Cutting out the calories!

[Bob Harris]

Well EM, you just gave my wife and I a pretty good laugh. Very innovative, I think I will skip my Cheerios tomorrow. Bob

[mischivo]

I won't comment on the qualities of this photo; as I understand it, you were attempting to be funny.

[eaglem]

Thanks to both of you for your comments.

[Bob Harris]

the quality of the photo is terrific EM, thanks Bob

[eaglem]

the quality of the photo is terrific EM, thanks Bob

Since re-adjusting the focus via the menu everything is coming up sharp and clear.

[wjt]

I won't comment on the qualities of this photo; as I understand it, you were attempting to be funny.

Aren't you all rainbows, cupcakes and warm fuzzy feelings.

Nice concept eaglem, something a little different and creative.

[eaglem]

Thank you for the positive comment wjt and I usually ignore mischivo's remarks and treat them with the contempt they deserve.

[mischivo]

Aren't you all rainbows, cupcakes and warm fuzzy feelings.

Nice concept eaglem, something a little different and creative.

On the contrary, I'm not. I don't issue undeserved positive sentiments. Nor are my criticisms undeserved or illegitimate. Face it, when you put your so-called "artwork" out into the public space, you open yourself to both negative and positive review. It's unrealistic to expect only praise, when there are clearly many poor examples to be found on these forums. Someone has to expose people to reality, but most people here just gush compliments regardless of the level of work.

Allow me to elaborate on why this photo is a poor image:
1. It is poorly cropped (and cropped it is).
2. For something shot in direct sunlight, the blacks are much too prominent. You've created unintended holes in your image.
3. In terms of perspective, the image lacks depth cues. You've managed to vanquish perspective two-fold, via extremely deep focus and flat lighting on both its front and side faces. This could've been averted had you allowed the box's orthographic nature shine through and shot from a steeper angle than straight on. We need a visual angle for depth cues. Looking at this pains my eyes and brain, I'm seeing it in convex and concave and can't lock onto the latter.
4. Ugly knife: looks like a dollar-store steak knife. Nothing wrong with cheap steak knifes, my mother has them and they cut well, but they're too ugly for photos, and not a conventional weapon (that would be a chef's knife).
5. Horrible choice of background. One side is black shadows. The other is some white stump. The other is brown ground (marbelite, stucco?).
6. The first pun is pretty good, but you don't need to repeat it. It reeks of desperation: "Did you get it, did you get it? I made a joke. Get it?"

[Frogfish]

As usual Mischivo, whatever the accuracy of your assessment, you are incredibly grim & humourless, not to say deleterious, with your comments, especially so considering this is just a light hearted snap to garner a smile. Which for most people I'm sure it did.

[eaglem]

Someone has to expose people to reality, but most people here just gush compliments regardless of the level of work.

I apologise, I didn't realise you had appointed yourself as the God of Photography and will promise to be much more careful in your presence from this point on.

[wjt]

On the contrary, I'm not. I don't issue undeserved positive sentiments. Nor are my criticisms undeserved or illegitimate. Face it, when you put your so-called "artwork" out into the public space, you open yourself to both negative and positive review. It's unrealistic to expect only praise, when there are clearly many poor examples to be found on these forums. Someone has to expose people to reality, but most people here just gush compliments regardless of the level of work.

Allow me to elaborate on why this photo is a poor image:
1. It is poorly cropped (and cropped it is).
2. For something shot in direct sunlight, the blacks are much too prominent. You've created unintended holes in your image.
3. In terms of perspective, the image lacks depth cues. You've managed to vanquish perspective two-fold, via extremely deep focus and flat lighting on both its front and side faces. This could've been averted had you allowed the box's orthographic nature shine through and shot from a steeper angle than straight on. We need a visual angle for depth cues. Looking at this pains my eyes and brain, I'm seeing it in convex and concave and can't lock onto the latter.
4. Ugly knife: looks like a dollar-store steak knife. Nothing wrong with cheap steak knifes, my mother has them and they cut well, but they're too ugly for photos, and not a conventional weapon (that would be a chef's knife).
5. Horrible choice of background. One side is black shadows. The other is some white stump. The other is brown ground (marbelite, stucco?).
6. The first pun is pretty good, but you don't need to repeat it. It reeks of desperation: "Did you get it, did you get it? I made a joke. Get it?"

Im not saying you have to be positive if you feel the material is not good, but instead of being abrasive and disparaging maybe try being helpful. One of the items 1-5 could have been in order if you had the overwhelming desire to post. Not all that frequent these forums are fantastic photographers that never take a bad shot. Everyone has something to learn, some more than others.

[downunderman]

Mischivo, I suppose you were one of those gifted, but very rare people, who are perfect in everything that the do, even the very first time. Hell must be a real bore having to put up with us mortals.

[Sailor]

Hey, EM - one always hates to see these tragic crimes take place. However,the poor victim may have been asking for it; I hear he was a real flake.

Jer

[eaglem]

Hey, EM - one always hates to see these tragic crimes take place. However,the poor victim may have been asking for it; I hear he was a real flake.

Jer

Could have expected that wry humour from you Jer, well appreciated.