[zombieCat]

I shot this while strolling around downtown one evening in L.A. a few months ago. Comments and critique are welcomed.

[GoremanX]

Great composition! Love the detal of the subject, it looks really sharp. The angles are really appealing to me.

I would maybe crop out the top of the picture to remove the bright light at the top left, it's very distracting.

[zombieCat]

Great composition! Love the detal of the subject, it looks really sharp. The angles are really appealing to me.

I would maybe crop out the top of the picture to remove the bright light at the top left, it's very distracting.

Thanks for the comments Goreman. Great point on the light--I'll crop it out, probably from the width rather than the height.

Thanks for the comments Goreman. Great point on the light--I'll crop it out, probably from the width rather than the height.

I would crop from the top, you'll spoil the composition if you crop from the left side.
I would crop some from the right side as well though, the space between the bread and the edge of the frame isn't doing anything. It doesn't matter if you crop out some of the napkin. I would crop to just past that downward diagonal on the end of the napkin, then the shadow will fill in the little amount of space that is left between the bread and the edge.

[zombieCat]

I would crop from the top, you'll spoil the composition if you crop from the left side.
I would crop some from the right side as well though, the space between the bread and the edge of the frame isn't doing anything. It doesn't matter if you crop out some of the napkin. I would crop to just past that downward diagonal on the end of the napkin, then the shadow will fill in the little amount of space that is left between the bread and the edge.

Very good, thanks. Here's a revised version.

[GoremanX]

Much better! Now all my focus goes to the subject, and the background is just that; background.

I love this shot.

Very good, thanks. Here's a revised version.

I'd crop it a little more, see my previous post. The corner of the napkin and that yellow stain are distracting.

[zombieCat]

Much better! Now all my focus goes to the subject, and the background is just that; background.

I love this shot.

Thanks again for the input. I know this stuff comes naturally to some people, but it's work for me, so any input is appreciated.

I'd crop it a little more, see my previous post. The corner of the napkin and that yellow stain are distracting.

The devil is in the details . It was very late last night and I misunderstood what you were saying. Now that I see it without the corner, I do agree that it was distracting (as was the mustard stain). Great stuff, thanks again for your advice.



I have a general question about the critique process. This may not be the proper place for it (if the "About the Photo Critique Section" sticky was still open, that would be). Some critique sites indicate that you should include as much information as you can about the photo in the initial post--the exact circumstances and context, what you were thinking, etc. I tend to think that the picture should speak for itself, and if it requires words to tell the story, it is inferior. In fact, I'm thinking even the amount of info I included in this one was too much. After all, we're trying to tell a story via a visual medium rather than words, aren't we? Thoughts? What's your preference when critiquing a photo?

[GoremanX]

I have a general question about the critique process. This may not be the proper place for it (if the "About the Photo Critique Section" sticky was still open, that would be). Some critique sites indicate that you should include as much information as you can about the photo in the initial post--the exact circumstances and context, what you were thinking, etc. I tend to think that the picture should speak for itself, and if it requires words to tell the story, it is inferior. In fact, I'm thinking even the amount of info I included in this one was too much. After all, we're trying to tell a story via a visual medium rather than words, aren't we? Thoughts? What's your preference when critiquing a photo?

Perhaps, but a short explanation can give a context to the photographer's intentions.

Look here for example;
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/photo-critique/89549-black-white-old-farm-shed.html

The photographer was trying to convey that the shack was rickety and frail, while the angle he used gave the shack a sense of strength and solidity. Neither way of photographing is wrong, but the picture he showed did not match up with his intentions. In this case, his explanation allowed Damn Brit to give him a different critique which helped the photographer better understand perspective and its effect on his pictures.

After the critique, he came back with this shot instead:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/photo-critique/89672-black-white-old-farm-shed-2-a.html

If we were all long-time professional photographers, we wouldn't need to explain our pictures, and we wouldn't seek out critiques either

[zombieCat]

Perhaps, but a short explanation can give a context to the photographer's intentions.

Look here for example;
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/photo-critique/89549-black-white-old-farm-shed.html

The photographer was trying to convey that the shack was rickety and frail, while the angle he used gave the shack a sense of strength and solidity. Neither way of photographing is wrong, but the picture he showed did not match up with his intentions. In this case, his explanation allowed Damn Brit to give him a different critique which helped the photographer better understand perspective and its effect on his pictures.

After the critique, he came back with this shot instead:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/photo-critique/89672-black-white-old-farm-shed-2-a.html

If we were all long-time professional photographers, we wouldn't need to explain our pictures, and we wouldn't seek out critiques either

Good point. If it were me, however, I may specifically ask for what the photo conveys to see if the responses match my expectation, and if they don't, find out why. I suppose that's the long way 'round, but personally, I like to hear people's responses untainted by my expectations. I'm fairly new to all of this, so I probably won't use this as a hard and fast rule.

[GoremanX]

Good point. If it were me, however, I may specifically ask for what the photo conveys to see if the responses match my expectation, and if they don't, find out why. I suppose that's the long way 'round, but personally, I like to hear people's responses untainted by my expectations. I'm fairly new to all of this, so I probably won't use this as a hard and fast rule.

Very well, so with that in mind, here is what your picture conveys to me:

It looks like some prison warden's mean joke at the expense of the prisoners. The whole atmosphere looks like an old prison, and the menu selection (essentially dry bread) is made to look all fancy and pretty. The contrast of these settings amuses me greatly.

I hope you don't take offense at this, that's really how I see it!

[zombieCat]

Very well, so with that in mind, here is what your picture conveys to me:

It looks like some prison warden's mean joke at the expense of the prisoners. The whole atmosphere looks like an old prison, and the menu selection (essentially dry bread) is made to look all fancy and pretty. The contrast of these settings amuses me greatly.

I hope you don't take offense at this, that's really how I see it!

Very nice . No offense at all, I like it. I'm thinking it will help me with a good title. Actually, your take confirms to me that I shouldn't have provided even as much info as I did. Though you were able to mentally get past the short description, that may not be the case for everyone. I like the blind interpretation (although in this case it wasn't completely blind, but it seems you put on the blinders quite effectively).

[GoremanX]

Very nice . No offense at all, I like it. I'm thinking it will help me with a good title. Actually, your take confirms to me that I shouldn't have provided even as much info as I did. Though you were able to mentally get past the short description, that may not be the case for everyone. I like the blind interpretation (although in this case it wasn't completely blind, but it seems you put on the blinders quite effectively).

I suppose you could pretend I have a great aptitude for setting aside preconceptions. But the truth is, once I read the initial description, I tend to forget it immediately. My memory is terrible that way. I didn't remember what you'd written at the top, and I didn't bother re-reading it. That's just pure laziness on my part. So by creatively combining forgetfulness and laziness, I exude an air of open-mindedness. It's all accidental, of course, but I like it when others ascribe qualities to me that I don't really have.

Good point. If it were me, however, I may specifically ask for what the photo conveys to see if the responses match my expectation, and if they don't, find out why. I suppose that's the long way 'round, but personally, I like to hear people's responses untainted by my expectations. I'm fairly new to all of this, so I probably won't use this as a hard and fast rule.

Another way to look at it is, if you have to ask, the picture hasn't worked on that level. A lot of photographs are just about the aesthetics and composition. When it comes to images that are trying to convey a narrative or are abstract there is a third dimension to the creation of the image and often, that third dimension is perspective.

[zombieCat]

I suppose you could pretend I have a great aptitude for setting aside preconceptions. But the truth is, once I read the initial description, I tend to forget it immediately. My memory is terrible that way. I didn't remember what you'd written at the top, and I didn't bother re-reading it. That's just pure laziness on my part. So by creatively combining forgetfulness and laziness, I exude an air of open-mindedness. It's all accidental, of course, but I like it when others ascribe qualities to me that I don't really have.

Take whatever you can get, man.

Another way to look at it is, if you have to ask, the picture hasn't worked on that level. A lot of photographs are just about the aesthetics and composition. When it comes to images that are trying to convey a narrative or are abstract there is a third dimension to the creation of the image and often, that third dimension is perspective.

This is in line with my initial thoughts when asking about this--that the photo should speak for itself.