the tone lacks some respect
|
|
Nathan Servi
Member
|
# Posted: 13 Mar 08 18:34 - Edited by: Nathan Servi
Reply
THats some comment right there!
|
|
Nathan Servi
Member
|
# Posted: 13 Mar 08 18:38
Reply
Thank you Joris, and Giz - will try your suggestions!
Nathan
|
www.imagografie.ch
Member
|
# Posted: 13 Mar 08 18:46 - Edited by: www.imagografie.ch
Reply
hi Nathan
i agree with Ruud , Dieuwertje and Joris
the idea is good, and i like it that the boy is only shown as a silouette. the background is partly disturbing, but only the part with the people in it. the lights are great! like that a lot!
but in one way the critic is right about: it is boring. (please, don't get that the wrong way, i don't know how to say it different! ) it is not the boy or the background but the croping. it is exaclty in the middle of the picture. it is still a action in this one, it would look much nicer and with more action if you would crop it so that the boy would be left or right in the picture instead of the midway...
keep trying, it is allready good.
greetz
Bunny
|
Christian C
Member
|
# Posted: 13 Mar 08 18:59
Reply
@the critic: if I don't make a mistake, it seems that you have been "devianpo" or "kepek", now you are "the critic" ; what will be the next name ? 
|
|
the critic
Member
|
# Posted: 13 Mar 08 19:00 - Edited by: the critic
Reply
Sorry for my hard comments.
But like I think you have a lot or learn-like me-, but you keep shotting and this is good.
Why ask for suggestions? If I tell you that the photo is dark and would require lights and you say that it's okay then not ask my opinion because you do not see the obvious.
I dont say the subject is boring -like person- the boy is really active and maybe for the familiy this is a lovely picture, but for general public is boring, In a good way.
The example picture of Joris-we can learn to much in this image- the light is the 90% in a good picture, your picture is very bad iluminated -sorry if is hard- but I cant tell you in other way.
The movement part, is not clear because of the low light can be confused with a picture out of focus.
And you are quite right that what they are you doing with their time and money.
@christian . I accept suggestions for my new name.
|
Ruden Fretsbo
Member
|
# Posted: 13 Mar 08 23:02 - Edited by: Ruden Fretsbo
Reply
Hi Nathan!
I prefer the coloured one. I don't know if you will win any competition with this pic, but I'm sure about something: you will never waste time neither money sending pictures to competitions, as it is a part of the learning process.
@ the critic: You wrote I dont have any pics because I am a critic. This means that you can criticize everyone and nobody can do the same with your work and skills... In my opinion this is a site to share with other people not only your opinions but also your work. Your critic is welcome, good and helpful, but I think is not fair to only criticize... I hope you receive this as a constructive criticism...
Hugs to all!
|
leilani
Member
|
# Posted: 14 Mar 08 05:06
Reply
your subject should be in focus, its not in this case but its hard when working indoors without the right equipment or without enough light.
its always good to remember the rule of thirds when doing composition. The crowd is distracting and that harsh light from the window hits right at the top of his head.
theres nothing wrong with that perspective. And theres nothing wrong with taking a photo from a spectators perspective, sometimes it adds to it, or makes you feel like youre there:
 by ibu
 by rick elkins
the color version lacks light and the bw needs contrast. I'm not sure if this is up to par for a contest but keep shooting.
cheers
|
Paulo Calafate
Member
|
# Posted: 14 Mar 08 11:42
Reply
Sorry Nathan But I think "the critic" has reason. I know that their words are very hard but to learn more and more we must know every opinion. Normally the good opinion is not true... it was make expecting return.
In your photo, your main subject is too centered and in the dark, no detail in the shadows, many heads cuted out on top, no face expression, and poor action, contrast and color saturation. Besides that, the proper scenary is not atractive, mainly taken off from this angle.
I think in that kind of situations the first thing is to shoot lots of photos with different settings and lenses and flashes.
If you pay attention, in the gym, there are some interesting spots of light that we can see projeccted on the floor. Putting your nice in those zones, or near, paying attention to the background elements (the framing), varying the camera placement, maybe you can achieve some interesting effects.
Cheers, and please don't be sad.
|
|
Nathan Servi
Member
|
# Posted: 14 Mar 08 14:03
Reply
Dear Paulo,
There is absolutely nothing to be sad about! Thank you so much for your comments, and they are always very welcome, mainly if (as you've done) they come across as constructive rather than destructive.
I'll be honest with you, that day I show 400 photos, all from different angles , with Fisheye, 50 mm, 100 macro, and long telezoom - the results are very very positive, and the lighting, and the atmosphere of the gym was absolutely perfect.
POint is, that i am not interested in uploading "simple" beautiful portraits of kids. I am not here to show that I can take a picture of a kid playing football, or, that I can use the 2 flash heads that I used that day to perfectly (and naturally) illuminate the shadows of the scene.
Which is the very same reason why I am posting these 2 photos here. I am not looking for a "family portrait" or anything like it, what I was looking for - and the suggestions are very welcome, if not offensive and rude - is the different composition, and different lighting that allowed this photo to have a different meaning - at least for me.
Now, I perfectly realise that there are some obvious faults in the composition and realisation of the picture, but what i am trying to go against, is the "general public opinion" regarding photography. Whenever a photo is different (apart from very few cases) its not as well accepted as a "normal" photograph. This makes it very hard for artistic intents to have a good outcome.
I'll give you an example of this.
This photo underneath is the type of photo that - to the general public - doesn't look like anything special. It looks distorted, and the subject is not particularly interesting. And here is my point. Its not a group portrait of a bunch of indians, its an artistic fisheye photograph aiming at capturing the reconstruction of 5 cm tall indian statues in a small glass nitche in a museum. Why is the artistic aim of the picture not perceived by the majority of the viewers? Is it actually a bad picture? Or perhaps the general public used to landscapes and portraits is not capable of understanding the ART in the photograph?
|
censored by joris
Member
|
# Posted: 14 Mar 08 14:54
Reply
Nathan you are a photographer that shows much promise but with this image you need to take a step back and truly see it without your affection for it.
Photography is communication from the artist to the audience, you are telling us something, sending us a message. What does the image say? To me and to several others here the image does not communicate a clear message. Not only should we get your message clearly but we should be moved by it as well if it is truly great.
|
|
Nathan Servi
Member
|
# Posted: 14 Mar 08 15:35
Reply
Dear Joris,
I am not going to bring famous examples to the forum, because I can't be bothered with posting images
Your message though, can be summerised as the ANTI - ART. In fact ART itself , be it modern art, dada, surrealism, or even the beloved impressionism , simply wouldn't exist according to your opinion.
There is a thin line between photography - and photographic art. IF photography definitely requires a direct communication between the photo and the audience, this definitely doesn't apply to ART. It is understandable that most audiences of modern art galleries actually don't connect and understand what they are viewing, but this doesn't prevent the artwork from being considered, indeed, artwork.
Problem is Joris, that photography today is very very common. And it is so hard to make any kind of difference, that with your attitude (which is completely legitimate) everything is confined within the borders of photgraphic schemes. What I am trying to say is that I strongly believe that most people don't understand the artistic intentions of artwork - as well as photography - and the only photographers that acquire any type of reconneissance are the ones that abolish the "normal" parameters of beauty, and explore rather different subjects and techniques. With this, I don't arrogantly pretend to show my photographs and expect fame, but I do wish for the public to try and see beyond the "normality" of photography, and the particular artistic intent of the photographs.
Not expecting for the public to understand it or connect to it (in the end nobody really understands modern art) I only wish for the viewer not to judge the "bad lighting" of a photo just because this is different from the "standart ideal of good lighting", but look at it with a critical eye rather than a standardized one.
I am not here to post my family photos, or my vacation photos, I am here to share my artistic aims with the public.
Hugs,
Nathan
|
ortho158
Member
|
# Posted: 14 Mar 08 15:44 - Edited by: ortho158
Reply
Nathan,
'censored by joris' is the name of a member, who is probably not Joris at all.
By the way, I rather agree with 'censored by ..', and I am suprised that you asked the opinion of the members of Woophy, if you feel so strongly that Art definitely does not need direct communication with the audience.
|
|
censored by joris
Member
|
# Posted: 14 Mar 08 15:56
Reply
Nathan,
I agree with much of what you say. The general public hasn't much of an educated clue about art. And I'm certainly not saying that your images are not art.
What I am saying is that successful art reaches into you and creates some kind of emotional response, be it positive or negative. Art that is not successful has no impact on the soul. As an artist, for you to be successful is to communicate in a way that elicits that emotion in your audience, be they educated in the arts or not.
I know you are on the right path with the thoughts you have expressed here, explore this journey that you are on and learn from it - enjoy it.
I'm not joris, only censored by him.
|
Online now: Guests - 2 Members - 2