Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 21

Beginner Shots Clock Tower

This is a discussion on Beginner Shots Clock Tower within the Critiques forums, part of the Photography & Fine art photography category; Originally Posted by tegan Basic to photography is that if a technique is not seen by the viewer(not the photographer ...

  1. #11
    Travis is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Huntsville Muskoka
    Posts
    678

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tegan View Post



    Basic to photography is that if a technique is not seen by the viewer(not the photographer by the way) as contributing to the overall effect of the photo then it is a fault and a weakness.

    Tegan

    But people use distortion to CONTRIBUTE to the overall effect. Distortion techniques can change the mood of the subject.

    And trust me.... once technology eliminates barrel distortion in wide zooms there will be plenty of expensive plug ins to apply faux distortion.... just as the are plenty of plug ins to add noise/grain...
    ______________________

    Nikon D300, Nikkor 24-70 2.8 . Nikkor 70-200 2.8 . Nikkor 50mm 1.8 . Sigma 105mm 2.8 . Tokina 12-24 4 . SB-600 . 2xVivitar 285

  2. #12
    tegan is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    948

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Travis View Post
    But people use distortion to CONTRIBUTE to the overall effect. Distortion techniques can change the mood of the subject...
    People may use distortion to contribute to the overall effect BUT if most viewers do NOT see the contribution or the effect, then the photographer has failed in his/her objective.

    Tegan
    "Photographic art requires the technical aspects of photography and the design aspects of art, both at an outstanding level."

  3. #13
    Kiddo is offline Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    35

    Default

    I thought distortion could be used as a style, as in Tirediron's shot on his ship, with the curved horizon. Or distortion using "fish eye" lenses.

    If the distortion is "accidental" or non intended, then i can understand that could be seen as taking away from the image?

    Just my 2 cents
    "A Journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step" - Confucius

  4. #14
    Dclark is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    3

    Default

    Thank you for all the tips and critiques.

    In all honesty, the distortion is an accident and therefore removing from the actual photo itself.

    In the future i will attempt to minimize distortion in all my shots unless intended.

    Its easier to correct distortion with a tripod.

    Thank you for all the feedback!
    20 Years From Now You will Be More Dissapointed By The Things You Did Not Do Than By The Things You Did" -Mark Twain

  5. #15
    pslove is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    24

    Default

    there's not much for me to say, i think, that hasn't already been said. they're nice photos. i think that the halo around the trees in photo 2 is a little distracting. is it caused by the compressing or is it also there in the original photo? it sort of looks like you attempted to burn out the sky a little but didn't finish the job. i also think that when you're shooting straight vertical lines, especially when they are in the centre of the photo, you really need to make sure they are straight. lens distortion is fairly easy to fix in photoshop. it would be a really good photo, i think ,if i wasn't distracted by the crooked lines. can you possibly fix them and repost them with our suggestions? team efforts are fun
    Jess

  6. #16
    Dclark is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    3

    Default

    I might just do that, I personally use gimp, so i dont know about that straight line thing but ill give it a go eh.
    20 Years From Now You will Be More Dissapointed By The Things You Did Not Do Than By The Things You Did" -Mark Twain

  7. #17
    mindforge is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Visalia, CA
    Posts
    330

    Default

    I like the third the most. The others - to me - look like they were hurried and cropped or composed wrong and angled.

  8. #18
    merlyn9 is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    I tend to live out of a suit case
    Posts
    5

    Default

    In the color shots, my personal opinion, the sky seems too unnatual, too blue.
    The clock face itself has a blue tint to it.

    Looks like you may have used "Shadow/Highlights" in Photoshop, or something similar. Take a look along the treeline, and around the Dome itself... There's some haloing beginning to show through.

    I also agree with the vertical lines comment.
    You are almost 45/90 degrees flush with that corner. Line this up in the view finder, then work your vertical camera angle (tilt) until you get minimal distortion in the building. Anything left you can adjust more as needed withing Photoshop or your favorite Image Editing tool.

    Sweet Clock Tower though!


    ---michael

  9. #19
    tegan is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    948

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kiddo View Post
    I thought distortion could be used as a style, as in Tirediron's shot on his ship, with the curved horizon. Or distortion using "fish eye" lenses.

    If the distortion is "accidental" or non intended, then i can understand that could be seen as taking away from the image?

    Just my 2 cents
    No, you need to look at photography in terms of the viewer, not the photographer. The photo has to stand on its own in terms of quality, independent of what the photographer was trying to do or his/her style.

    Tegan
    "Photographic art requires the technical aspects of photography and the design aspects of art, both at an outstanding level."

  10. #20
    Travis is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Huntsville Muskoka
    Posts
    678

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tegan View Post
    No, you need to look at photography in terms of the viewer, not the photographer. The photo has to stand on its own in terms of quality, independent of what the photographer was trying to do or his/her style.

    Tegan
    you should add IMO to the end of this statement... there are no technical boundries an artist must submit to... an artist simply puts forth their contribution and it is either admired or it is not...
    ______________________

    Nikon D300, Nikkor 24-70 2.8 . Nikkor 70-200 2.8 . Nikkor 50mm 1.8 . Sigma 105mm 2.8 . Tokina 12-24 4 . SB-600 . 2xVivitar 285

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36