The Photographers' Corner 2013-2020

[Major Tom]

When I was transitioning to digital photography, I had a couple of 3 and 4MP compact cameras. They were fairly rudimentary compared to modern compacts and more sophisticated cameras, but I had lots of fun walking around my neighborhood and taking pictures of almost everything I saw. Those same early compacts can be bought online for ~$20 now, the point being that if you don't have any money, you can still have fun with one of these. Money need not be a pre-requisite.

No great photographic skills here, but having the compact camera gave me a reason to slow down and look at things. I think I enjoyed looking at things more than I actually enjoyed taking the pictures.

 

[redduck]

I intended for this thread to be a source of inspiration. Instead it has become a source of disappointment for me personally. The critiques of what I foolishly thought were good pictures were unexpected and they hit me hard.<snip> I have purged my photo library, and I am thinking about shelving the camera.

I don't take photos. But, I think this is a great thread--one of my favorites. I just re-visited the first few pages--lots of colors/ interesting subjects--places and things I've never seen before--and didn't know existed. Just sharing of photos. I would hope that this thread does not go the critiquing route--and now it sounds as if the critiquing is being headed off.

I'm glad you started this thread, FIREd. If you thought your pictures were good, they were good. I mean, just how "good" do they have to be?

 

[Skyward1]

I intended for this thread to be a source of inspiration. Instead it has become a source of disappointment for me personally. The critiques of what I foolishly thought were good pictures were unexpected and they hit me hard. Even though I never seem to gratefully accept critiques, I do learn from them. But now I second guess myself all the time and miss potentially great shots. It's just frustrating and I am losing confidence in my abilities as a photographer. I have purged my photo library, and I am thinking about shelving the camera.

That's a shame and an over-reaction imo. I looked back on this entire thread and it seems to me the overwhelming majority of feedback you (rightly) received was positive but you chose to concentrate on the relatively mild suggestions offered by others on a couple of your shots and saw them as overly negative.

I certainly hope you are not serious about shelving the camera because that would be a big mistake! Please rethink your position and remember for every person who looks at your photograph and responds positively there are probably a hundred who think the same but don't bother to post a comment. I know I'm guilty of that.

 

[mathjak107]

i love bugs.

one thing about macro is just as much thought has to go into the backgrounds and what you show as for the subject.

while a painter decides what to put in the photo as photographers we have to decide what to take out of the photo.

anything not adding is taking away .

 

[Ronstar]

I kinda like bugs too. Should have a lot to shoot here soon.

 

[Mr. Paul]

Wonderful photos.

"anything not adding is taking away"

The first time I heard this it was like a light bulb clicking on. A great example of how just the simplest of thoughts can really help getting a good photo.

After prattling on yesterday about the journey involved in getting better, it dawned on me that for many folks that does not enter into the equation at all and is not a necessary part of participating here. The point has already been made that it can just as easily be about sharing photos here that one has taken for themselves which is of course 100% all good.

 

[mathjak107]

most amateurs have way to much clutter and distractions in their shots.

they need to keep things simple but do not realize how important it is. macro and flowers almost demand a simple clutter free background.

just blurring the background isn't enough as many times you get awful or strange looking shapes in the blur.

shooting manual with flashes is my way of controlling the backgrounds. i can make them range from black to fully visible and that is something that i can control even on the brightest days in manual.

every shot above is with the nikon r1c1 macro flashes.

 

[mathjak107]

Wonderful photos.

"anything not adding is taking away"

The first time I heard this it was like a light bulb clicking on. A great example of how just the simplest of thoughts can really help getting a good photo.

After prattling on yesterday about the journey involved in getting better, it dawned on me that for many folks that does not enter into the equation at all and is not a necessary part of participating here. The point has already been made that it can just as easily be about sharing photos here that one has taken for themselves which is of course 100% all good.

coming from a background of being a pro-drummer i liken photography to my music.

what i like to play for myself is not what i would play in public.

my own view is i don't post shots on line that are shots that would be meaningful to only me .

we all have priceless photos of family ,events and things in our lives that are priceless. but to others they may mean very little.

anything i post on line i post with the interest of others in mind and that represent the best i could do at the point in time.

of course this thread is not a serious photography thread so anything can be posted but i still have my own rules i try to stick to.

many times on other photography sites folks post really bad photographs and then tell us how it means something to them.

my feeling is great , but those are shots that should be kept private for those it means something to.


we have the same thing with folks who don't have the knowledge to edit so they post half baked photos that are straight out of camera and when folks comment about issues they proclaim they are straight out of camera like that means something.

there are no brownie points for posting a partially finished looking photo just because it is out of camera if you are trying to show that photo off to a bunch of photographers..

 

[photoguy]

That shows what I know. Especially the Rhein II - horizon right through the middle, for pete's sake!

One reason I like the Rhein photo is that it is the exact opposite of many landscape / cityscape photos: low contrast, muted colors, no leading lines, etc.

 

[Mr. Paul]

The Rhein photo is very cool and I agree with photoguy that part of it's attraction is that it "lacks" what we usually get with landscape photos. I love the layers that lead the viewer off to the distance. That said, I'm thinking the only way to get the big bucks like that for a photo is to get rich guys together who really want it at the same time

 

[seraphim]

The Photographers' Corner

"If you look at some of the most expensive photos ever sold, they wouldn't survive internet critiques either:"

I suspect these were purchased by collectors; more interested in value than visual interest. It's often a status thing. Neither is my cup of tea, as the compositions don't hold my interest for long. The photographers, however, each created a following for a specific reason, it seems.

To each, however, their own...

Funny, Paul, I don't like the line aspect of the Rhein because it tends to draw my eye off the sides of the composition lol.

Initially, the eye is normally captured by the point of highest contrast. In Rhein, that appears to be the bright part of the sky middle frame, just above the horizon. The contrast of the the highlights in the water is greater, but they are too many, I think, so the eye is captured by the sky, instead. My eye seems to follow the horizon line to the edge of the frame, but the photographer has burned in the sides, so the eye is turned upward, where the darker sky keeps the eye moving to the opposite ( also burned in) sky, back down to the horizon line and center of the image. The detail of the water provides interst, but nothing leads the there naturally from the sky, so it takes a conscious effort on the part of the viewer to break the barrier of land between sky and water. Once looking at the water, even though there is nice detail there, the lines created by the shore lead the eye off the side of the image which, to me, is desirable. Somehow the eye should be redirected back into the frame, preferably back towards center again.

The longer the composition keeps my eye inside the image, directing it to different areas of interesting detail, the more I appreciate it.

Just my thoughts..

Addendum: I think our viewing of the image is diminished, because we are not seeing it in its actual size. The effects are probably more powerful were we standing in front of the 6x12 original.

Looking at a larger image, the eye does seem able to cross the land boundary from sky to the brighter part of the river just below, and I noticed the outside edges of the river are burned in, and the desire for the eyes to leave the sides of the frame decreased.

Some very subtle manipulations of the image. I'm liking it a bit better, but I think there's still something lacking.

 

[Major Tom]

Oh, c'mon somebody - post a picture or two. There are too many words in this thread

 

[Walt34]

Oh, c'mon somebody - post a picture or two. There are too many words in this thread

Ask, and you shall receive.

Went out & about the back yard (DW is sick, not serious, so I'm sticking close to home) looking for signs of spring and found some. I used the 85mm macro on a Nikon D7000 with the R1 speedlights. Shot in daylight but at 1/250 sec and f/25 to kill the ambient light. Not everyone likes the effect but I kind of like it since it mostly eliminates background clutter and distractions.

They are sprouting leaves, tree buds going to leaves, and another sprouting leaf.

 

[Ronstar]

Nice shots Walt - good to see that spring is springing somewhere

 

[Major Tom]

Thanks for those Walt. Nice.

 

[Mr. Paul]

Particularly like #3 ... freaky cool.

 

[mathjak107]

i like flower guts . i like going inside the flowers .

nikon d800, nikon 105mm vr, r1c1 macro flash and extention tubes.

all handheld. all backgrounds were controlled by me as to how much of anything i wanted to appear in my photo from back there.

it is pretty easy to do once you get a feel for your camera in manual and learn to control the lighting via flashes.

 

[Nemo2]

The video link below was featured on the British Daily Mail.........perhaps a few people might be interested in some of the techniques he mentions.....(I found the portable stove cum battery charger fascinating):

 

[Walt34]

That stove/charger grabbed my eye too. I looked around a bit and found it: BioLite CampStove | Order Today

 

[Walt34]

i like flower guts . i like going inside the flowers .

Where do you go to get these? Is there a nursery nearby that lets you shoot there, a botanical garden, park?

I like shooting photos of insects too but I don't have the patience to sit for hours that some people do.

 

[photoguy]

The stove/charger is a cool idea (but it weighs 1kg). I wonder how you can hook up a DSLR to charge the battery? and long would it take?

 

[mathjak107]

Where do you go to get these? Is there a nursery nearby that lets you shoot there, a botanical garden, park?

I like shooting photos of insects too but I don't have the patience to sit for hours that some people do.

we have so many local botanical gardens. most are at new york botaniacal, the planting fields in long island , brooklyn and queens botanical and my favorite longwood gardens in PA.

i have no patients either , the bugs are either there when i am or not.

 

[Ronstar]

The video link below was featured on the British Daily Mail.........perhaps a few people might be interested in some of the techniques he mentions.....(I found the portable stove cum battery charger fascinating):

Wow! Thanks for posting

 

[kcowan]

Light painting. What a concept!

 

[Ronstar]

Playing with grain and other effects in Lightroom