# What do you think of my photo's?



## Chicagophotoshop (Jan 27, 2007)

I do not, I repeat, do not consider myself a professional photographer.   but I do intend on selling my photos online.  I would love if you can give me some constructive criticism or *gasp* tell me you love em  

 keep in mind, I have not done any touch up work on these photos.  but I definitely plan to.


----------



## Chicagophotoshop (Jan 27, 2007)

this needs to be straightened


----------



## Chicagophotoshop (Jan 27, 2007)




----------



## Chicagophotoshop (Jan 27, 2007)




----------



## Chicagophotoshop (Jan 27, 2007)




----------



## Chicagophotoshop (Jan 27, 2007)

not too happy how this came out but hopefully I can fix it


----------



## Sw1tchFX (Jan 27, 2007)

4 is really the only good one. Everything else just looks too distant.

4 is compositionally strong becuase you have 3 elements in 3 parts of the frame, all leading the eye up to that cloud in the sky. I kind of with that your images were ok to edit beucase i'd play around with number 4.


----------



## Chicagophotoshop (Jan 27, 2007)

Sw1tchFX said:


> 4 is really the only good one. Everything else just looks too distant.
> 
> 4 is compositionally strong becuase you have 3 elements in 3 parts of the frame, all leading the eye up to that cloud in the sky. I kind of with that your images were ok to edit beucase i'd play around with number 4.


cool thanks for the input.  the distant photos are all shot in RAW so I think I can crop out alot fo wasted space to bring it in a bit.  thanks for your input.


----------



## Chicagophotoshop (Jan 27, 2007)

this needs some work too but you get the idea.


----------



## Chicagophotoshop (Jan 27, 2007)




----------



## Chicagophotoshop (Jan 27, 2007)




----------



## jimiismydaddy (Jan 27, 2007)

Those next 4 are all pretty good. Yeah the first set are kind of far. the 4th one though of the first set is nice.


----------



## Azuth (Jan 27, 2007)

I agree with most of the already posted comments for the first 4.

In regard to the second 4;

1 seems underexposed and poorly framed. The wall on the right dominates.

2 again seems poorly framed, the DOF also makes the person in front of the two girls very much part of the image. It's also worth noting that taking pictures of young girls in swimsuits may be frowned upon by some members of the public, no matter how innocent the intent or artistic the result.

3 Could be kind of cool, at least you're drawn in to the image by the shapes, but apart from that it's pretty boring and rather flat.

4 The lens distortion does nothing for the image, in fact it seriously detracts from the result. It's not very crisp, but perhaps that's just the compression?


----------



## WTF? (Jan 27, 2007)

the 4th of the first set is really good, i love pictures like that. i really like the 1st and 3rd of the second too, very nice. i feel the last one is a bit plain, it does have nice colours though which kinda makes up for it.


----------



## Rusty_Tripod (Jan 27, 2007)

Unless an individual had a particular need for one of the particular views, I do not see that any of the images is striking enough to be marketable.  #4 is nice but kind of cliche. Still someone might have a yen for that angle. The image of the two girls in the bathing suits disturbs me a little as there seems to be no reason for shooting it and/or including it. (Of course, my primary job is school teacher and people fear that all teachers are pedophiles. Thus, I flinch when I see this type of image.)

I believe you are off to a good start, but I also believe that people prefer more striking images. Keep at it.

Rusty Tripod


----------



## Chicagophotoshop (Jan 27, 2007)

Azuth said:


> I agree with most of the already posted comments for the first 4.
> 
> In regard to the second 4;
> 
> ...


----------



## Chicagophotoshop (Jan 27, 2007)

Rusty_Tripod said:


> Unless an individual had a particular need for one of the particular views, I do not see that any of the images is striking enough to be marketable. #4 is nice but kind of cliche. Still someone might have a yen for that angle. The image of the two girls in the bathing suits disturbs me a little as there seems to be no reason for shooting it and/or including it. (Of course, my primary job is school teacher and people fear that all teachers are pedophiles. Thus, I flinch when I see this type of image.)


I have taken the pic down.  I see where your coming from.



Azuth said:


> I believe you are off to a good start, but I also believe that people prefer more striking images. Keep at it.
> 
> Rusty Tripod


thanks for the words of encouragement. I know I have a ways to go, but I'm learning


----------



## Chicagophotoshop (Jan 27, 2007)




----------



## Chicagophotoshop (Jan 27, 2007)




----------



## Chicagophotoshop (Jan 27, 2007)




----------



## Chicagophotoshop (Jan 28, 2007)

is this also too distant?


----------



## MrMatthieu (Jan 28, 2007)

Chicagophotoshop said:


> I do not, I repeat, do not consider myself a professional photographer. but I do intend on selling my photos online. I would love if you can give me some constructive criticism or *gasp* tell me you love em
> 
> keep in mind, I have not done any touch up work on these photos. but I definitely plan to.


 
Man I don't understand you.

You want to sell pictures and in the same time you tell us you didn't make any work on it.... 

You tell us you are beguinner but in same time say you don't consider you as a professionnal :er: 

Really I am lost, and don't see any picture that I would like too buy.
Sorry , I hope my direct comment are not too rude  but I am quite amazed by your introduction

Mat


----------



## Chicagophotoshop (Jan 28, 2007)

MrMatthieu said:


> Man I don't understand you.
> 
> You want to sell pictures and in the same time you tell us you didn't make any work on it....


not yet, no.  I said I plan to.  I will do some editing work to my photos before I put them on my wesite for sale.




MrMatthieu said:


> You tell us you are beguinner but in same time say you don't consider you as a professionnal :er:


yes exactly.  why is this so hard to understand?



MrMatthieu said:


> Really I am lost, and don't see any picture that I would like too buy.
> Sorry , I hope my direct comment are not too rude  but I am quite amazed by your introduction
> 
> Mat


ok no problem.  I wish I could help you understand so you wont be so confused.  let me try, ready.

1. I enjoy taking pictures as a hobby.

2. I am creating a website for people to see my pictures.  most of my shots are in and around Chicago.  In my _humble_ opinion, some of my photos might be worthy of being purchased and hanging on the wall in someone home, office, dorm room, whatever.  My pictures will mostly likely not end up in magazines, museums, text books. thats ok, I have a day job.

3. On my website,  I am giving the opportunity for others to sell their work.  I am under the crazy belief that there are many "amateur" photographers and artist who...
a) have some insanely good talent 
b) do not know how or care to start their own website.


If all else fails, I have a website where people can go and browse some pictures.  


I hope you are less confused


----------



## MrMatthieu (Jan 28, 2007)

I see your point, but I can't agree because for me what make value of pictures ( mine, yours and anyone  included) has nothing to see with money.

That's why for me selling my pictures is not my target, but let me know i f you succed in selling some of them.

Mat


----------



## Chicagophotoshop (Jan 28, 2007)

MrMatthieu said:


> I see your point, but I can't agree because for me what make value of pictures ( mine, yours and anyone  included) has nothing to see with money.


 I can appreciate that.  but I think people who do this for a living would disagree.  professional photographers depend on sales in order to live.

but beauty is in the eye of the beholder my friend.  for me, I would rather pay for a photo of the Chicago skyline then a picture of a garbage can, perfectly centered and cropped with amazing light and exposure etc etc.  but thats just me.  



MrMatthieu said:


> I That's why for me selling my pictures is not my target, but let me know i f you succed in selling some of them.
> 
> Mat


well for many people in the photography business, I would say selling their work is important.  for you, not so much and thats great.  you are more then welcome to come to my site any time and just look, you dont have to buy anything.  isnt that cool?  site should be up in 2-4 weeks after I finish putting my portfolio together.


----------



## Chicagophotoshop (Jan 28, 2007)

anybody care to comment on my last set of 4?


----------



## Chicagophotoshop (Jan 28, 2007)

anybody want to chime in?


----------



## skates94 (Jan 28, 2007)

I want to chime in.........

GO BEARS!!!!!!:cheer: 


Good luck with your pictures from the point of another person just starting out I think you posted some nice shots.

I live in the South Suburbs and hope to get downtown soon and grab some shots.


----------



## adoho (Jan 28, 2007)

One thing I can say about all of your photos is that the composition is very weak for the most part. They look like snapshots. A good photo is supposed to give someone a perspective they wouldn't or couldn't see.


On top of that, why would you ask for opinions on "unfinished" photos?


----------



## LaFoto (Jan 29, 2007)

One suggestion: you might begin to consider starting a new thread instead of adding photos to this one. Plus it is possible, allowed and even encouraged on here to post more than one photo in one post. Actually you can put as many as you like into one post, but make sure you put spaces between the links and (as soon as you post more than 3 pics in the same post) number your photos. Makes commenting so much easier.

But keep in mind that threads which are very picture-heavy (like my own tend to be :roll: ) take a lot of loading time for those viewers who are still on modem... Same applies to a thread with too many photos.

And it might well be that those who have looked into your thread once (when there only was the very first set of photos to be seen) will not look again. They don't know you have added so many more photos. 

OK, but I have come again (and again) and find that out of the very last lot there are two that I like. 
The aerial view holds an interest of its own that aerial views all do, but you really should work on them a bit to bring out the colours and contrasts and all!
And the close-up on the buildings with the moon in the sky is nice. I like that one. But that one, too, could "live" a bit more! Just a bit.

Ah, and one question that springs to mind ANY TIME I see your title: What do we "think of your photo's" *what*??? And of which "photo's" *what*? (Plurals don't have an apostrophe, only genitives have - sorry ... I have thought this ever so many times now, it needed to be said just this once  But if you plan on setting up a website to sell your photos, do make sure there are no grammar or spelling errors in your writing...).


----------



## Chicagophotoshop (Jan 29, 2007)

adoho said:


> A good photo is supposed to give someone a perspective they wouldn't or couldn't see.


says who?  you?  

there is a store here in Chicago that sells nothing but "snapshots" of the chicago skyline. they do quite well.    if you dont like my photos, thats fine, you are entitled to your opinion.  but I dont think you are the authority on what constitutes a "good photo" 




adoho said:


> On top of that, why would you ask for opinions on "unfinished" photos?


just looking for opinions dude.  I'm not trying to win a contest here


----------



## Chicagophotoshop (Jan 29, 2007)

LaFoto said:


> One suggestion: you might begin to consider starting a new thread instead of adding photos to this one. Plus it is possible, allowed and even encouraged on here to post more than one photo in one post. Actually you can put as many as you like into one post, but make sure you put spaces between the links and (as soon as you post more than 3 pics in the same post) number your photos. Makes commenting so much easier.
> 
> But keep in mind that threads which are very picture-heavy (like my own tend to be :roll: ) take a lot of loading time for those viewers who are still on modem... Same applies to a thread with too many photos.
> 
> And it might well be that those who have looked into your thread once (when there only was the very first set of photos to be seen) will not look again. They don't know you have added so many more photos.


thanks for this.  I was looking around in the FAQ's about posting pictures.   is it best to take them down after a certain amount of time?



LaFoto said:


> OK, but I have come again (and again) and find that out of the very last lot there are two that I like.
> The aerial view holds an interest of its own that aerial views all do, but you really should work on them a bit to bring out the colours and contrasts and all!
> And the close-up on the buildings with the moon in the sky is nice. I like that one. But that one, too, could "live" a bit more! Just a bit.


yup I intend too.  at least you like one or 2.  tough crowd around here


----------



## Chicagophotoshop (Jan 29, 2007)

skates94 said:


> I want to chime in.........
> 
> GO BEARS!!!!!!:cheer:
> 
> ...


right on!!


----------



## adoho (Jan 29, 2007)

Chicagophotoshop said:


> says who?  you?
> 
> there is a store here in Chicago that sells nothing but "snapshots" of the chicago skyline. they do quite well.    if you dont like my photos, thats fine, you are entitled to your opinion.  but I dont think you are the authority on what constitutes a "good photo"
> 
> ...




Getting defensive I see... Now, you see... that happens to be an opinion, so ya, I do say.   

Yes... people _LOVE _looking/buying at photos the average joe could have taken, I'm sure. Stop taking it so personal, like you said, you asked for opinions.


You have a *long *way to go. Take the criticism and DO something about it.


----------



## Chicagophotoshop (Jan 29, 2007)

adoho said:


> Getting defensive I see... Now, you see... that happens to be an opinion, so ya, I do say.


 I'm not getting defensive.  you said..



> A good photo is supposed to give someone a perspective they wouldn't or couldn't see.


why do you get to choose what constitutes a "good photo" ? 

lets say someone in china see my photos.  they have never been to chicago or seen many pictures.  arent they seeing something they wouldnt or couldnt see?  they might think its a good photo, according to your definition, no?



adoho said:


> Yes... people _LOVE _looking/buying at photos the average joe could have taken, I'm sure.


 awesome.  I agree.




adoho said:


> You have a *long *way to go.


 ok cool, i'm new to this, so I would agree I have some work to do.



adoho said:


> Take the criticism and DO something about it.


then give me some constructive criticism.  what exactly dont you like about my photos other then, they look like "snapshots" ?  I like snapshots.


----------



## LaFoto (Jan 29, 2007)

OK, some things that might help your photos not to look that much like a snapshot, although you say you like that look.
Watch your horizons.
Have them straight. Particularly when water is involved, else it might look like your frame will soon run dry .

Move your camera while composing the photo so the horizon either is in on the border to the upper third of your photo or on the border to the lower third. That depends on what you want to express: is the expanse of the sky important to you in the moment of taking the photo then put in more sky and only one third of "land". If it is the impression of town/countryside whatever that counts to you most, show only the upper third of sky. See?

Test it with your photos and you will SEE they look more interesting.
It is no rule. It is just something that has been found out in the so-and-so many thousand years that humanity has created art. It is more pleasing to the eye. 

Upon planning your composition, watch for things that might be distractive.
If it cannot be avoided to get distractive things into your frame, crop the photo later. 

I would never present unfinished photos along with saying that I hope to once make money with my photography, for doing that will bring you the reaction you are getting right now. You either work until your images are perfect to your eye and then present them to the public (like an internet forum, for example), or you come here and openly say: I still have much to learn, this is what I have got for the time being, what can I do to get better?

Unfortunately, mostly so in challenging everyone for their comments (not quite as positive as you had hoped they would be, I assume), you give off an air of superiority that unfortunately a good many of your photos don't have. Sorry to be so direct, but you seem to invite this directness.

As to the photos presented ... you can leave them on for as long as you want to leave them on your photo server. That is entirely up to you. You can leave them here ALWAYS. There are no rules for that.


----------



## Chicagophotoshop (Jan 29, 2007)

LaFoto said:


> OK, some things that might help your photos not to look that much like a snapshot, although you say you like that look.
> Watch your horizons.
> Have them straight. Particularly when water is involved, else it might look like your frame will soon run dry .
> 
> ...


 great information thank you.  



LaFoto said:


> I would never present unfinished photos along with saying that I hope to once make money with my photography, for doing that will bring you the reaction you are getting right now. You either work until your images are perfect to your eye and then present them to the public (like an internet forum, for example), or you come here and openly say: _I still have much to learn, this is what I have got for the time being, what can I do to get better?_


 I guess I tried to convey this but did not do a good enough job.



LaFoto said:


> Unfortunately, mostly so in challenging everyone for their comments (not quite as positive as you had hoped they would be, I assume), you give off an air of superiority that unfortunately a good many of your photos don't have. Sorry to be so direct, but you seem to invite this directness.


  I definitely invite directness but I by no means feel a level of superiority.  



LaFoto said:


> As to the photos presented ... you can leave them on for as long as you want to leave them on your photo server. That is entirely up to you. You can leave them here ALWAYS. There are no rules for that.


cool thanks


----------



## MrMatthieu (Jan 29, 2007)

I think so many pictures from many different people on this forum deaserve to pay more attention that the one you show us even if you consider you are close to become professional.

And just to give you an idea why you create such reaction, me included, understand that when you see somebody who comes on the ring saying I will become a boxing champion without looking very gifted and really interested, it can be quite funny or tragic depending on your mood.

Mat


----------



## Chicagophotoshop (Jan 29, 2007)

MrMatthieu said:


> I think so many pictures from many different people on this forum deaserve to pay more attention that the one you show us even if you consider you are close to become professional.


never said I am a professional.  whats a professional anyway?  do I need to do a few weddings before I consider myself a pro ?



MrMatthieu said:


> And just to give you an idea why you create such reaction, me included, understand that when you see somebody who comes on the ring saying I will become a boxing champion without looking very gifted and really interested, it can be quite funny or tragic depending on your mood.
> 
> Mat


whats more tragic is fear of getting into the ring in the first place.


----------



## MrMatthieu (Jan 29, 2007)

Chicagophotoshop said:


> never said I am a professional. whats a professional anyway? do I need to do a few weddings before I consider myself a pro ?
> 
> whats more tragic is fear of getting into the ring in the first place.


 
No man what is tragic is to look more attracted by the bright of the gold that by the pleasure of passion.
That ' s my last word, let die this thread.

Mat


----------



## LongDucDong (Jan 29, 2007)

Theyre pretty decent, but only one really jumps out at me, thats in the 2nd group of pics, the one with the Aon Center/Prudential #2 with the moon in the BG. Thats a really nice shot, something different!


----------



## Digital Matt (Jan 29, 2007)

Chicago, pick one photo, and work on it until you consider it finished to the best of your ability, then post in the critique section.  There are way too many photos here for us to tell you what we think, and you are not going to learn anything this way.


----------



## Chicagophotoshop (Jan 29, 2007)

LongDucDong said:


> Theyre pretty decent, but only one really jumps out at me, thats in the 2nd group of pics, the one with the Aon Center/Prudential #2 with the moon in the BG. Thats a really nice shot, something different!


I have that one framed on my wall.  it looks good.  I took that while laying in my bed.  I got lucky with the moon being there at that time.

thanks for your positive comment.


----------



## Chicagophotoshop (Jan 29, 2007)

Digital Matt said:


> Chicago, pick one photo, and work on it until you consider it finished to the best of your ability, then post in the critique section.  There are way too many photos here for us to tell you what we think, and you are not going to learn anything this way.


ok will do.  I will start a new thread tonight after I do some editing.  thanks


----------



## LongDucDong (Jan 29, 2007)

Chicagophotoshop said:


> I have that one framed on my wall. it looks good. I took that while laying in my bed. I got lucky with the moon being there at that time.
> 
> thanks for your positive comment.


 
No prob! The pic is outstanding. :thumbup:   Must be nice to have a room with a view like that. :hail:


----------



## darich (Jan 30, 2007)

Why have you posted so many images that you haven;t edited, but tell us you will edit before trying to sell?

If you edit first to the point where you're happy with the image then you'll obviously get better feedback.

As for the shots thmeselves, none particularly jump out at me as being outstanding. They're all good and the aerial ones are a bit more interesting but other than that they're no better than many holiday snaps.

AS has been mentioned keep your horizon level and not necessarily in the middle of the image.
I'd agree with whoever said a good image is one showing a perspective i didn't or couldn't see. That's because if i saw that particular perspective i'd have taken the shot already. That's also why i find the aerial ones more interesting.
You argued about someone from china never having seen chicago and therefore never had that perspective. With all due respect, none of your shots are anything more than holiday shots that any competent photographer would have taken.


----------



## ozzono (Jan 30, 2007)

Some I like much.  I hope to be able to sometimes make photos of your city.    Greetings from Spain.


----------



## WVPhotoGuy (Jan 30, 2007)

Very Nice Photos!


----------



## Chicagophotoshop (Jan 30, 2007)

darich said:


> Why have you posted so many images that you haven;t edited, but tell us you will edit before trying to sell?


 i'm new around here.  live and learn I guess.



darich said:


> As for the shots thmeselves, none particularly jump out at me as being outstanding. They're all good and the aerial ones are a bit more interesting but other than that they're no better than many holiday snaps.


  I can live with this.  my goal is not to get a spread in some magazine.  or win any awards.  just some nice photographs that people can look at and say, chicago is a cool city.if they want to buy one, by all means, be my guest.



darich said:


> You argued about someone from china never having seen chicago and therefore never had that perspective. With all due respect, none of your shots are anything more than holiday shots that any competent photographer would have taken.


I dont doubt that for a second.  but why should that stop or discourage me from taking it?   I love photography, but what I think is a great photo might be completely different from your average "pro".  

for me, I enjoy taking shots that I want to hang on my wall.  and for others to hang on their wall.

the impression I get from most here, is that they are trying to get on the cover of a book or a spread in a magazine or to stare at the photo and find some hidden meaning.   thats all well and good, I see nothing wrong with that.  many people here have a great eye for it and are very talented.  

so am I taking "holiday shots" ?  ok if the pros say thats what they are.  then I guess thats what they are.  I think there is a big market for people who enjoy those type of shots.  i'm one of them. 

thanks for your input, I have learned alot here in a short time


----------



## Chicagophotoshop (Jan 30, 2007)

ozzono said:


> Some I like much.  I hope to be able to sometimes make photos of your city.    Greetings from Spain.


hello!!  I hear your country is beautiful.  I really hope to visit one day.  it's on my list!


----------



## darich (Jan 30, 2007)

I'm no pro and would never claim to be.

By saying they're like holiday shots i wasn't trying or meaning to discourage you - i hope i haven't.

What i meant is that in trying to get someone to buy an image it must be something particularly good or mean something to them. If most competent photographers would take a particular shot why would they buy one that someone else took?

Try to be unusual - i normally find that going low is the easiest way of getting something that most others wouldn't think of. Some shots will be disappointing but you'll get some really cool unusual shots that no one else would have thought of.
Abstracts are another good way - instead of the building, what about the reflection in the lake/pond beside it?

When i asked about non edited images i was meaning that it would enhance your reputation more if you only showed the best of your images. And AFTER editing.
I was once asked "How come all your shots are so good". I replied, "They're not, i just show you the good ones!" I don't show the images i that aren't among the best I've taken. i almost never show unedited versions.

when i was on holiday in November in NYC for 7 days i took around 850 shots - only around 5 were added to my website. i showed family quite a few but many were never seen by anyone except me.

Be selective and critical of your own work.,
Also try to be objective - i'm sure that Chicago street is a great place to be and has brilliant atmosphere but for anyone who doesn't know the street, does the shot convey that feeling? Why would i buy it if i didn't know what it was like?

I'd also point out that most here do not look for hidden meaning and most do not try to get on the cover of a mag (although it would be great!) I think you'll find that most are very critical of their own work and of others when asked for the reasons i've detailed.

Glad you've learned a lot - that's the whole point!:thumbup:


----------



## Chicagophotoshop (Jan 30, 2007)

thanks darich  I hear what your screamin :hug::


----------



## scrutiny1 (Jan 30, 2007)

Ah, so these are some of the pictures you took with the point and shoot whilst working on the top of skyscrapers?


----------



## Chicagophotoshop (Jan 31, 2007)

scrutiny1 said:


> Ah, so these are some of the pictures you took with the point and shoot whilst working on the top of skyscrapers?


yes, just the first and the third in the first set.


----------

