# Portfolio



## theraven (Oct 17, 2012)

Hi guys,

I've recently signed up with 500px and you get a trial of the portfolio, seriously thinking of paying for this when the trial runs out! Anyway, what are your guys thoughts?

http://jennagoodwin.500px.com


----------



## binga63 (Oct 17, 2012)

I'm no expert but I have looked at your nice pics, and I think your money would be better spent on a lens/lessons/macdonalds...... before wasting your time and money with 500pix
Get better.... learn more....don't waste your money if you don't have too...


----------



## Light Guru (Oct 17, 2012)

All of your photos have the subject dead center in the image.  I would say study up on composition. Start with the rule of thirds.


----------



## Tee (Oct 17, 2012)

Perhaps the proverbial cart is a few kilometers ahead of the horse.  Try a free website like WIX.


----------



## Rick58 (Oct 17, 2012)

Sorry, I can't agree. Only because it's the kind of photography I enjoy. Just well exposed "nice" photo's. I enjoyed paging through this portfolio.
Are they all composed according to some rules that are apparently written in stone somewhere? No. Do they *HAVE* to be...NO!

I enjoy capturing everyday subjects. Just as they are. My camera, my time, my photo's. Do I get feedback? Nope, not much. Will I change after 40 years behind a lens. Nope. No reason to.

BTW Raven...Nice job.


----------



## pixmedic (Oct 17, 2012)

Light Guru said:
			
		

> All of your photos have the subject dead center in the image.  I would say study up on composition. Start with the rule of thirds.



It's pretty easy to just say study composition and the rule of thirds...dont need a forum for that. Instead,  explain to the OP what the rule of thirds is, why it is important in composition, and under what conditions you should break it.
It isnt the LAW of thirds after all. 
Im not a pro, nor have the answer to that question so i will defer to more experienced photographers.


----------



## Light Guru (Oct 17, 2012)

pixmedic said:


> Light Guru said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Vary true the rule of thirds is not a law and there are many instances when the composition is stronger without it.

If you look at the images in the link you well see that all of them are simply placed in the middle of the frame.  

There is already so much information out there on the rule of thirds that i dont think it is needed that i explain it here.  Simply typing rule of thirds into google or into the forum search will give the OP more then enough information on the subject. I was simply just trying to point the OP in the right direction.


----------



## PhotoWhoa (Oct 17, 2012)

Light Guru said:


> All of your photos have the subject dead center in the image.  I would say study up on composition. Start with the rule of thirds.



Rules are meant to be broken.

Love the photos, and if you think 500px is worth it then go for it. It's only $50/ year anyways.


----------



## ghache (Oct 17, 2012)

500px is great and easy to use. i use it over flickr to host some photos when i need to.
there is some really great stuff posted on there if you look at the daily postings.


----------



## Rick58 (Oct 17, 2012)

I am really, REALLY tired of hearing about "the rule of thirds" Yes we all know about it. It's been around since the 1700's. I know it sounds really cool, but can't we find another rule to use to put people's photos down with?


----------



## Light Guru (Oct 17, 2012)

Rick58 said:


> I am really, REALLY tired of hearing about "the rule of thirds" Yes we all know about it. It's been around since the 1700's. I know it sounds really cool, but can't we find another rule to use to put people's photos down with?



If everyone knew about it then why is it always brought up as a suggestion to improve photos and make them more then just snapshot.  

I personally am not a fan of the term "rule of thirds" something like  the "suggestion of thirds" or the "compositional guideline of thirds".  

The rule of thirds is not a law but it still is a useful tool in composition.  When not using it you should be aware that you are not and be doing it on purpose. 

What other basic and easy to learn things do you sagest to help people to improve their composition?


----------



## ronlane (Oct 17, 2012)

Rule of thirds or not, looking at the OP's pictures some of them I would say were animal portraits and are just fine in the middle. Some of them could benefit from composition but overall, I find them pleasing.


----------



## theraven (Oct 18, 2012)

I personally enjoy breaking the rule of thirds, the first reason is it make the shots how I want them, not how the rules state, also it irritates people and gets people talking about my shots! They are exposed correctly, they are well focused, all in all reasonable shots, just not composed as they "should be". Thank you Rick58 for your agreement with this!

I take on board what you say Light Guru, in regards to my composition, it is not perfect and does need more thought, possible shoot further away and crop more, thank you for your comments all!


----------



## sleist (Oct 18, 2012)

> I personally enjoy breaking the rule of thirds



We can only judge your experience by what you show us.  If there were examples where you followed rules of composition, we would assume you "chose" to break them and could comparatively derive why you might have made that choice.  Your portfolio, as it currently stands, leads folks to believe it was a lack of understanding and not so much a choice.  This is why you received the comments you did.

To me, your portfolio indicates you made the "choices" you did because you were not aware that there were better choices.


----------



## theraven (Oct 18, 2012)

Well that is to you, also, I only made my portfolio a few days ago, with a few shots I had to hand. I have many more that I have not included yet as I work full time and unfortunately will not be able to yet. 

I am aware of better "choices". I just don't like to "choose" them. I didn't realize when I signed up for this forum that these "choices" would take me back to 1850, where If i didn't follow the "rules" I would be beaten and thrown back in the kitchen for being different.

Luckily I take all criticism and composure to the rules is something I will take on board, however, I cannot see this changing what I do. but thank you for your input.


----------



## PixelRabbit (Oct 18, 2012)

sleist said:


> > I personally enjoy breaking the rule of thirds
> 
> 
> 
> ...


THIS!!


theraven said:


> Well that is to you, also, I only made my portfolio a few days ago, with a few shots I had to hand. I have many more that I have not included yet as I work full time and unfortunately will not be able to yet.
> 
> I am aware of better "choices". I just don't like to "choose" them. I didn't realize when I signed up for this forum that these "choices" would take me back to 1850, where If i didn't follow the "rules" I would be beaten and thrown back in the kitchen for being different.
> 
> Luckily I take all criticism and composure to the rules is something I will take on board, however, I cannot see this changing what I do. but thank you for your input.



This is your intro post:



theraven said:


> Hi there! I'm a newbie from Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire, Uk!
> 
> Not really a member of any photo forums but every time I Google something this place pops up so here I am joining up finally!
> 
> ...



Your responses to everyone who has tried to tell you that your composition is lacking (here and in your other threads for C&C) proves the bolded to be false.  You claim in your intro to be a newbie but then when someone says "everything is centered"  and suggests the simplest concept of composition (rule of thirds) as a jumping off point you say you are INTENTIONALLY breaking the rules.  

  I'm going to call you on that, IF there was a variety of compositions in your work I would say good on ya! break those rules! but alas there is not.  Essentially every single subject is centered.  If I'm wrong and you have other work that has strong compositions and the subject isn't centered then why did you choose the images you did to put on 500pix instead of your stronger compositions?

You don't seem to be looking for help, you seem to be showing your work hoping people will like them and defending it to the end.  If you are happy with your photography as it is, as your defense of your centered subjects seems to indicate, then good, they aren't horrible! You are correct, your exposure and focus is pretty good for the most part but I think your closed minded approach to every person who has mentioned the shortcomings of your composition of choice will only hold you back. 

I know it's not easy to hear bad stuff about your pictures.  We can welcome harsh criticism but that doesn't take away the initial sting when we hear that criticism and that sting is what we tend to react to.  I usually try to only reply to C&C posted on my work once a day, that way I can feel the sting, then get over it and read the C&C subjectively and answer with thought instead of knee jerk defense.


----------



## theraven (Oct 18, 2012)

I'm a far from closed minded, I accept your comments and respect you for them much more than the "I don't like it" comments from other people. I enjoy constructive criticism  like yours, I don't think anyone enjoys just criticism! I did say "_Luckily I take all criticism and composure to the rules is something I will take on board" _but I do like the ones I take now, the composition of others is better agrees, but as I said, I on;y put a few onto 500px which were readily available, I haven't had the chance to put more on! 

I wouldn't be so defensive if people were CC instead of just C. I've noticed there are people on this forum who just rip into newbies etc instead of helping. Not everyone, just a choice few that ruin it. I am here for help and I will take on board the comments, but I can't improve with people just saying they don't like it it's crap, hints and tips on how to improve are a much better way forward.

i.e. Instead of "I don't like that, there are better views", maybe try "I don't think that view is the best, maybe further to the left, lower, a different angle, focus more on ____" etc.


----------



## Rick58 (Oct 18, 2012)

theraven said:


> I personally enjoy breaking the rule of thirds, the first reason is it make the shots how I want them, not how the rules state, also it irritates people and gets people talking about my shots! They are exposed correctly, they are well focused, all in all reasonable shots, just not composed as they "should be". Thank you Rick58 for your agreement with this!
> 
> I take on board what you say Light Guru, in regards to my composition, it is not perfect and does need more thought, possible shoot further away and crop more, thank you for your comments all!



I got into a "discussion" about this a while ago. Photography was around long before it was an art form. Imagine all the historical photos that would be lost if the photographer would have only concerned himself with composition and particularly the famous "Rule of Thirds". For example, we would have to read about the US Civil War in textbooks only without any visual reference. This is only one reference out of probably thousands.
I really enjoy when the topic comes up and and someone climbs on the soapbox and says "Some of the best photographs are record shots", yet when a member takes one, all the composition cops start writing tickets. 
Suggestion to the mods. Would a "Record and Snaps" Category be useful or a poll set up to see if it would be used? This type of photography doesn't seem well received in the General Gallery and to be honest, I don't think record and snaps people care much about abstract and comp.. I'm certainly not a beginner and Record and Snaps certainly aren't necessarily "just for fun".


I think it's sad that few here give any regard to simply nice photographs. This forum isn't titled "Photography As An Art Form".


----------



## pixmedic (Oct 18, 2012)

RULE OF THIRDS!
PORTRAIT ORIENTATION!
MANUAL ONLY!

we should put together the 10 commandments of photography and it can be made a sticky post...would be fun to see what people come up with. maybe we can vote on a permanent 10 that are the best.   :mrgreen:


----------



## PixelRabbit (Oct 18, 2012)

Rick58 said:


> theraven said:
> 
> 
> > I personally enjoy breaking the rule of thirds, the first reason is it make the shots how I want them, not how the rules state, also it irritates people and gets people talking about my shots! They are exposed correctly, they are well focused, all in all reasonable shots, just not composed as they "should be". Thank you Rick58 for your agreement with this!
> ...



Hey Rick, I would have to say that the difference between a "successful" historical record shot with a centered subject and an "unsuccessful" picture of a common flower/building/critter etc... centered is the subject, both in what it is and how readily available it is to shoot.

I agree that there is absolutely nothing wrong with Jenna's work as it stands.  She records the world around her effectively with nice exposure and focus, sometimes the centered subject works better than others but they are overall "nice" shots.  You are right, not everyone aspires to learn and ingrain the nuances of composition, balance, lines, shape, form, light (etc to infinity!) of photography and that is cool.  If everyone had the same aspirations with photography it would be boring and no work would stand out as different.  

Here we tend to look at images offered for C&C and figure out what is lacking in the image, why it isn't "wowing us".  The plain and simple fact with Jenna's work is it isn't wowing us but it shows potential.  The glaring consistent "issue" is her centered subjects.  When we see a bad or boring composition we default to suggesting "rule of thirds" as the solution when we should be only calling it "composition" since the rule of thirds is only a very miniscule part of the whole and quite frankly is often as boring and mundane as the centered subject but easier to look at.

When I read the OP I assumed that her choice to use 500px was a very telling cue, it told me that she aspires to be as good as the best there and the best there don't center their subjects unless there is a good reason for it or as you said it was a record shot and the subject of the shot trumps all composition rules.


----------



## Rick58 (Oct 18, 2012)

Thanks Pix (sorry, I don't know your actual name). I like your post and what you have to say. That is why I think a category for this type of photography would be a benefit. People who take this kind of photography may be happy with what they do. Myself included. I've been snapping pictures longer then some here have been alive. In all those years I've never had any interest in "leading lines" or "rule of thirds" etc, etc. Sure I know about them, but it doesn't make me "wrong" for not caring about them. If the record and snap people have "a home of their own" the C&C can consist of "maybe a tighter crop or it's a little dark" type of C&C. A persons photography should be the result of the photographers taste.


----------



## theraven (Oct 18, 2012)

Well I've managed to add a few more to 500px and a couple on the forum if anyone wants to CC them?


----------



## Rick58 (Oct 18, 2012)

I'm not sure where you added them to the forum and the problem with adding them to 500px is trying to find the "new" shots.
I did pick up on one in the Urban Gallery. It's not titled so I'll refer to it as the "Spitting Fountains". You might want to clone out the blurred figure on the left side of the frame.


----------



## theraven (Oct 18, 2012)

I'll get onto that when I'm at home, there were a few shot of that fountain, that was the one with the least people in! I slowed the shutter speed down to try and remove the detail of the people a little more too. there were a lot of people there for some reason!


----------



## sleist (Oct 18, 2012)

Just to be clear, I'm not defending or deriding rules of composition or their breakage.  My comments were to point out what the OP's portfolio currently tells people about his ability as a photographer.  If he used this to try to land a job, I think many people would assume the OP did not grasp the basics of photographic composition given the "current" lack of variation in the collection.  Furthermore, the excuse that this was intentional is less believable for the same reason.

FWIW, I'm as sick of the same old stuff (including my own) and try to mix things up with varying degrees of success.  I post these here to see what works and take my lumps when they don't.  But successfully breaking rules requires some knowledge of why these guidelines exist in the first place.  Otherwise you're just guessing, and any successful images are just dumb luck.

As for the comments that this is all just crit and no explanation - there were links posted to currently available sources that already go into the detail required.  Typing it out again here is redundant.  If the OP is interested, the information is a click away.  Google is your friend.


----------



## theraven (Oct 18, 2012)

I don't know how to spell it out that I understand the rule of thirds, I also understand about composition. I spend many hours reading and watching tutorials and looking at peoples work, this is how I found this site. I am slowly learning and changing and trying new things. 

I know the rules, I just don't follow them. There is a very big difference.


----------



## JAC526 (Oct 18, 2012)

Simple answer:  If the subject looks good in the center...put it in the center.  If the subject looks good according to the rule of thirds use that.

But to just say that every image that has the subject dead center is just adhering to dogma with no independent thought.


----------



## Tee (Oct 18, 2012)

With few exceptions it has been my observation here on TPF that those who proudly announce that rules are meant to broken (i.e. rule of thirds) are the ones who post less than pleasing images.  I feel this is the cool cyber way of taking a defensive stance rather than just saying, "Hey, you're right.  I'll work on that next time."  These are also ones who received pats on the head from friends and family and then are shocked back into reality when joining a community of different skill levels.  We see this all the time with the Facebook mommies with their Rebel cameras.  A while back, a member tried to backup their claims that amazing photographs can be made by disregarding every rule.  They posted links and guess what?  Every photograph had some form of rule in the image.  

Raven- you're explanation of why you choose to break the rules is not convincing.  If you're new, then how can you state you know what you're doing without first mastering basic photographic guidelines?  Saying you like to irritate people by centering shots is a cop out.


----------



## Tee (Oct 18, 2012)

theraven said:


> I know the rules, I just don't follow them. There is a very big difference.



Then keep an open mind when your images aren't appealing to the eye.  Or you can always use the default reply of "You'e not advanced enough to understand my work."


----------



## fjrabon (Oct 18, 2012)

I like your shots.  But why do you need these shots in a portfolio?  A portfolio is used to sell you as a photographer to a client.  Nobody commissions these types of shots.  These are the types of shots you just take on your own and hope to sell as prints.  You don't need a portfolio for that, as the client sees the image you are intending to sell to them there, already made.  

A portfolio is a way to say 'hey, if you hire me for X, this is the level of quality and type of style you can expect.'  For these types of photos, that's pointless.  

These aren't product shots, they aren't portraits, they aren't album cover shots, they aren't fashion shots, etc.  Nothing here says 'hire me for this commissioned job!'  They say "if you like these buy a print", which isn't what a portfolio is for.  

Furthermore if you want a portfolio, make your own website.  If you're going to do it, be a pro about it.


----------



## theraven (Oct 18, 2012)

I'm not trying to be a pro, I'm new to the forum, but not photography. I may only recently have bought the camera I have now, it doesn't mean I haven't done it for much longer than that! 

And where has this "every subject is in the centre thing" come from? I do centre a lot yes, but not all!


----------



## theraven (Oct 18, 2012)

fjrabon said:


> I like your shots.  But why do you need these shots in a portfolio?



Because I got a free 14 day trial with 500px and liked it.


----------



## fjrabon (Oct 18, 2012)

theraven said:


> I'm not trying to be a pro, I'm new to the forum, but not photography. I may only recently have bought the camera I have now, it doesn't mean I haven't done it for much longer than that!



If you're not trying to be a pro, then why are you going to pay to have a hosted portfolio?  If it's just to have pictures up to show your friends, facebook is fine for that purpose.


----------



## fjrabon (Oct 18, 2012)

theraven said:


> fjrabon said:
> 
> 
> > I like your shots.  But why do you need these shots in a portfolio?
> ...



I mean if you just want to pay for it, fine, its your money to spend however you please.  Our comments are mostly based on the fact that this isn't a good portfolio.  Because a portfolio has a definite purpose to it that these shots don't fulfill.  

If you were to post some of these as single shots for C&C, I think they'd be recieved very well.  But as a portfolio they simply don't work very well.  That was our issue, I think, to the extent I can speak for many of the other commenters.  

If you simply intended the portfolio to be a collection of pleasant pictures, and you want to pay $50 a year for that, then fine, by all means go ahead.  They're pleasant.


----------



## theraven (Oct 18, 2012)

fjrabon said:


> theraven said:
> 
> 
> > I'm not trying to be a pro, I'm new to the forum, but not photography. I may only recently have bought the camera I have now, it doesn't mean I haven't done it for much longer than that!
> ...



So I have somewhere to have them, something that is nice to look at, I hate Facebook and Flickr is the ugliest site ever. Photobucket is rubbish. I just want somewhere to keep my nice pictures, the ones I like. 

I don't understand the issue? It is my money? It works out at £2.50 a month for *unlimited storage *that's the key. Almost the same as Flickr but it looks better and functions smoother. Why is that such an issue if I want to do this?


----------



## theraven (Oct 18, 2012)

fjrabon said:


> theraven said:
> 
> 
> > fjrabon said:
> ...



I have posted individuals up, I was trying to get into a Flickr/500px discussion, as many people I know use Flickr Pro, but I genuinely think its an ugly site.


----------



## fjrabon (Oct 18, 2012)

theraven said:


> fjrabon said:
> 
> 
> > theraven said:
> ...



The point is that you asked us what we thought of your portfolio.  You got the responses you got because of the questions you asked.  Your thread title is 'portfolio'.  This would be a bad portfolio. As others have communicated, as a portfolio it says 'I don't understand the rule of thirds and I take pictures that nobody pays to have done.'  

If you had stated 'hey guys, I don't plan on using this as a portfolio to sell to clients, but what do you guys think of these few pictures?!' you may well have gotten very different feedback because that would be an entirely different question.


----------



## fjrabon (Oct 18, 2012)

theraven said:


> fjrabon said:
> 
> 
> > theraven said:
> ...



I don't like flickr either as a site, but its great for hosting images you then put other places.  I mean who actually besides you is going to go to the site and look through your galleries?  You have them on your computer.  To the extent these sorts of sites are useful, they're useful to give to potential clients (which we already talked about the issues there) or to post images to other sites (such as this one) that are posted there.


----------



## theraven (Oct 18, 2012)

Well as I said, I'm not a professional photographer, and as it is called a "portfolio" on 500px, that is what I posted it as on here. I never said I got paid, or was pro. Mind you, didn't think I'd get my head ripped off about a few pictures I took either!


----------



## fjrabon (Oct 18, 2012)

theraven said:


> Well as I said, I'm not a professional photographer, and as it is called a "portfolio" on 500px, that is what I posted it as on here. I never said I got paid, or was pro. Mind you, didn't think I'd get my head ripped off about a few pictures I took either!



Well, you should at least be aware of what the term portfolio means.  It's called 'portfolio' on 500px, because they intend for it to be used as a portfolio.  ie a collection of pictures to show to clients (or potential bosses) in order to get you paying work.  That's what a portfolio is.  

We 'ripped your head off' because you asked us what we thought, and we told you that this simply wasn't a very good portfolio.


----------



## pixmedic (Oct 18, 2012)

Tee said:


> With few exceptions it has been my observation here on TPF that those who proudly announce that rules are meant to broken (i.e. rule of thirds) are the ones who post less than pleasing images.  I feel this is the cool cyber way of taking a defensive stance rather than just saying, "Hey, you're right.  I'll work on that next time."  These are also ones who received pats on the head from friends and family and then are shocked back into reality when joining a community of different skill levels.  We see this all the time with the Facebook mommies with their Rebel cameras.  A while back, a member tried to backup their claims that amazing photographs can be made by disregarding every rule.  They posted links and guess what?  Every photograph had some form of rule in the image.
> 
> Raven- you're explanation of why you choose to break the rules is not convincing.  If you're new, then how can you state you know what you're doing without first mastering basic photographic guidelines?  Saying you like to irritate people by centering shots is a cop out.



I would also like to point out, that with few exceptions it has been my observation here on TPF that those who proudly (and loudly) announce every "rule" that a picture has allegedly broken, are the ones that rarely offer any other insight besides "that needs portrait orientation" or, "study the rule of thirds". I feel this is the cool cyber way of taking the easy way out rather than offering any significant insight as to how the error could have been corrected. a simple "this would have looked better in portrait because...." or, the rule of thirds might have worked better here because..." or even, this needed better lighting, and this is how you could have done it..." would be a far better critique. unless of course, the sole purpose is to trash the picture.  instead we see..."go study the rule of thirds", or "go read up on lighting" or "go read your cameras manual". YES..ALL OF THAT should be done. and usually before the post was made. but seriously people, this is a photography forum on the internet...and SOMETIMES, the only thing stupider than the newbie questions we get here, are the newbie-esque answers that are given.  how are we supposed to expect the new photographers to take our advice (not mine of course), assimilate our critique, and follow our suggestions, when half the C&C is just as asinine  as the newbies lack of research? when giving C&C, if your intention is to teach, then teach. if your intention is to just put down someones work for the sake of making yourself look better, or seem smarter...please just refrain from commenting.

P.S. I dont lump Tee in with that lot, i was just hijacking this post.  :mrgreen:


----------



## theraven (Oct 18, 2012)

True, but this is uncalled for...



binga63 said:


> I'm no expert but I have looked at your nice pics, and I think your money would be better spent on a lens/lessons/macdonalds......



Which, lets be honest, none of these things can be bought for £2.50 a month! :scratch:


----------



## theraven (Oct 18, 2012)

Tee said:


> Saying you like to irritate people by centering shots is a cop out.



Not centering, just not following the rule of thirds...



pixmedic said:


> I would also like to point out, that with few exceptions it has been my observation here on TPF that those who proudly (and loudly) announce every "rule" that a picture has allegedly broken, are the ones that rarely offer any other insight besides "that needs portrait orientation" or, "study the rule of thirds". I feel this is the cool cyber way of taking the easy way out rather than offering any significant insight as to how the error could have been corrected. a simple "this would have looked better in portrait because...." or, the rule of thirds might have worked better here because..." or even, this needed better lighting, and this is how you could have done it..." would be a far better critique. unless of course, the sole purpose is to trash the picture.  instead we see..."go study the rule of thirds", or "go read up on lighting" or "go read your cameras manual". YES..ALL OF THAT should be done. and usually before the post was made. but seriously people, this is a photography forum on the internet...and SOMETIMES, the only thing stupider than the newbie questions we get here, are the newbie-esque answers that are given.  how are we supposed to expect the new photographers to take our advice (not mine of course), assimilate our critique, and follow our suggestions, when half the C&C is just as asinine  as the newbies lack of research? when giving C&C, if your intention is to teach, then teach. if your intention is to just put down someones work for the sake of making yourself look better, or seem smarter...please just refrain from commenting.
> 
> P.S. I dont lump Tee in with that lot, i was just hijacking this post.  :mrgreen:



Pretty much what I was saying, C&C not just C. Help people, don't just rip them down.


----------



## fjrabon (Oct 18, 2012)

pixmedic said:


> Tee said:
> 
> 
> > With few exceptions it has been my observation here on TPF that those who proudly announce that rules are meant to broken (i.e. rule of thirds) are the ones who post less than pleasing images.  I feel this is the cool cyber way of taking a defensive stance rather than just saying, "Hey, you're right.  I'll work on that next time."  These are also ones who received pats on the head from friends and family and then are shocked back into reality when joining a community of different skill levels.  We see this all the time with the Facebook mommies with their Rebel cameras.  A while back, a member tried to backup their claims that amazing photographs can be made by disregarding every rule.  They posted links and guess what?  Every photograph had some form of rule in the image.
> ...



I agree here.  Some people view the rule of thirds as a rule, not a design concept with a logic behind it.  I've seen people apply the rule of thirds when it totally killed the image to do so.  People who actually know a lot about composition almost never refer to the rule of thirds.  Instead, they tend to talk about having a place for the the image to lead, balancing the image visually, etc.  From that, the rule of thirds will sort of emerge.  The rule of thirds as applied by a lot of people here is a very crude rule of thumb, that works a decent amount of the time, but really works better when you stop thinking in terms of 'the rule of thirds' and instead think in terms of more fundamental issues of balance, movement and geometry.


----------



## fjrabon (Oct 18, 2012)

theraven said:


> Tee said:
> 
> 
> > Saying you like to irritate people by centering shots is a cop out.
> ...



beggars can't be choosers either.  You should be really thankful for the amount of feedback your thread got.  The amount of commentary it generated.  This is much more helpful than a lot of C&C threads around here that just drop to the bottom of the page like a rock with just 1 or 2 random "I really like this set!" type comments.


----------



## Rick58 (Oct 18, 2012)

_"So I have somewhere to have them, something that is nice to look at, I hate Facebook and Flickr is the ugliest site ever. Photobucket is rubbish. I just want somewhere to keep my nice pictures, the ones I like."
_

I don't think using 500pix should be an issue what-so-ever. You're right. It's your money. Actually I was impressed with the presentation and I'm considering opening an account for myself. As you say, a nice way to store and present your photos. I think everyone's issue is the word "Portfolio" I personally don't have a problem with it. In your case, The World Dictionary defines "Portfolio" as...
*"the contents of such a case, such as drawings, paintings, or photographs, that demonstrate recent work: an art student's **portfolio"
*
Which part of that is a problem?


----------



## theraven (Oct 18, 2012)

Very true, I do appreciate the comments, as said before, if I need to work on my composition, then I will, this means that I will think more about how each shot is laid out, not just the settings required to shoot it.


----------



## theraven (Oct 18, 2012)

Rick58 said:


> "So I have somewhere to have them, something that is nice to look at, I hate Facebook and Flickr is the ugliest site ever. Photobucket is rubbish. I just want somewhere to keep my nice pictures, the ones I like."
> 
> 
> I don't think using 500pix should be an issue what-so-ever. You're right. It's your money. Actually I was impressed with the presentation and I'm concerning opening an account for myself. As you say, a nice way to store and present your photos. I think everyone's issue is the word "Portfolio" I personally don't have a problem with it. In your case, The World Dictionary defines "Portfolio" as...
> ...


 I don't know, if I had said this is my professional portfolio then fair enough, but I did stipulate that it was part of a free trial!


----------



## fjrabon (Oct 18, 2012)

also, my favorite comment ever is "read up on and study the rule of thirds!"  It's like "uh, put things 1/3 of the way in the image?  That's it, you 'studied' this?"


----------



## fjrabon (Oct 18, 2012)

theraven said:


> Rick58 said:
> 
> 
> > "So I have somewhere to have them, something that is nice to look at, I hate Facebook and Flickr is the ugliest site ever. Photobucket is rubbish. I just want somewhere to keep my nice pictures, the ones I like."
> ...



professional portfolio is sort of redundant.  By calling it a portfolio, you are implying that it is professional.  Professional portfolio would be like you saying 'professional resume'  Resumes are professional by definition, just like portfolio.

I get that you probably didn't understand that originally.  I'm just telling you that's why you got the feedback you did.  It was harsh, because portfolio is a very certain standard, and screwing up a portfolio can mean thousands of dollars lost.  I dont think it was an intent of slamming you or anything.  It was you asked a question that I dont think you fully understood, and thus got responses that you felt to be unwarranted or non-sensical.


----------



## theraven (Oct 18, 2012)

fjrabon said:


> also, my favorite comment ever is "read up on and study the rule of thirds!"  It's like "uh, put things 1/3 of the way in the image?  That's it, you 'studied' this?"



What I actually said was...



theraven said:


> I don't know how to spell it out that I understand the rule of thirds, I also understand about composition. I spend many hours reading and watching tutorials and looking at peoples work, this is how I found this site. I am slowly learning and changing and trying new things.
> 
> I know the rules, I just don't follow them. There is a very big difference.



Studying various things, like light room tutorials recently. As I have just downloaded it and am learning about it. I am fully self taught. Therefore I am proud of where I am. It's a hobby, I've had no lessons, I worked hard for the money for my meager equipment which I love and I don't get paid for it! but I enjoy it! Which is what I think a lot of people lose sight of. 

Enjoy it!


----------



## fjrabon (Oct 18, 2012)

theraven said:


> fjrabon said:
> 
> 
> > also, my favorite comment ever is "read up on and study the rule of thirds!"  It's like "uh, put things 1/3 of the way in the image?  That's it, you 'studied' this?"
> ...



I wasnt referring to you with that post.  I was more referring to the people who just respond with "read up on the rule of thirds!"


----------



## theraven (Oct 18, 2012)

fjrabon said:


> theraven said:
> 
> 
> > fjrabon said:
> ...



Please accept my apologies then! :hugs:


----------



## HughGuessWho (Oct 18, 2012)

Rick58 said:
			
		

> I am really, REALLY tired of hearing about "the rule of thirds" Yes we all know about it. It's been around since the 1700's. I know it sounds really cool, but can't we find another rule to use to put people's photos down with?



I've said it many time... though a agree with basic rules as a foundation, if everyone follows every rule then we all have the same pictures. Nothing wrong with breaking the rules and setting your own style. BUT, break the rules for a reason not just out of lack of knowledge.


----------



## jake337 (Oct 18, 2012)

There are rules?


Interesting......


----------



## theraven (Nov 5, 2012)

OK, so to show that I've taken peoples advice on here, I went Pro with Flickr instead of 500px and am seriously working on my composition!

Any more for anymore? I'm all ears and can take the worst!  

Flickriver: ravenphotography2012's photosets


----------



## Gadfly (Nov 5, 2012)

Nice job overall, but it's hard to give critique on any one thing when looking at a gallery. It looks like you've improved, so keep on shooting!


----------



## theraven (Nov 5, 2012)

Thank you. I'm trying and taking on board what people are telling me!


----------

