# What do you think of these pictures ?



## eugene_jenea (Aug 21, 2012)

I can only wonder how would they look like if I had a professional camera like a Canon 7D, for instance. How do you think they would look like ?

Tell me everything you think, com' on, I can take it 

P.S. Some of them were taken with a Kodak z1275 while others with a Kodak C875.


----------



## eugene_jenea (Aug 21, 2012)

no opinions ? com' on guys.


----------



## Flyhigh (Aug 21, 2012)

I'm not qualified to critique, but #1 is my favorite. Like the composition. Wonder if you can get rid of the dead tree branch in upper left corner?


----------



## macpro88 (Aug 21, 2012)

Well to start off, you have too many pictures. You are basically showcasing the pics and no one will comment.

If you want comments and critique, please post 1-2 pics only, this gives members more time to look at a singe image and really come to a conclusion about the photo.

No body is going to spend a half hour looking and critiquing 11 pictures in one post...


----------



## The_Traveler (Aug 21, 2012)

they are just pictures, like anyone with your camera would take.
the composition is off on most, the subject is centered.
there is nothing personal or original or particularly interesting about them.

photography is both a craft and a skill mediated by talent.

*Without knowledge, skill and practice, you have the vaguely same chance of taking a good, original, interesting picture as you would sitting down at a piano and playing a Chopin Polonaise without lessons or practice.*

Your camera is doing 99% of the work and your first finger does the rest.


----------



## eugene_jenea (Aug 21, 2012)

Flyhigh said:


> I'm not qualified to critique, but #1 is my  favorite. Like the composition. Wonder if you can get rid of the dead  tree branch in upper left corner?



no one is qualified to critique so don't worry about that, thanks,  good to know, i think it's possible if i go to london and retake the  picture  or if i work a lot in photoshop which would ruin the picture


----------



## eugene_jenea (Aug 21, 2012)

The_Traveler said:


> they are just pictures, like anyone with your camera would take.
> the composition is off on most, the subject is centered.
> there is nothing personal or original or particularly interesting about them.
> 
> ...



That was harsh but I'll take it like a man  Those picture were taken with a compact camera, I just was wondering if these pictures show potential since I barely have any experience with both, compact camera and DSLRs.


----------



## eugene_jenea (Aug 21, 2012)

macpro88 said:


> Well to start off, you have too many pictures. You are basically showcasing the pics and no one will comment.
> 
> If you want comments and critique, please post 1-2 pics only, this gives members more time to look at a singe image and really come to a conclusion about the photo.
> 
> No body is going to spend a half hour looking and critiquing 11 pictures in one post...



Well, first of all, there are 10, second of all, I asked for a general opinion, i don't need a review for each of these pictures. But thanks for your input, it counts too.


----------



## KmH (Aug 21, 2012)

There is no substitute for learning the fundamentals of visual image composition and photographic technical implications.


----------



## MLeeK (Aug 21, 2012)

The images would look exactly the same with a "professional" DSLR like a 7D or even an outdated entry level DSLR if you just turned it on and let it do the work and clicked. 
The beauty of a DSLR is the fact that you have to learn to balance every element of the photo and NOT let the camera do it. 
You can't just turn on a DSLR and get amazing, different, high quality images. It has the same brain in it with the same basic programming as your point and shoots and does the exact same things to make a picture in it's auto mode.


----------



## Derrel (Aug 21, 2012)

I REALLY LIKED the one tall shot of the yellow rose bloom, surrounded by buds...very nicely done!


----------



## Rick58 (Aug 21, 2012)

If I HAD to pick one, it might be #1. The reflections are kind'a symmetrical, but I'm not even sure that was intentional.
You're buildings are leaning in all different directions.
The light colored roses are not the nicest specimens and the red rose is blown out.

Sorry I can't be more positive, but you need to take what you learned here and apply it next time. That's the nicest thing about digital, even the smallest trash can holds infinite mistakes.


----------



## Jaemie (Aug 21, 2012)

eugene_jenea said:


> no one is qualified to critique...



I disagree. Many people here and elsewhere are very qualified to critique. Indeed, criticism is what you asked of us. 

For me, the photo that most stands out is #8. The imagery is clearly sexual, more female than male in my eyes, and not subtle. If it were my shot to do over, I'd work on better exposure at street level, better sky, and getting a composition without the crane thing on the side of the tower.


----------



## pgriz (Aug 21, 2012)

Well, the good news is that you ARE seeing interesting stuff, and recognizing the potential image.  Now comes the hard part - translating that vision to something that will impress others.  This is where you use exposure control, perspective, framing, aperture, etc. to isolate the part that you want to emphasize, and place it in the frame so that we have no doubt about what you want us to look at, but at the same time, be subtle enough that we want to explore the image.  When you know what you need to do, a nice camera will be a good tool to help you reach that goal.  But unless you are able to meaningfully direct that tool to achieve your vision, the images you get will be the result of some nameless technician in a far away land programming in the settings and hoping he/she got it right most of the time.


----------



## johndizzo (Aug 21, 2012)

Would have to agree with the_traveler.  Poor composition on most and generally lacking facets of interest (not to mention issues with exposure). Plus one re what MleeK said. These same images taken with better glass and more resolution would still be uninspired and lacking composition. These photos share many characteristics with many camera rolls from any smart phone being wielded by someone who hasn't put much thought into what they're shooting. No offense intended by any of the above comments. Just giving an honest response to what appears to be a question from a person seeking honesty.


----------



## sm4him (Aug 21, 2012)

^+1 on what Lew, KmH and MLeek have already said.  Your question was, if you had a 'professional' camera, how would these look. The answer is, just the same way they look now--like snapshots that would be interesting only to you, your family and possibly your friends.  Even a point-and-shoot is capable of far more than pointing and shooting. Start reading about composition, for starters.

As a side note: After looking at these pictures, my one overwhelming thought was: I wonder what Bitter could do with that very cool, bullet-shaped building?!?  Because there are some VERY cool abstracts just waiting to be found there!


----------



## thereyougo! (Aug 21, 2012)

The light is nice on the last shot, but it's ruined by two things: chromatic Abberations giving everything a blue tinge.  Secondly it's a pity you couldn't have got a bit further back and shot in portrait mode to have the building that is locally known as The Gherkin juxtapositioned against the old church.  The scene definitely had potential, but you needed to think a bit more to get the best out of it.  The CA's could have been worked out in post, but composition is well out on it I'm afraid.


----------



## Designer (Aug 21, 2012)

eugene_jenea said:


> no opinions ? com' on guys.


Oh, man, I hope I can still get in here, and thanks ever so much for waiting patiently.  Unfortunately, I find that I occasionally am called aaway from my computer, and when I come back, I have other tasks to perform before I can read your post.  Whew!  I think I made it.

The pictures are o.k.

BTW: the quality of photographic images depend more on the person behind the lens rather than the type of camera.


----------



## jake337 (Aug 21, 2012)

eugene_jenea said:


> Flyhigh said:
> 
> 
> > I'm not qualified to critique, but #1 is my  favorite. Like the composition. Wonder if you can get rid of the dead  tree branch in upper left corner?
> ...



How would photoshop ruin anything.  

Also it's called post production.  Photoshop is one of many post production tools you could use to perform post production on your images.

The only difference you would see using a 7D or even a 8x10 sheet of film in a view camera would be the size you can print.  The quality of the image itself is dependent on the person taking the picture or creating their vision.


----------



## eeplants (Aug 21, 2012)

If I were to asked, I could say that you have done it great, all the shots are beautiful and clearly taken. What I love among your pictures is the 1st one and the buildings.


----------



## The_Traveler (Aug 21, 2012)

eugene_jenea said:


> That was harsh but I'll take it like a man  Those picture were taken with a compact camera, I just was wondering if these pictures show potential since I barely have any experience with both, compact camera and DSLRs.



That wasn't harsh; it was the truth as I see it.
Taking reasonably exposed, reasonably sharp pictures with an automatic camera of things that are inherently beautiful or interestingly shaped is not any test of 'potential.'

If I walked into a studio and pressed one key on a piano - and it  sounded great - should I expect someone to predict at that moment whether I could become  a great pianist?
Photographers do more than point and press a button, they choose angles and focal length to compliment the image, they decide depth of field, choose exposure, create beauty and find meaning.

You won't know if you are a good photographer until long after you take up the effort because, only after you acquire some skills, does your talent get a chance to show.


Lew


----------



## eugene_jenea (Aug 23, 2012)

The_Traveler said:


> eugene_jenea said:
> 
> 
> > That was harsh but I'll take it like a man  Those picture were taken with a compact camera, I just was wondering if these pictures show potential since I barely have any experience with both, compact camera and DSLRs.
> ...



Now this is what I call a nice comment, see, you can do it if you really put your mind to it. For the future I won't be starting threads anymore as I thought photography is not going to happen for me anytime soon, I'm just going to comment once in a while and say how beautiful some snapshots are. But thank you, write more comments like the last one and don't be too hard on people, you just might push them over the edge. Do it in a more diplomatic way, follow the feedback techniques. And again, thank you, you opinion matters.


----------



## Designer (Aug 23, 2012)

eugene_jenea said:


> Now this is what I call a nice comment, see, you can do it if you really put your mind to it. For the future I won't be starting threads anymore as I thought photography is not going to happen for me anytime soon, I'm just going to comment once in a while and say how beautiful some snapshots are. But thank you, write more comments like the last one and don't be too hard on people, you just might push them over the edge. Do it in a more diplomatic way, follow the feedback techniques. And again, thank you, you opinion matters.



Eugene; if this is the first time anyone has criticized your work, I can understand your extreme sensitivity, but please be aware that many of us have had much more direct and disparaging criticism than the one you had here.  We simply took it "like a man" as it were and moved on.  Time for you to "man up".


----------



## Jaemie (Aug 23, 2012)

Designer said:


> Eugene; if this is the first time anyone has criticized your work, I can understand your extreme sensitivity, but please be aware that many of us have had much more direct and disparaging criticism than the one you had here.  We simply took it "like a man" as it were and moved on.  Time for you to "man up".



Or "woman up," though I guess the OP is male. Hehe..

The comments and criticism in this thread are nothing to get upset about. Honest opinions and objective suggestions are great learning tools, and I'd focus my energy on improving my photography. It seems to me a waste of time to take anyone's comments personally.


----------



## The_Traveler (Aug 23, 2012)

Each of those comments are in the same tone - I have no reason to be either harsh or accommodating.
They are what they are and your different response is wholly within you.

Lew


----------



## zcar21 (Aug 23, 2012)

First I want to say that I like the rose with the buds and the last one, but you should try to look at it from different perspectives to find a better composition. Second, I disagree with the people that say you would get the same result with a dslr. Other than composition, you would get a lot of advantages from a dslr even if you use it in auto: better exposure, better dynamic range and detail , sharper, better colors, etc. Will these advantages make you a better photographer, probably not, but when you do get a good picture it WILL look better.


----------



## cgipson1 (Aug 23, 2012)

eugene_jenea said:
			
		

> Now this is what I call a nice comment, see, you can do it if you really put your mind to it. For the future I won't be starting threads anymore as I thought photography is not going to happen for me anytime soon, I'm just going to comment once in a while and say how beautiful some snapshots are. But thank you, write more comments like the last one and don't be too hard on people, you just might push them over the edge. Do it in a more diplomatic way, follow the feedback techniques. And again, thank you, you opinion matters.



OP.. your sarcasm and rudeness to a long time respected member here, ensures that I will never try to help or assist you.... and no matter what you think, you have a LONG way to go!


----------



## thereyougo! (Aug 24, 2012)

eugene_jenea said:


> The_Traveler said:
> 
> 
> > eugene_jenea said:
> ...



Arrogance will teach you nothing.  All it will do is ensure you get no help from anyone.  The only thing that might have been gained from using a better camera would be that you would have less distortion and less chromatic aberrations.  

Before you get a new camera I think you need to get a new attitude and a thicker skin.  You will learn nothing at all from people telling you that your photographs are 'nice'.  I went through a stage of thinking that my shots were great and ignored some of what people were saying, mainly on another forum.  I have top notch kit (Canon 5D mk II, Mk III Pentax 645D a 41mp medium format camera and a number of medium format film bodies) and was convinced for a while that I was getting great images.  I initially saw the criticism on another site as jealousy of my kit.  then I had a good look at myself, and found that although my images were fine, they lacked something.  They didn't 'pop'.  I had great gear but hadn't learned to make the best of them and the software that I have.

I have still got a long way to go, but my images are much better now and have some direction, and are processed much better now.  Yes, I'll still put in some duff images (I suspect that all the images I have taken today on arrival in Seoul will all hit the trash but then I took them while jet lagged!).  

Shake off the attitude and be prepared to take a few scrapes.  Some of the criticism will be spot on, some wildly off the mark, but learning why people see your images in a certain way is *one* of the keys to mastering the art.  As for cameras, learn to live the limitations of your kit and when you have better kit, you will get better use from it.  Work to the camera's strengths, not it's weaknesses, and take on as much free advice as you can get.  It won't all be useful, but it will all be valuable.

It all comes down to one question:

*Do you want a pat one the back, or do you want to learn something that will improve your photography?* 

We've all been at the stage you are.  Moving on to the next stage is up to you, but it means manning up and being able to take a few knocks.  Good Luck whichever route you take!


----------



## thereyougo! (Aug 24, 2012)

dddube said:


> Beautiful pics. pls see my work on *|*



OP, I wouldn't necessarily take much from this poster.  Looks like spam to me as first post (the other 3 are gallery posts) has a link in it.  When someone *really* likes your stuff they'll often tell you why they like it.  This one just wants you to click his link.


----------



## eugene_jenea (Aug 24, 2012)

Designer said:


> eugene_jenea said:
> 
> 
> > Now this is what I call a nice comment, see, you can do it if you really put your mind to it. For the future I won't be starting threads anymore as I thought photography is not going to happen for me anytime soon, I'm just going to comment once in a while and say how beautiful some snapshots are. But thank you, write more comments like the last one and don't be too hard on people, you just might push them over the edge. Do it in a more diplomatic way, follow the feedback techniques. And again, thank you, you opinion matters.
> ...



Listen, people post a lot of crap that is far from it's called "constructive criticism". There is a way of criticizing someone's work even if they don't have much experience, it's doesn't apply only to me. As I said, there is a technique you need to use, and it's called feedback, you point out what's not good and give some solutions, don't just send me look for something and not knowing what that is. I'm sure some people had it worse than me but com' on, don't just be a son of a ***** (not talking about you) and and be rude.


----------



## eugene_jenea (Aug 24, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> eugene_jenea said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Have you looked yourself in the mirror lately? I was nothing but polite. I don't care if you're respected or a long member, I'm just returning the favor, I'll be treating you the same you treated me. And just for the record, I didn't ask to completely discredit some of the pictures I took years ago, I used the tools I had at that time. I asked if there is a small chance of becoming a good (not a great) photographer, but since a lot of you think of yourselves as good commentators you didn't even filter some of your thoughts, you just didn't care. Just because some you had it tough it doesn't mean you had to put me through the same crap. Some of your opinions I'll accept but some of you went a lot over the board.


----------



## unpopular (Aug 24, 2012)

The problem with this group of photographs is that it is not a group at all. They seem directionless, without theme in either style nor content. While you have some interesting subjects, none of these images represent interesting ideas - they document things not things about the things. The roses are just roses, the church is just a church the skyscrapers are just skyscrapers. There is some sense of juxtaposition of old and new, but it is not a particularly strong juxtaposition.


----------



## eugene_jenea (Aug 24, 2012)

thereyougo! said:


> eugene_jenea said:
> 
> 
> > The_Traveler said:
> ...



I have no clue for where you have seen arrogance in my comments, to make such assumptions you really need to know me. And yet some people blamed the distortion and chromatic aberrations on me, nice to know, duly noted. About new attitude and thicker skin, good point, good assumption but again it was made on the wrong base. I don't think the shots I took are great, since I basically have not experience or studies in the domain in question, I have no tools, I have nothing. i almost ignored your comment as most of it was good because of your off the line remark about me being arrogant, I usually admit to the truth but there isn't any. I'm really happy for you that you've come a long way to being great, I'm sure you are but not all will understand you style, your approach and simply your taste of what you consider attractive, popping-out and so on. Thanks, I can add this comment, most of it anyway, the the list of the good ones. Remember, there is no arrogance in it, maybe a bit of sarcasm but also remember sarcasm is a coping mechanism for a lot of crap and misery I had to go through. See ya. 

And people, please stop commenting, I've had it already.


----------



## zombiemann (Aug 24, 2012)

Is it me or did the pics in the original post change?  I could have sworn that the OP was a set of much different pictures.


----------



## eugene_jenea (Aug 24, 2012)

zombiemann said:


> Is it me or did the pics in the original post change?  I could have sworn that the OP was a set of much different pictures.



Nope, they're the same pictures, why would I change them ?


----------



## The_Traveler (Aug 24, 2012)

eugene_jenea said:


> As I said, there is a technique you need to use, and it's called feedback, *you point out what's not good and give some solutions*, don't just send me look for something and not knowing what that is.



The problem is, as I see it, is that you think that because the camera gets you 60% to reasonable technical results that we should be able to point you to a simple step o two that will get you the rest of the way - the 'solutions' you refer to.

Well that isn't so, it's the camera that knows everything and you know very little and there is no way to give you any steps to improve until you actual start working at it.
Your lecturing me and others about how to give criticism is more than a bit condescending - and wrong.  
If you read the comments, many people did give some some general impressions as feedback but you don't have the vocabulary, you don't have the knowledge, you don't have the experience, you don't have the equipment and you don't have the interest or willingness or ability to put any more detailed comments to use.


----------



## eugene_jenea (Aug 24, 2012)

The_Traveler said:


> eugene_jenea said:
> 
> 
> > As I said, there is a technique you need to use, and it's called feedback, *you point out what's not good and give some solutions*, don't just send me look for something and not knowing what that is.
> ...



Did not want to do this but here is what one guy said about you: "I  am new here, and I can already tell one thing about this forum.  MOST  every one thinks they are the best photographer in the world, and  everyone else is bad.  You could post the best picture in the world,  they wont say "this is great!" they will pic out one tiny little thing  and nit pick it to death.

That guy Lew said "they are just pictures, like anyone with your camera would take.
the composition is off on most, the subject is centered.
there is nothing personal or original or particularly interesting about them."

Well dont worry, I looked at all his pictures and 90% of them are NOT  interesting to me and have flaws.  So dont pay guys like him any  attention.                         "

It's interesting how I can learn from your opinions but not the other way around, right? Talk about hypocrisy. "you don't have the vocabulary, you don't have the knowledge, you don't  have the experience, you don't have the equipment and you don't have the  interest or willingness or ability to put any more detailed comments to  use." wow, you really think big enough of yourself to make such conclusion, and by the way, these are real cheap shots, I admitted already to that so there was no need to state the obvious. Man, I feel sorry for you as perhaps you weren't loved as a kid. You really have no manners, but hey that's just me, my subjective opinion about a man I don't even know. Cheers.


----------



## The_Traveler (Aug 24, 2012)

Dear Eugene,

You really need to come out of this feeling better than me or us.
Who ever wrote to you isn't very familiar with the comments here.
When pictures are good, people, including me, say they are good.
When pictures are ordinary, they get comments like you get.

I would suggest you read what people said about your pictures.
None of it is wrong.

Maybe you need an attaboy to make you feel good because you had some idea that you are an original untutored talent.

I don't think you'll get exactly what you want in the way you way; for that kind of praise you need a mother.

Best wishes,

Lew


----------



## rexbobcat (Aug 24, 2012)

eugene_jenea said:
			
		

> Did not want to do this but here is what one guy said about you: "I  am new here, and I can already tell one thing about this forum.  MOST  every one thinks they are the best photographer in the world, and  everyone else is bad.  You could post the best picture in the world,  they wont say "this is great!" they will pic out one tiny little thing  and nit pick it to death.
> 
> That guy Lew said "they are just pictures, like anyone with your camera would take.
> the composition is off on most, the subject is centered.
> ...



Did you know that you don't have to be an incredible photographer to effectively criticize photography? 

*legasp!* :O

Oh, yeah, and your photos are incredibly average. Not particularly BAD, but kind of just "meh it's a flower"

Boring subjects+lack of technical knowledge=Boring and at best mediocre photographs.

A good photographer can make a normally boring subject shine in a way that makes it interesting. You aren't at that point...


----------



## jowensphoto (Aug 24, 2012)

There's nothing spectacular about these photos.

You said yourself that you barely know anything about a camera. The photos reflect that. Learn more about composition and get a camera that has at least semi-manual settings.


----------



## pgriz (Aug 24, 2012)

Looked you up...  You've got lots of stuff all over.  The photos you posted here are also on Pinterest.    If expressing yourself through photography remains one of your goals, you may want to spend some time familiarizing yourself with the conventions of this art form.  Should you listen to critiques and opinions?  That depends on how open you are to input.  And how well you can figure out what comments are worth listening to, and which are to be ignored.  You can also figure a lot of stuff out for yourself, but if you want to be a writer with an audience, it helps to have a good rapport with that audience.  It is not for me (or any one here) to tell you how to do that, and even if it is something you should do.  However, in the context of a photography forum, you posted some images and you got feedback.  From your reaction, it was not what you expected.  Perhaps, you could tell us what your expectation was, and we can then carry on the conversation from there.


----------



## eugene_jenea (Aug 24, 2012)

pgriz said:


> Looked you up...  You've got lots of stuff all over.  The photos you posted here are also on Pinterest.    If expressing yourself through photography remains one of your goals, you may want to spend some time familiarizing yourself with the conventions of this art form.  Should you listen to critiques and opinions?  That depends on how open you are to input.  And how well you can figure out what comments are worth listening to, and which are to be ignored.  You can also figure a lot of stuff out for yourself, but if you want to be a writer with an audience, it helps to have a good rapport with that audience.  It is not for me (or any one here) to tell you how to do that, and even if it is something you should do.  However, in the context of a photography forum, you posted some images and you got feedback.  From your reaction, it was not what you expected.  Perhaps, you could tell us what your expectation was, and we can then carry on the conversation from there.




A comment of mine from a little above: "And just for the record, I didn't ask to completely discredit some of  the pictures I took years ago, I used the tools I had at that time. I  asked if there is a small chance of becoming a good (not a great)  photographer, but since a lot of you think of yourselves as good  commentators you didn't even filter some of your thoughts, you just  didn't care. Just because some you had it tough it doesn't mean you had  to put me through the same crap. Some of your opinions I'll accept but  some of you went a lot over the board."

But I'd appreciate if everybody stopped, I'm already sweating like crazy. If you wanna say something do it in private.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Aug 24, 2012)




----------



## Designer (Aug 24, 2012)

eugene_jenea said:


> I asked if there is a small chance of becoming a good (not a great) photographer..



I thought your question was about cameras.



eugene_jenea said:


> I can only wonder how would they look like if I had a professional camera like a Canon 7D, for instance. How do you think they would look like ?
> 
> Tell me everything you think, com' on, I can take it


----------



## unpopular (Aug 24, 2012)

pgriz said:


> The photos you posted hereare also on *Pinterest.*



Oh. That explains a lot actually.


----------



## thereyougo! (Aug 24, 2012)

eugene_jenea said:


> thereyougo! said:
> 
> 
> > eugene_jenea said:
> ...



Your defensiveness will get in the way of your progress.  It's also that that makes you come across as arrogant.  I also don't see how anyone that knows anything about cameras and photography would say that you *created* the distortion and chromatic aberrations.  these are inherent in all lenses, just more pronounced in cheaper lanes and in inbuilt lenses on compacts or bridge cameras.  You can use a certain amount of skill to reduce the distortion, but CA will always be present unless removed in Post production.

As for you 'knowing that these photos weren't great, why didn't you tell people what *you* thought were the weak points? That tells people that you are willing to learn and would also lessen the criticism that would come at you, as you are then displaying some self knowledge and anyone that came in pointing it out would be rightfully admonished for pointing out what you know already.  

If you don't want people to tell you what they think, don't ask.



eugene_jenea said:


> I can only wonder how would they look like if I had a professional camera like a Canon 7D, for instance. How do you think they would look like ?
> 
> Tell me everything you think, com' on, I can take it



The original post tells me two things: you thought these shots were great: "I can only wonder....".  come across as thinking the shots are great and be prepared to back it up with great images.  As for the second sentence, Yeah, right, I believe you, thousands wouldn't.

You will also rile people when nagging for feedback only a few hours after posting.  Impatience won't endear you to anyone.


----------



## JasonVillamil (Aug 24, 2012)

nice angles nice concepts but need to be careful with over expose areas... play around with apeture... and ISO...


----------



## thereyougo! (Aug 24, 2012)

Also if you want to get tailored feedback rather than straight criticism you need to put more effort in. In your OP you didn't tell us when these were taken (although you've since told us it was some time ago); you didn't explicitly tell us what you thought of the pictures (although later in the thread you say you knew there were issues).  To get better feedback you need to give more information.

For my part, they show too little thought has gone into composition and there doesn't really seem to be any real concept behind most of the shots.  The flower shots are just flower shots, the first shot while reasonably exposed and the composition is alright, there isn't really a clear subject.  The last shot of the bunch has the most potential but you chopped off the top part of the gherkin, so I don't think you had any real concept there as you haven't really juxtapositioned the old building next to the modern one.  The light is good,but you didn't create the light, there is distortion and lots of CA but there's little you can do about this (apart from reducing the amount in post either by profile or by reducing the saturation for that colour).  The big fail on that photo is composition and that's because you didn't appear to have a clear concept in the shot.


----------



## eugene_jenea (Aug 25, 2012)

thereyougo! said:


> Also if you want to get tailored feedback rather than straight criticism you need to put more effort in. In your OP you didn't tell us when these were taken (although you've since told us it was some time ago); you didn't explicitly tell us what you thought of the pictures (although later in the thread you say you knew there were issues).  To get better feedback you need to give more information.
> 
> For my part, they show too little thought has gone into composition and there doesn't really seem to be any real concept behind most of the shots.  The flower shots are just flower shots, the first shot while reasonably exposed and the composition is alright, there isn't really a clear subject.  The last shot of the bunch has the most potential but you chopped off the top part of the gherkin, so I don't think you had any real concept there as you haven't really juxtapositioned the old building next to the modern one.  The light is good,but you didn't create the light, there is distortion and lots of CA but there's little you can do about this (apart from reducing the amount in post either by profile or by reducing the saturation for that colour).  The big fail on that photo is composition and that's because you didn't appear to have a clear concept in the shot.






unedited.


----------



## The_Traveler (Aug 25, 2012)

eugene_jenea said:


> unedited.



My suggestion that you pick the one image you think is most successful, edit it and start another thread with it.
That way anything you hear will be something you don't know.


----------



## thereyougo! (Aug 25, 2012)

The_Traveler said:


> eugene_jenea said:
> 
> 
> > unedited.
> ...



+1.  no.2 is a pity you couldn't have gone any wider and got the top of the Gherkin in.  One thing you did do right was to shoot at this time of the day.  The light is nice.  Shooting from these angles you will always get perspective distortion, so hard to avoid sometimes.  Like The_traveler said go and edit them and pick the one *you *&#8203;think is best in a new thread.


----------

