Hi folks. A bunch of us amateur photographers in my housing co-op have decided to have a little show of some of the stuff we’ve taken in the past year. We’re each showing 4 photographs. After a lot of hemming and hawwing I’ve got my selection down to 5.

I need to lose one of the following. I can’t make up my mind. Go see ‘em (sorry for the lack of thumbnails), then vote!

IMG_1518_2_2.jpg
IMG_1534.jpg
IMG_1736_1.jpg
IMG_1741_1.jpg
IMG_2085_3.jpg

Those are some monster pictures, they make my 20” LCD sob.

Voted for the rust. Just didn’t seem to have anything that brought emotion.

I like the two-plane water picture. Have you touched it up? The reflection looks like it could use some purple-fringing adjustment.

My least favorites are:
IMG_1736_1.jpg
IMG_1741_1.jpg

Neither have any real subject matter much in the way of composition. I’m a nature photographer so I like big pretty trees, lakes, mountains, rivers and stuff.

And man, talk about resizing…. Even my 24 inch just doesn’t have the pixels

I give “ice pipeline” an uneducated 9/10 and put another vote against the rust.

I second lockharts views.

Ice pipeline is definitly the stand out one, but the rusted wasteland is… not to my taste.

I like the rust, but feels it would work better in a landscape cut. The bottom half doesn’t really add anything. The one I put my vote on is the blue arrow one. While I kinda like it as well, it doesn’t feel optimal. Something is “wrong” with composition that make it feels a bit forced. The other ones feel more natural. But as said, the rust would in my eyes gain a lot by being cut in half so it became horizontal… something like [URL=http://www.holybork.com/whale/IMG_1518_2_2.jpg]this[/URL].

My problem with the rust one isn’t the composition, its the sheer amount of noise in the photo.
Which is in turn why, since accidentally destroying my new olympus camera, I’ve decided against digital, gone back to 35mm.

I voted for the rust too, didn’t really do much for me. Grunge is so 2003.

For me the standout was the second shot with the reflection. It makes you pause for a second before you figure out what exactly is going on which makes it very interesting to look at. The last one with the iced pipe had much the same effect on me. I liked the one with the blue paint as well, even if it had questionable composition. It’s one of those weird urban details you easily miss.

These are great comments people. Thanks a lot for the feedback.

I agree with the noise issue on the “rusted landscape” shot… I fucked up the macro settings on that one. It actually looks ok in a 4x6 which is what I had printed originally, but if I’m going with 8x10 I don’t see how I can make it fly. I’ll check my originals and see if I can lose the bottom part which is noisiest, but otherwise it’ll go.

With the leaves, I have a couple of other shots I took of the same thing, so maybe I can improve the composition a bit. I just didn’t want the paint to be dead centre as I found that a bit boring. Maybe I can play with the proportions a bit better.

Hopefully I’ll have some time tonight and can post new versions of those.

Keep ‘em coming!

I actually like the rust shot. It’s almost so noisy and blown out that it’s abstract. When I first opened it up, I thought I was looking at leaves for a second. It could also be some alien landscape—almost like something Bill Watterson would draw.

I think the noise, blur, and over-exposure give it a dirty 70s-80s old film feel.

I agree with Whale. Ditch 1741. I’m normally a sucker for square and near-square (love my 6x6) aspect ratios, but transitioning to them is a test of a photographer’s artistic eye. You might consider going back and cropping again, but I wouldn’t bother—the leaves just aren’t that compelling.

Evaluating these from a more technical perspective, 1534 and 2085 both look maybe a half stop overexposed—although in 2085 you’re doing battle against the simple fact that shooting the sky on an overcast day is typically a losing proposition. Visually, the pipe is a strong subject—its unfortunate the environment didn’t fully cooperate. Also, little more DOF would have been nice, I think.

The files don’t seem to contain any Exif data, so I don’t know what camera you’re shooting (or the exposure settings). It looks like your photos might benefit from reading up on basic metering and exposure technique. I say this not to be condescending, but because skilled metering will help you get the image your after more often. Its especially important if you’re shooting JPG, since there’s no way to recover detail post-exposure from blow out highlights.

For the sake of all that’s holy, resize before you post next time. There are plenty of reasons to do this, but perhaps the best is simply that they will look better than if they’re resized in the web browser.

[quote author=“Xaphon”]My problem with the rust one isn’t the composition, its the sheer amount of noise in the photo.
Which is in turn why, since accidentally destroying my new olympus camera, I’ve decided against digital, gone back to 35mm.

I don’t think noise is really a good reason to avoid digital entirely. Any full-frame digital should compete just fine with 35mm film. Of course, the film is vastly more economical for the casual shooter, so definitely its a worthy alternative to inexpensive point-n-shoots.

That being said, I love film. I’ve found my best photos are often taken right after I get a new piece of gear—lens, filter, flash, whatever—because the new technical abilities encourage me to try new things. With film I can get this effect simply by loading a new emulsion.

Fuji recently discontinued Velvia 50. Kodak discontinued Kodachrome 25 along with their B/W paper. And of course Nikon is no longer making film cameras. It appears film is dying, and its a damn shame. The creative possibilities and fun—that’s right, photography should be fun—of film have yet to be matched by digital, and for this reason I think every dSLR shooter owes it to himself to own a film body.

I thought it was bark. But I voted for it to be taken out as well. The ones I like the most are the reflections and the blue thing.

Canon FTb, baby.

Pentax Spotmatic F, baby!

Well, I’m basically a n00b at photography (only been doing it semi-seriously for the past 6 months or so), so it’s impossible to be condescending to me. I’ve been using a borrowed Canon A75, and one of my plans for the coming year is to get a lot more familiar with the basics (and get my own camera ). I’m pretty sure this camera saves EXIF info, so if I’ve lost it along the way, I guess I have something to fix.

For the sake of all that’s holy, resize before you post next time. There are plenty of reasons to do this, but perhaps the best is simply that they will look better than if they’re resized in the web browser.

Part of me wanted to avoid the “looking better when resized” issue to generate criticism (and I guess I just got some ). Will do thumbnails next time.

One of the things I definitely want to do is get a decent dSLR… I thought the LCD display on digital cameras was cool (and it is), but after using this thing for 6 months, I’m more and more wanting a real viewfinder. Time to start saving…

first or third one - umm, 1518 or 1736.

the water one ftw though.