Haveb't posted pictures in a while so...
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 4,343
From: New Jersey
Rep Power: 199
Kirby,
You asked so here are my comments........
Picture #1:
I would have framed it so that the ship's stack is not truncated. I like the fact that you incorporated good depth of field for both the car and the ship. I may have included at least the bow of the ship, assuming it is to the right, as a contrast to the bow (nose) of the car.
Picture #2:
I don't like how the rear light is truncated. There is that word again! LOL I would also have used a reflector (that could even be a piece of foam board) to reflect some of the natural light to the underside of the wing. I probably would have pulled back enough tto show both wing stanchions.
Picture #3:
I don't like how the driver's headlight is truncated. Again? Yes, again, that T word! Either include the light or don't include the light. Narrow depth of field...good.
Picture #4:
The car is the important subject and it is out of focus!!! Not good. Not knowing your camera, I suggest the following.....set the AF to "spot" metering, not exposure metering, focus point! aim the center of view right at the car, half press, reframe and shoot. That way, you insure the subject is in focus. I would have probably moved a little more to the right so that you could get a little closer to the car and still have the same expanse of city skyline.
Picture #4
My favorite. I still have a few comments though. First and foremost, CLEAN THE DUST BALL OFF THE SENSOR!! Again, I would have gotten closer to the car and maybe stood up instead of crouching down so that the suspension cable on the bridge beyond is not interrupted. Also, remember to expose for the shadows. In this case, I would have set the exposure metering to spot and aimed it at the front bumper. I would have hit exposure lock, reframed the shot and hit the shutter.
Picture #5
The intent is right.....in other words, contrast....good! Also, the exposure is dead nuts on with this one. So you get stars for these aspects. You fail in the implementation. And, I am strictly talking about the framing of the shot. Not knowing what is to the left and right, I really can't tell you what you should have done. I just don't like how the lefthand derrick grows out of your roof.
Summary
It seems your biggest, and repeatable, problem is framing the shot. I know you love your car. We all do. As a photogrpaher, try to look through the viewfinder as if you are looking through a window. If you move to the left, right, up or down in a house to look out a window, you will change the number and orientation of things you see outside. The same holds true here. Move the camera left, right, up or down to see how the arrangement of items interact with each other. Pay particular attention to lines and objects. Allow lines to maintain their continuity and objects to remain whole.
I apologize if I was direct but you DID ask.
You asked so here are my comments........
Picture #1:
I would have framed it so that the ship's stack is not truncated. I like the fact that you incorporated good depth of field for both the car and the ship. I may have included at least the bow of the ship, assuming it is to the right, as a contrast to the bow (nose) of the car.
Picture #2:
I don't like how the rear light is truncated. There is that word again! LOL I would also have used a reflector (that could even be a piece of foam board) to reflect some of the natural light to the underside of the wing. I probably would have pulled back enough tto show both wing stanchions.
Picture #3:
I don't like how the driver's headlight is truncated. Again? Yes, again, that T word! Either include the light or don't include the light. Narrow depth of field...good.
Picture #4:
The car is the important subject and it is out of focus!!! Not good. Not knowing your camera, I suggest the following.....set the AF to "spot" metering, not exposure metering, focus point! aim the center of view right at the car, half press, reframe and shoot. That way, you insure the subject is in focus. I would have probably moved a little more to the right so that you could get a little closer to the car and still have the same expanse of city skyline.
Picture #4
My favorite. I still have a few comments though. First and foremost, CLEAN THE DUST BALL OFF THE SENSOR!! Again, I would have gotten closer to the car and maybe stood up instead of crouching down so that the suspension cable on the bridge beyond is not interrupted. Also, remember to expose for the shadows. In this case, I would have set the exposure metering to spot and aimed it at the front bumper. I would have hit exposure lock, reframed the shot and hit the shutter.
Picture #5
The intent is right.....in other words, contrast....good! Also, the exposure is dead nuts on with this one. So you get stars for these aspects. You fail in the implementation. And, I am strictly talking about the framing of the shot. Not knowing what is to the left and right, I really can't tell you what you should have done. I just don't like how the lefthand derrick grows out of your roof.
Summary
It seems your biggest, and repeatable, problem is framing the shot. I know you love your car. We all do. As a photogrpaher, try to look through the viewfinder as if you are looking through a window. If you move to the left, right, up or down in a house to look out a window, you will change the number and orientation of things you see outside. The same holds true here. Move the camera left, right, up or down to see how the arrangement of items interact with each other. Pay particular attention to lines and objects. Allow lines to maintain their continuity and objects to remain whole.
I apologize if I was direct but you DID ask.
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 8,579
From: SF Bay Area
Rep Power: 387
Hey Ken, no need to apologize. I appreciate your comments. You take some great shots and the only way to get better is to hear these things. THANKS!
BTW, I have a Canon Digital Rebel and was using a 28-135 lens.
Here is a picture of the car facing the city that is more infocus, I just think it's too small...
BTW, I have a Canon Digital Rebel and was using a 28-135 lens.
Here is a picture of the car facing the city that is more infocus, I just think it's too small...
Last edited by Itzkirb; Jun 14, 2005 at 08:14 AM.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 4,343
From: New Jersey
Rep Power: 199
Kirby,
I have taken the liberty of modifying your photo to my liking. I still would have chosen a different vantage point, but nonetheless. I have changes the levels of the car, and the background. I also cropped th ephoto to place the subject, the car in this instance, in the sweet spot. The sweet spots are located at the 4 intersections shown by the 1/3 point lines that I drew. By placing the subject at those locations, you create a more interesting, less tourist-type photo.
Hope that helps.
I have taken the liberty of modifying your photo to my liking. I still would have chosen a different vantage point, but nonetheless. I have changes the levels of the car, and the background. I also cropped th ephoto to place the subject, the car in this instance, in the sweet spot. The sweet spots are located at the 4 intersections shown by the 1/3 point lines that I drew. By placing the subject at those locations, you create a more interesting, less tourist-type photo.
Hope that helps.
nice
