# New to the forum, looking for critique



## cunderwood (Aug 26, 2014)

I am new to the website and have been grinding away on my photography for a few years now. I have started doing some work for friends, and would like to get more serious about it. I would appreciate any advice or critiques that anyone may have. Due to the quantity of images I am just posting the link to my SmugMug page. cunderwood.smugmug.com

Thanks for the time,
Chris


----------



## The_Traveler (Aug 26, 2014)

Way too many and way too diverse to critique.
Post one or two at a time here for best response.


----------



## pthrift (Aug 26, 2014)

The_Traveler said:


> Way too many and way too diverse to critique.
> Post one or two at a time here for best response.




what he said. Pick whatever you think your best photo is (or maybe your worst) and let us go from there.


----------



## cunderwood (Aug 27, 2014)

Fair enough...  I have started shooting people and running my own lighting more recently, so I think I'll start there.

View attachment 83066View attachment 83067


----------



## Designer (Aug 27, 2014)

This shot has a nice pose, but it is so far out of focus that it has nothing else.  Now I wonder why not get it into focus, frame a little to the right, and get more light on your model's face?


----------



## The_Traveler (Aug 27, 2014)

Since the OOF areas are intended that's not my concern.
What bothers me about this is the different and obvious editing.
Note the junctions between OOF hair and really OOF hair (blue arrows) and the darkish clouds (red arrows).
These processing artifacts and the relatively bright draw attention to themselves and away from the subject.

A prime rule of PPing is that it should add to to enjoyment of the center(s) of interest not detract from it.
In total, interesting attempt pretty much defeated by defects in post-processing.
Hope this is of some interest.

Lew






OP images marked "Not okay to edit".


----------



## The_Traveler (Aug 27, 2014)

I didn't edit or crop, just pointed.
That seems to fit within the 'no edit' category - and if it doesn't the Mods should consider a different definition.

Suggested definition:

When the maker of any photograph exhibited has profile set to 'no edit', the commenter may not edit and repost the posted image with any alterations - to include any changes in color, contrast, texture and/or framing.
The only allowed re-posting of an image is one where subtle areas or details are indicated with arrows or drawn boundaries to facilitate discussion of specific aspects of the image.
In all situations, if the maker of the original photo objects, the marked photo should be removed.


----------



## astroNikon (Aug 27, 2014)

OP change your "*My Photos Are NOT OK to Edit*"
In your profile then you can get good visual identification of areas that Lew pointed out.
I'd love to see it myself.

I figured you were going for the ethereal look but I don't know anything about this specific technique.


----------



## cunderwood (Aug 27, 2014)

I will make that change so you can point them out. Though admittedly that photo was an early attempt in many aspects. Are you able to see the other two, or did they not load properly?


----------



## The_Traveler (Aug 27, 2014)

added photo in comment
others didn't attach.


----------



## astroNikon (Aug 27, 2014)

cunderwood said:


> I will make that change so you can point them out. Though admittedly that photo was an early attempt in many aspects. Are you able to see the other two, or did they not load properly?


we only see the last one

the first two are errors
The files cannot be too large


----------



## cunderwood (Aug 27, 2014)




----------



## dennybeall (Aug 30, 2014)

Not a fan of super soft focus so didn't care for the artistic one. Liked the women and the baby but could have been better if baby had more expression. The band one for me didn't have a focal point, if you had been 15 feet to the left and had the guitarist looking into the frame instead of out of it.......  and zoom in a bit
All comments just my personal opinion based on my persoanl likes and dislikes.


----------



## AlanKlein (Aug 30, 2014)

Just a general comment about your smugmug pages.  There are many photos that are really just a lot of duplicates, such as the surf pictures.  You probably have two dozen of basically the same shot.  Pick one that you feel is the best of the group and delete the rest.   Also, go through all your photos and be merciless.  If it doesn;t meet your standards, delete it.  Don't throw mud on the wall and hope it all will stick.  It won't and it can't.  Be critical of your work.  Good luck.


----------



## The_Traveler (Aug 31, 2014)

I suggest you toss the second two.
My opinion is :
The crop could be fixed a bit but singer is way,way, way out of focus and his eyes are hidden so the impact is essentially nil.
The woman and child are badly over-saturated, the white balance is very far off, the baby looks like she is staring into a strong flash and the composition doesn't work.


----------



## Derrel (Aug 31, 2014)

Well, I stopped by and looked at your smugmug stuff. Overall, it looks like your compositional approach is random and unstudied, and not really in tune with visual communication principles like design elements or compositional strategies. You have a number of bad compositions that have large, empty areas that work against the photos. You do however have some photos that work, but it appears random. I sense that you are developing your eye, but are not trained in the best ways to frame and compose pictures using the narrow and short 3:2 aspect ratio that most d-slrs offer. It is actually a TOUGH format to shoot in. In fact, the SQUARE format is the easiest way to get BETTER compositions, especially of simple subjects, and reportage-like photos, like say, a woman and her baby, shot as a record of how they appeared at a moment in time. The square format lens itself very well to centering the subject in the frame, and shooting! I am not kidding. Relating this together, I suggest starting t crop photos in post much more-often than you do currently. Crop, crop,crop! "Find" the best picture within the captures you make.

The second issue I would list is poor lighting indoors, and sort of related to that poor lighting situation, a related issue your photos seem to show is shallow depth of field/missed focus. All sort of interrelated because dimmer, indoor light can lead to wide-open lens aperture settings, and lower light, and difficulty focusing, and of course, limited depth of field due to 1_wide lens openings 2)marginal focus performance of the camera/lens and 3) subjects actually moving a bit. The woman and baby for example, have some odd lighting. I think the best thing would be to learn how to use a powerful, TTL-capable, high-grade speedlight flash, like the Nikon SB 700,800, or 900, or 910 models, or failing that, one of the Yongnuo knock-offs. Neil Van Nierkirk's web sites/blogs would be the place I would start, to learn how to use BOUNCED flash, elevated ISO levels, and smaller apertures, like say f/5.6, to be able to simulate ambient lighting through the careful, skilled use of electronic flash supplementary light. I think you need to learn how to use flash in the truly modern, advanced ways that Neil teaches people about.


----------

