# B/W for critique



## scooter2044 (May 11, 2015)

OK, so while I try to get better aquainted with bird photography I thought I'd submit one of my B/W's. I'm new to DSLR photography and this is from my third try using my camera. Critique away!




cement plant by Sheila Swindell, on Flickr


----------



## snowbear (May 11, 2015)

The exposure looks good but I really don't know what to look at.  It's a bit busy, IMO.  Maybe getting to the right so the dark trees along the left take up as much space and a bit closer, maybe even to the edge of the hill.

I'd be interested in some details of the (I guess) tower - behind the tree in the middle, and the area between that tree and the right edge of the photo.


----------



## Light Guru (May 11, 2015)

snowbear said:


> It's a bit busy



Exactly. There is no clear subject.


----------



## The_Traveler (May 11, 2015)

What they said^^^

What is the center of interest?
Why is that tree taking up half the photo, and a tree line obscuring the buildings?

The first thing any viewer does is try to figure out what the photographer is wanting to show them - and I can't figure that out.


----------



## Designer (May 11, 2015)

About half of the frame is taken up by things that ware NOT the cement plant.

Walk closer.  Frame your subject to fill the frame.

BTW: It's going to seem like I'm talking out of two sides of my mouth, but here:

Also, I noticed that many of your other shots are cropping off parts at the edges.  Bird wing-tips, etc.  Don't do that.


----------



## scooter2044 (May 11, 2015)

snowbear said:


> The exposure looks good but I really don't know what to look at.  It's a bit busy, IMO.  Maybe getting to the right so the dark trees along the left take up as much space and a bit closer, maybe even to the edge of the hill.
> 
> I'd be interested in some details of the (I guess) tower - behind the tree in the middle, and the area between that tree and the right edge of the photo.



I didn't get a shot further to the left but here is more of the right side. I tends to get more boring the further right you go. Behind the tree is a huge electric grid which I didn't want in the photo either, and down over the hill a little further is a quarry entrance to the left and diesel train filling station between where the photo was taken and the cement plant. Both may be worthy of some photos but I think like you said, it's too busy already. Thanks for commenting on the exposure. I am still struggling with learning to shoot in manual. I don't know much about post processing in Elements so I am working on getting things right so I don't need to do it there.




cement_2 by Sheila Swindell, on Flickr


----------



## snowbear (May 11, 2015)

Now I know what to look at!   There are a few things you could still do, but this is much better.



scooter2044 said:


> I don't know much about post processing in Elements so I am working on getting things right so I don't need to do it there.


What we all should strive for.


----------



## The_Traveler (May 11, 2015)

Don't worry about struggling in manual, technical stuff only matter when it hurts the picture. 
This exposure is reasonable but so what.
A decent exposure of nothing is nothing.
I can point to 20 pictures posted here today that are well exposed and sharp but they are lifeless and forgettable because they are about nothing.
First figure out what you want to take a picture of and then compose and frame around that.


----------



## scooter2044 (May 11, 2015)

The_Traveler said:


> Don't worry about struggling in manual, technical stuff only matter when it hurts the picture.
> This exposure is reasonable but so what.
> A decent exposure of nothing is nothing.
> I can point to 20 pictures posted here today that are well exposed and sharp but they are lifeless and forgettable because they are about nothing.
> First figure out what you want to take a picture of and then compose and frame around that.


Thank you! I've been so worried about the technical stuff that I forget to get the picture that I started out to get. Very helpful advice. Getting out and getting some practice shots sure beats sitting home on my couch practicing with my different aperture settings, lol.


----------



## scooter2044 (May 11, 2015)

snowbear said:


> Now I know what to look at!   There are a few things you could still do, but this is much better.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks! I was trying to photograph flying birds my first weekend out (not intentionally, I just couldn't resist the challenge once I saw them) so it seemed more important to worry about ISO and shutter speed. I guess I just have to remember to switch gears between the two and work on my composition.


----------



## snowbear (May 11, 2015)

Start with composition and point of view.  Once you have a feel for that, look at the exposure settings.  Use the full- and semi-auto modes for a while until you understand what each does, and how they interact, then worry about full manual.


----------



## scooter2044 (May 11, 2015)

snowbear said:


> Start with composition and point of view.  Once you have a feel for that, look at the exposure settings.  Use the full- and semi-auto modes for a while until you understand what each does, and how they interact, then worry about full manual.



Thanks, I think I'll try that next time.


----------



## The_Traveler (May 11, 2015)

When a 1 year old is coloring, a parent doesn't worry about staying within the lines.
Put some heart into it.
Learn the technical stuff of exposure and depth of field as you go along.

Yes, there is an achievement for catching a bird in flight but just a technical one.
Learn to capture with your camera what your mind's eye sees.

If you're having trouble sleeping, these links may help and also give a hint to what I think.

shooting-in-p-mode-why-photographers-defend-their-methods
11-tips-for-beginning-photographers
is-post-processing-cheating?


----------



## scooter2044 (May 11, 2015)

The_Traveler said:


> When a 1 year old is coloring, a parent doesn't worry about staying within the lines.
> Put some heart into it.
> Learn the technical stuff of exposure and depth of field as you go along.
> 
> ...


LOL! I got no further than the 3rd paragraph in the first link and started laughing. I must tell you that I was always scolded for coloring outside the lines. Then in the next breath "Why can't you be more like ...". It's an inner struggle to please everyone (and myself) that I have yet to reconcile. Makes it very difficult to be creative. Sometimes I think it's what makes me good at some things but not great at anything. Now, back to the link...


----------



## scooter2044 (May 11, 2015)

scooter2044 said:


> The_Traveler said:
> 
> 
> > When a 1 year old is coloring, a parent doesn't worry about staying within the lines.
> ...


Great advice in those links that I need to start following. I didn't purchase my camera to learn how to use a camera. I wanted to capture the images I saw that meant something to me. I got sidetracked when every video I watched said "get out of auto mode". Thanks!


----------



## vintagesnaps (May 12, 2015)

That last one has potential, great subject that could make for more than one good photograph. Try to take your time and see what you're looking at, spend some time looking thru the viewfinder and thinking about how you're framing photos and what you see in that rectangle.

The taller buildings to the right could make for an interesting photo, a vertical shot of those might be a possibility.

Try to watch your framing, there's an edge of a tree (I think) in the upper left corner, that would be better not in the photo. It takes some time and practice to get good at getting a proper exposure and knowing the technical aspects as well as the composition.


----------



## Designer (May 12, 2015)

scooter2044 said:


> I got sidetracked when every video I watched said "get out of auto mode".


I don't know the impetus for making those videos, but I suspect that they assume people already know how to choose and frame a good composition, and just need to realize more creativity.  Either that or they are simply stroking their own ego.


----------



## timor (May 13, 2015)

or they are simply stroking their own ego.[/QUOTE] Rather this. You know... freedom of the Internet.
Well, where is a will, there is a way. OP got first lesson: things are not working out right out of the bat. Now what ?


----------



## bribrius (May 14, 2015)

scooter2044 said:


> OK, so while I try to get better aquainted with bird photography I thought I'd submit one of my B/W's. I'm new to DSLR photography and this is from my third try using my camera. Critique away!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


this first image is better. Balanced/split frame/leading line with a intentional (seemingly) bi pass. It might potentially need a crop, but sending to print you would anyway and would have to play with it.
why everyone else in this thread thinks the other is better i honestly couldn't friggn tell you. Yes, learn your camera. Your second image lacks balance, foreground.  Okay, but really a serious step down from the first. You could almost cut the first and make two photos of it. That is actually a pretty neat photo to come up with. The second, drop the foreground and crop, you could get it to balance. Basically separating the photo into a four square opposing eachother.  The split frame idea i think i like better.


----------



## bribrius (May 14, 2015)

The_Traveler said:


> What they said^^^
> 
> What is the center of interest?
> Why is that tree taking up half the photo, and a tree line obscuring the buildings?
> ...


it isn't perfect, but i like when i see people shoot like this. To me it shows potential. Some frames are much harder to develop than just "here is the subject" which is photography 101. Albeit shooting a single subject to draw it out takes a lot of skill and talent. But as the frames get more complex, the more you have to break them down, the more abstract thinking gets pulled into a general landscape or city scape shot. My natural inclination when i don't see a clear subject is to next go to a. is it a general landscape or cityscape which usually doesn't require one. b. is it like many other shots of maybe a generalized street photo which photographers have been shooting for well over a hundred years or c. do i need to look at the frame and start breaking it down into abstract thinking and see how it fits together.
I generally don't look at any piece of art or a photo assuming it has to have a simple subject. Directing the eye, is a accomplishment, however there is something to be said for the type of work and the viewers ability to direct themselves. Sometimes i do think a photo is a lack of composition, other times, i believe it is a more complex kind of photo, or has a different purpose,  that requires a different approach. That the photographer or artist intended, or just by natural inclination. I wouldn't have shot either of the above shots. But i probably would have came up with something close especially if i had spent some time right before that concentrating on abstracts. I don't believe in "there has to be a subject " premise in art.  And for well over a hundred years photographers have been shooting general scenes without a simple subject. Literally, after a couple seconds of looking at these i started putting my hands over my computer screen and began breaking them down into basically quadrants and looking for balance.

just my thoughts. Not sure how you look at a photo i have a feeling you see it quite differently.


----------



## scooter2044 (May 14, 2015)

bribrius said:


> The_Traveler said:
> 
> 
> > What they said^^^
> ...



I definitely am not an abstract thinker so I never would have thought to break it down into quadrants. When I look at a picture I want to feel something that makes me want to search the rest of the picture to see what's there. This is a road that I travel every day to get to work. And depending on the season, it can either feel very lonely or extremely beautiful. The whole photo would be very deceptive to someone unfamiliar with the area because when I took it, everything looked out of place. I guess the angle I shot it at gives the impression that everything to the right of the photo is on the right side of the road but it isn't. It was just such a curiosity to me that I took the picture without thinking much about the framing (other than to block out the electrical stuff with the tree). After I took that one, I took a few of just the cement plant because I liked the look of the shadows when I looked at the first one.


----------



## bribrius (May 14, 2015)

scooter2044 said:


> bribrius said:
> 
> 
> > The_Traveler said:
> ...


summed up your reasoning right there. Nothing wrong with that. you'll get better.


----------



## Derrel (May 14, 2015)

bribrius said:
			
		

> it isn't perfect, but i like when i see people shoot like this. To me it shows potential. Some frames are much harder to develop than just "here is the subject" which is photography 101. Albeit shooting a single subject to draw it out takes a lot of skill and talent. But as the frames get more complex, the more you have to break them down, the more abstract thinking gets pulled into a general landscape or city scape shot.



Making a good photo of something like a cement plant is challenging, especially if it is obscured by telephone wires,a road, a big leafy tree, and situated down in a dell, and far-away. My dad was actually in the sand and gravel business for a long time, and I've been to multiple cement plants in my life...they're all the same, and yet they are all a bit different, and NONE of them are all that photogenic. The way to develop a shot of a cement plant is to be able to get a good look at it, some place to shoot from, a decent vantage point. My suggestion, from the multiple industry magazines I've looked through? Formerly, balloons or helicopters were used for exciting images. Today, I'd go with a drone shot! But, lacking a drone, you need to get some way to literally show some of the plant. One option could be late or early in the day, with long,long shadows, and a low to the ground wide-angle look at something at least minimally exciting there, like maybe the crusher and its belt angling up, or some of the raw material piles and a front-end loader shown against nice, colored light from the sky...

You could go gritty, or go pretty. The biggest challenge from ground level in many places is that the places are BIG locations, and if you use a wide-angle lens, only the very closest stuff has any real size...the background stuff rapidlydrops off to nothing, size-wise....that was one reason I mentioned shooting late or early, to get loooooong shadows that will fill the foreground and almost, by dint of size drop-off, "point to" the stuff in the background.

You're kind of in the field of industrial photography with a cement plant; that's where you'll find pointers and ideas on how to shoot such places so they look at least minimally exciting.


----------



## scooter2044 (May 14, 2015)

Derrel said:


> bribrius said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Well, no no balloons or helicopters or drones, but I do have 2 legs. I will definitely have to find some other vantage points. Like you said its big, but there's not a lot of good places to get a shot unless you're back far enough which introduces things you don't want in the photo. I like the industrial feel to it. I also grew up around a cement plant. My dad worked there when the company didn't have a job on the highways to do. Now that I wish I could have gotten a picture of. Our school bus took a road that went straight through the middle of the plant. As we passed through, off to the right you could see gigantic cylinders that were red hot as they spun around. The town I live in now used to be huge on industry. Now there are just alot of abandoned buildings which would make great photos, but there are alot of wires and other junk in the way. Eventually I want to spend some time photographing as many as I can find. Only one thing I disagree with you on. Everything is photogenic, you just have to find the right way to look at it.


----------

