|
overlord
Mar 6, 2006, 10:20 PM
Post #2 of 19
(2671 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2002
Posts: 14120
|
tree things really spring to mind:
1) lose the thick frame
2) the gear on hes harness is really distracting
3) id love to see the face
maybe you shouldve waited for him to actually make the move with hes left arm that he looks to be prepairing.
|
|
|
|
|
boondock_saint
Mar 6, 2006, 11:55 PM
Post #3 of 19
(2671 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 6, 2005
Posts: 2157
|
I'd really like to see it at 700 pixels or less ....
|
|
|
|
|
outsane
Mar 7, 2006, 12:31 AM
Post #4 of 19
(2671 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2006
Posts: 31
|
resized
|
|
|
|
|
melekzek
Mar 7, 2006, 3:12 AM
Post #5 of 19
(2671 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 16, 2002
Posts: 1456
|
In reply to: lose the thick frame
and please make it symmetric :roll:
seriously, i am usually not anal, yet your frame keep disturbing me...
The rock face has high frequency features, but somehow does not look like focused. The overexposed background is distracting, i think it is better to keep its size to minimum, if you want to include it at all. I second overlord, you need the face.
Overall, his body is smooth, his head is smooth, but the rockface, background and gear all are too crowding. You might want contrasting that two properties, but i think you need to get closer, and personal.
|
|
|
|
|
outsane
Mar 7, 2006, 3:25 AM
Post #6 of 19
(2671 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2006
Posts: 31
|
thanks I'll keep that in mind..
|
|
|
|
|
kimgraves
Mar 7, 2006, 3:40 PM
Post #7 of 19
(2671 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 13, 2003
Posts: 1186
|
It seems to me that the interesting thing about this image is that the color of the rock and the color of the climber's skin are one. You might try cropping down to highlight that. When you do that the shape of the climber becomes more interesting as well.
Best, Kim
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
kimgraves
Mar 7, 2006, 4:39 PM
Post #9 of 19
(2671 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 13, 2003
Posts: 1186
|
Hi,
I think that's better, but I think you can go even further. How about?
http://www.carletonwoodworking.com/rccom01.jpg
or
http://www.carletonwoodworking.com/rccom02.jpg
This way the line of the leg, arm two rock features line up. The color of the climber on the left is balanced with the color of the rock on the right with the white rock between. And there's motion in the first - left to right and right to left.
You don't have a lot of pixels to play with because of the blowup. Maybe you have a better image to play with.
Hope it's okay for me to play with your image. I'm happy to scratch it from my server if you'd like.
Let me know what you think.
Best, Kim
|
|
|
|
|
melekzek
Mar 7, 2006, 6:08 PM
Post #10 of 19
(2671 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 16, 2002
Posts: 1456
|
too much imho. it does not look like climbing anymore
|
|
|
|
|
boondock_saint
Mar 7, 2006, 8:27 PM
Post #11 of 19
(2671 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 6, 2005
Posts: 2157
|
Ok I don't wanna put the pic down because it is what it is. I was wondering for a while before posting a comment, what it was about the image that just didn't work for me and I think I finally got it. Too much forshortening. You simply don't see enough of the climber, or significant detail to be more precise. As some said, if you could see his face it would be a big plus. Right now his body is the the most prominent feature of the scene but we see so little of it. I love the line that goes from the arm to the leg but there has to be more than just arms and legs in an image.
Now like I said, it is what it is and you can't change the way it was shot As it is, I like your last composition the best. Not spectacular, but it works for me.
|
|
|
|
|
jakedatc
Mar 7, 2006, 8:28 PM
Post #12 of 19
(2671 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 12, 2003
Posts: 11054
|
ok here is my idea..
sorry about all the compression .. but i wanted to show the cropping.. i didnt do much else cept burn a bit of that glare out of the trees anyway. shows climbing.. shows the line of draws.. one more second and him looking up woulda been nice but it happens
http://img.photobucket.com/...ke/RC-critique-2.jpg
|
|
|
|
|
outsane
Mar 7, 2006, 8:43 PM
Post #13 of 19
(2671 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2006
Posts: 31
|
Thanks again for all the comments,
I have not learned the timing yet on getting the shots I want..
I took several shots on this climb and did not get him looking up..when everything else was in place, body position, lighting, and all that.
in part he has climbed this several times (they put the route up)
It seems that I need to learn to forsee movements to be ready to shoot..
more of sport photography then still life..
|
|
|
|
|
outsane
Mar 7, 2006, 8:46 PM
Post #14 of 19
(2671 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2006
Posts: 31
|
Thanks again for all the comments,
I have not learned the timing yet on getting the shots I want..
I took several shots on this climb and did not get him looking up, I took three shots when he was in this position and he did not look up until after his body position changed..when everything else was in place, body position, lighting, and all that.
in part he has climbed this several times (they put the route up)
It seems that I need to learn to forsee movements to be ready to shoot..
more of sport photography then still life..
|
|
|
|
|
melekzek
Mar 8, 2006, 12:51 AM
Post #15 of 19
(2671 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 16, 2002
Posts: 1456
|
In reply to: i didnt do much else cept burn a bit of that glare out of the trees anyway.
I like your frame better. One thing I would do different is dodge the background, instead of burn. They are already overexposed anyhow, at least dodging them would create a nice seperation between background and foreground. Dodge brings back some detail there, but the image looks flat, because the background and foreground blend. As I pointed before, the image is already too crowded, imho.
My take, i went square. I dodge the background, blur a bit. I also dodge the rock around the talent too, to clear him a bit.
http://people.cs.tamu.edu/.../critic/keloglan.jpg
|
|
|
|
|
jakedatc
Mar 8, 2006, 5:23 AM
Post #16 of 19
(2671 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 12, 2003
Posts: 11054
|
In reply to: more of sport photography then still life..
exactly.. it is sport photo. and it takes a bit of time. knowing your climbing friends helps too.. like i know one of my friends always looks down at his feet while he steps up but then looks up while he makes the move.. i wait until he picks his head back up to take the shot
Melz that's cool.. and makes sense.. it did have alot that had nothing to burn in so just taking it all mostly out looks nice. In my messing around i did dodge around the climber and a bit on each draw to have that line stand out a bit but it didnt get into the final save
anyway.. rumney this weekend.. hopefully i'll have some stuff to share :crosses fingers:
|
|
|
|
|
kimgraves
Mar 8, 2006, 3:49 PM
Post #17 of 19
(2671 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 13, 2003
Posts: 1186
|
In reply to: too much imho. it does not look like climbing anymore
Well, it depends upon what your goal is, doesn't it? Keeping it as a "climbing picture" doesn't work for me. The background is too distracting and has nothing to do with the subject - the climber on the rock. It doesn't match color wise; it doesn't match shape wise; it doesn't match texture wise; it doesn't match contrast wise; it doesn't add to the drama. Burning it in or dodging it just makes it worse because it ends up highlighting those differences.
So the question becomes, for me at least, do I sacrifice the potential of the image just to maintain my "intention" of creating a "climbing image?" Or do I search around and see what "the best image" I can harvest out of the limitations of the material in front of me?
When I was in college, many moons ago, I did a lot of painting (fine art - not house :wink: ). And one of the things I learned is that it is often - more often than not - necessary to give up what I liked best in the painting in order for the whole painting to work. That it is certainly a valid way to work to let the painting (or photograph) tell you what it needs rather than trying to impose a set of expectations on the work.
I'm in no way saying that my crop is better than your crop, or anything like that. But it certainly is always at least interesting to look for "the happy accident" that may be lurking - hidden by our intention.
Best, Kim
|
|
|
|
|
climbsomething
Mar 17, 2006, 6:06 AM
Post #18 of 19
(2671 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 8588
|
Melekzek's take on it is hands down the best (as usual), but I like Jake's crop. Cropping it up to his butt is too claustrophobia-inducing.
I disagree with the gear being distracting. I'm kinda sick of all the minimalist no-gear-on-my-loops shots.
|
|
|
|
|
hillbillywannabe
Mar 17, 2006, 2:45 PM
Post #19 of 19
(2671 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 16, 2005
Posts: 415
|
it is climbing gear in a climbing shot, i kind of like it too. it bothers me that i cant see his right leg.
i like jake's and melekzeks framing. the smaller size really helps imo
|
|
|
|
|
|
