“It’s not whether you get knocked down, it’s whether you get up.” —Vince Lombardi

Forum software has been updated to latest version. Please report any issues you may encounter. - Thanks

― Architecture CritiqueThe Davison House

User avatar
Didereaux
Mentoris Sextus
Mentoris Sextus
Posts: 639
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2015 6:37 pm
Location: swamps of East Texas
Social Media Opt-In: Yes
Editing option: Yes, feel free to edit my image
Contact:

The Davison House

Post by Didereaux » Sun Apr 30, 2017 8:50 pm

The Davison House on a foggy morning. (Tx City Tx)
Image
There are no banal subjects in photography, but an infinite number of banal ways to illustrate them.

User avatar
Psjunkie
Mentoris Quintus
Mentoris Quintus
Posts: 709
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2016 4:20 am
Social Media Opt-In: No
Editing option: Yes, feel free to edit my image
Contact:

Post by Psjunkie » Sun Apr 30, 2017 9:20 pm

Just my opinion but I feel the fog if enhanced could really impact the mood of this image.

User avatar
Didereaux
Mentoris Sextus
Mentoris Sextus
Posts: 639
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2015 6:37 pm
Location: swamps of East Texas
Social Media Opt-In: Yes
Editing option: Yes, feel free to edit my image
Contact:

Post by Didereaux » Sun Apr 30, 2017 10:21 pm

Psjunkie wrote:Just my opinion but I feel the fog if enhanced could really impact the mood of this image.


You are right. But this level of contrast gives that effect when printed on barya paper. I print almost all my pictures and so they are processed to match the inks and paper.
There are no banal subjects in photography, but an infinite number of banal ways to illustrate them.

User avatar
LindaShorey
Mentoris Secundus
Mentoris Secundus
Posts: 1237
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2016 11:50 am
Location: Yakima, WA
Social Media Opt-In: No
Editing option: Yes, feel free to edit my image
Contact:

Post by LindaShorey » Sun Apr 30, 2017 10:31 pm

Didereaux wrote: But this level of contrast gives that effect when printed on barya paper. I print almost all my pictures and so they are processed to match the inks and paper.
Your comments bring up an interesting dilemma: if posting in the critique section of an online forum, but the image has been optimized for printing, how do we assess?
"What's important in a photograph and what isn't." http://photographylife.com/whats-import ... -what-isnt

User avatar
Didereaux
Mentoris Sextus
Mentoris Sextus
Posts: 639
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2015 6:37 pm
Location: swamps of East Texas
Social Media Opt-In: Yes
Editing option: Yes, feel free to edit my image
Contact:

Post by Didereaux » Sun Apr 30, 2017 11:17 pm

LindaShorey wrote:
Didereaux wrote: But this level of contrast gives that effect when printed on barya paper. I print almost all my pictures and so they are processed to match the inks and paper.
Your comments bring up an interesting dilemma: if posting in the critique section of an online forum, but the image has been optimized for printing, how do we assess?


I don't see the problem. If pointed out and something is done to meet print needs then it is pointed out and that is the endo of it. However if something is not right in someones eyes, and is not a result of special processing then it is addressed in that vein. People who critique must not only critique from the photographers point of view, but also their intent. A critique based upon personal likes and dislikes is less than worthless to all parties involved. For example, I absolutely loathe the cartoonish over saturated processing (that thankfully is fading away), and unless forced to voice my opinion on a specific piece will not comment. If on the other hand the admirer of such stuff tries to critique mine, or anothers work and say that it needs to be made into a garish cartoon I will speak up. My point specifically is that it is not your place, nor duty to dictate the why something is done, yours is to critique the photo within that vein , process or genre, or not comment at all.

For instance on the Davison house you can perfectly well comment on the sharpness, the composition, distortions etc for they are not specifically processed for printing, but carry of as fundamental qualities.

If the board wish to put constraints upon how a picture is process then that is the sites prerogative, and our prerogative as to whether or not to post. glad you brought this up so that it can be explained and discussed. That at this time is the purpose for posting all the stuff that I have recently....it is to generate interest, and involvement and hopefully attract more participants. One further point you ask, "...how do we assess?" One thing that you might ask is why does the printed version not appear as the screen version, You might learn something useful about printing. For if a picture is not printed it is merely fleeting eye-candy of very little value in the short term, and none in the long term.
There are no banal subjects in photography, but an infinite number of banal ways to illustrate them.

User avatar
Psjunkie
Mentoris Quintus
Mentoris Quintus
Posts: 709
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2016 4:20 am
Social Media Opt-In: No
Editing option: Yes, feel free to edit my image
Contact:

Post by Psjunkie » Sun Apr 30, 2017 11:24 pm

Didereaux wrote:
Psjunkie wrote:Just my opinion but I feel the fog if enhanced could really impact the mood of this image.


You are right. But this level of contrast gives that effect when printed on barya paper. I print almost all my pictures and so they are processed to match the inks and paper.

Good to know, very well then.

User avatar
LindaShorey
Mentoris Secundus
Mentoris Secundus
Posts: 1237
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2016 11:50 am
Location: Yakima, WA
Social Media Opt-In: No
Editing option: Yes, feel free to edit my image
Contact:

Post by LindaShorey » Sun Apr 30, 2017 11:30 pm

Didereaux wrote:
I don't see the problem. If pointed out and something is done to meet print needs then it is pointed out and that is the endo of it. However if something is not right in someones eyes, and is not a result of special processing then it is addressed in that vein. People who critique must not only critique from the photographers point of view, but also their intent. A critique based upon personal likes and dislikes is less than worthless to all parties involved. For example, I absolutely loathe the cartoonish over saturated processing (that thankfully is fading away), and unless forced to voice my opinion on a specific piece will not comment. If on the other hand the admirer of such stuff tries to critique mine, or anothers work and say that it needs to be made into a garish cartoon I will speak up. My point specifically is that it is not your place, nor duty to dictate the why something is done, yours is to critique the photo within that vein , process or genre, or not comment at all.

For instance on the Davison house you can perfectly well comment on the sharpness, the composition, distortions etc for they are not specifically processed for printing, but carry of as fundamental qualities.

If the board wish to put constraints upon how a picture is process then that is the sites prerogative, and our prerogative as to whether or not to post. glad you brought this up so that it can be explained and discussed. That at this time is the purpose for posting all the stuff that I have recently....it is to generate interest, and involvement and hopefully attract more participants. One further point you ask, "...how do we assess?" One thing that you might ask is why does the printed version not appear as the screen version, You might learn something useful about printing. For if a picture is not printed it is merely fleeting eye-candy of very little value in the short term, and none in the long term.


Technical discussion of printing would make an excellent topic, for sure.

You're right about all the areas that can be covered in both subjective and objective critiques - in fact, skimming through Duck's "how to critique photos" just now I was very impressed by how thorough it is. Ironically, I usually leave the technical stuff to others, and comment more from subjective points such as emotional impact. But your comment to psjunkie sent my brain in another direction. All the best.
"What's important in a photograph and what isn't." http://photographylife.com/whats-import ... -what-isnt

User avatar
St3v3M
Key Founding Member
Key Founding Member
Posts: 3027
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2016 1:02 am
Location: 35,000 feet
Social Media Opt-In: Yes
Editing option: Yes, feel free to edit my image
Contact:

Post by St3v3M » Mon May 01, 2017 3:37 am

I think the fog gives it an old-world feel that fits the scene and while the perspective throws me a little I can live with it. What bothers me, if anything, is the tree leaking in on the left. I'm sure you noticed it when you took the shot and have to ask if it would have made more sense to take a step forward to remove it completely. It wouldn't be hard to remove the top portion and maybe by doing so could leave the bottom part, either way it draws my eye and removes my attention to the house.

I hope this helps! S-
"Take photographs, leave footprints, steal hearts"

User avatar
Didereaux
Mentoris Sextus
Mentoris Sextus
Posts: 639
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2015 6:37 pm
Location: swamps of East Texas
Social Media Opt-In: Yes
Editing option: Yes, feel free to edit my image
Contact:

Post by Didereaux » Mon May 01, 2017 10:34 am

St3v3M wrote:I think the fog gives it an old-world feel that fits the scene and while the perspective throws me a little I can live with it. What bothers me, if anything, is the tree leaking in on the left. I'm sure you noticed it when you took the shot and have to ask if it would have made more sense to take a step forward to remove it completely. It wouldn't be hard to remove the top portion and maybe by doing so could leave the bottom part, either way it draws my eye and removes my attention to the house.

I hope this helps! S-



A very valid point. Although I was constrained from getting closer by a fence (this is a historical site) I should have moved right or left and looked for a better vantage without the interfering trees....that's why I am still an apprentice and not a a journeyman. ;) Good points.
There are no banal subjects in photography, but an infinite number of banal ways to illustrate them.

User avatar
St3v3M
Key Founding Member
Key Founding Member
Posts: 3027
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2016 1:02 am
Location: 35,000 feet
Social Media Opt-In: Yes
Editing option: Yes, feel free to edit my image
Contact:

Post by St3v3M » Mon May 01, 2017 11:45 am

Didereaux wrote:
St3v3M wrote:A very valid point. Although I was constrained from getting closer by a fence (this is a historical site) I should have moved right or left and looked for a better vantage without the interfering trees....that's why I am still an apprentice and not a a journeyman. ;) Good points.

It's easy to be a couch-editor making suggestions after the fact, and I've been there where the shot is perfect if only for that one branch... I respect that you honored the site as you did and hope you don't misunderstand that I like the image, it's just my eye keeps going there. It's the imperfections though that make us unique so maybe it's meat to be! Thank you again, S-
"Take photographs, leave footprints, steal hearts"

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests