Arty-Clarty stuff

[Stephen]

Re: Arty-Clarty stuff

I'm a bit late into this thread, though I've kept up with it from the beginning. I've just been preoccupied with 'stuff' and couldn't devote much considered comment.

However it seems to me that Pol has produced something here that most people here might have struggled to do. I think she has used one of her Pancake lenses wide open at f2.8 This has given very shallow depth of field and has enabled her to focus mainly on one single flower.

I'm not interested in all the horticultural stuff, but look at it purely from a photographic and compositional viewpoint. For me I can probably see where David is coming from, its well saturated, though I wasn't there and it maybe very realistic. What I do love about the shot is the out of focus area, the bokeh. I feel the green area in particular is beautiful, and because there is only one flower truly in focus, this is what captures the attention. I truly believe that a big print would have more impact than the small version here does.

I'm not sure what feelings it evokes in me, though my overriding sense is one of a dreamy summery scenario, with some movement caused by the wind

Having said this there is one adjustment I think it would benefit from and that is a crop off the bottom. Approx 1/3rd off the bottom making it a letterbox style format, (or roughly a 16:9 ratio) in my opinion enhances it greatly, and concentrates the eye even more on the flowers

As for Jocelyns final comment, I seem to sense a 'taking ones ball home' kind of attitude, after what amounts to a ticking off from Pol. I hope this is not the case.

We all have to contend with hitting a raw nerve from time to time. I personally have never been keen on having my pictures in Critique copied and altered. It doesn't bother most, but for some they are somewhat more possessive about their pieces of work, presenting them for comment only, not for a crop & chop or other major alteration. Pol is one of the best people I know for offering constructive critique, and she does her fair share of that on this forum. She is able to summarise the good things about an image in a way I often find difficult, she can somehow put into words what an image does for her in terms of emotion and feelings. In short she is a passionate person who is keen to encourage and at the same time suggest ways of improvement. Submitting her own work for Critique is a rare occurrence, and so we can assume she has produced a piece of work she sees merit in and is passionate about. To have it altered, is somehow saying 'your work is poor and my way is better' We do perhaps need to be sensitive to this.

Anyway I've said enough on the matter and will keep out of any further discussion on the subject

[Pol]

Re: Arty-Clarty stuff

I'm a bit late into this thread, though I've kept up with it from the beginning. I've just been preoccupied with 'stuff' and couldn't devote much considered comment.

However it seems to me that Pol has produced something here that most people here might have struggled to do. I think she has used one of her Pancake lenses wide open at f2.8 This has given very shallow depth of field and has enabled her to focus mainly on one single flower.

I'm not interested in all the horticultural stuff, but look at it purely from a photographic and compositional viewpoint. For me I can probably see where David is coming from, its well saturated, though I wasn't there and it maybe very realistic. What I do love about the shot is the out of focus area, the bokeh. I feel the green area in particular is beautiful, and because there is only one flower truly in focus, this is what captures the attention. I truly believe that a big print would have more impact than the small version here does.

I'm not sure what feelings it evokes in me, though my overriding sense is one of a dreamy summery scenario, with some movement caused by the wind

Having said this there is one adjustment I think it would benefit from and that is a crop off the bottom. Approx 1/3rd off the bottom making it a letterbox style format, (or roughly a 16:9 ratio) in my opinion enhances it greatly, and concentrates the eye even more on the flowers

As for Jocelyns final comment, I seem to sense a 'taking ones ball home' kind of attitude, after what amounts to a ticking off from Pol. I hope this is not the case.

We all have to contend with hitting a raw nerve from time to time. I personally have never been keen on having my pictures in Critique copied and altered. It doesn't bother most, but for some they are somewhat more possessive about their pieces of work, presenting them for comment only, not for a crop & chop or other major alteration. Pol is one of the best people I know for offering constructive critique, and she does her fair share of that on this forum. She is able to summarise the good things about an image in a way I often find difficult, she can somehow put into words what an image does for her in terms of emotion and feelings. In short she is a passionate person who is keen to encourage and at the same time suggest ways of improvement. Submitting her own work for Critique is a rare occurrence, and so we can assume she has produced a piece of work she sees merit in and is passionate about. To have it altered, is somehow saying 'your work is poor and my way is better' We do perhaps need to be sensitive to this.

Anyway I've said enough on the matter and will keep out of any further discussion on the subject

My goodness! I certainly didn't mean to come over as 'ticking anyone off' - just trying to say I feel the critique forum should remain exclusively for considered critique on the photo in question. I didn't get the impression Jocelyn was 'taking her bat home' either. I assume she simply meant maybe she could find an arts/graphics forum in addition to her using the DPN photography board. As a matter of fact I'm subbed to a couple such forums myself - though admittedly I rarely use them these days but still look in occasionally.

As for my Poppy picci :- It's from the 50mm 1.4 lens shot at 2.8 iirc (exif in the image) The largest aperture on the 21mm pancake is 3.2 and I'm still trying that lens out atm so I haven't done anything much with it yet as it just arrived a couple of days ago.

The initial idea was influenced by the sort of 'wide and close' type of thing JW produces. I'd also thought the colours of the poppies and lighting on that day might be able to produce something akin to an Orton effect too - but an 'in-camera' produced Orton effect rather than the usual layers and blends he (and others) use for it.

I think I probably managed to get something along the combined JW+Orton influences but I have to agree that although I liked the bokeh and the colours, the leading flower really isn't isolated and prominent enough to give the sort of impact I'd hoped for.

I have a large print of the falling leaf and find the very shallow dof makes the printed version look a tad two dimensional so I doubt that the Poppies would be very impressive in print. Colourful maybe but that's about all .....

I used an X-pro layer at a multiply blend at no more than about 5% transparency as I sometimes find that helps boost the contrast as well as livening up some of the colour shades but those flowers really are that colour, especially bright and cheerful in the sunlight.

Footnote - I have a few recent 12x8 waiting in a temporary print folder at photobox. This particular Poppy picci ain't one of them and isn't likely to be.. but I won't bin it unless and until I get something a bit closer to what I have in mind.

Pol

[Jocelyn Walker]

Re: Arty-Clarty stuff

To clarify a point, I wrote 'my sincerest apologies' to Pol for having offended her.....meaning by taking the liberty of altering her work without prior consent! I don't know what is meant by taking ones ball home attitude is quite honestly & if it means a high & mighty attitude, that I assure you it wasn't! I also said I took the comments on board & meant just that, I will not alter peoples work again as an illustration of what I suggest could help! I had what in retrospect was maybe incorrect on my part, that Pol had felt the subject not quite big enough or significant enough & would put it on the backburner! No way was I suggesting that the work was not good enough or mine to be any better! I am not presumptious & am well aware of my limited knowledge compared to the likes of many people on this forum, Pol being one of them! Merely a suggestion illustrating what could be used to achieve the end result! My comment that perhaps including getting more involved in a graphics oriented forum actually being a good idea was just that....to widen experience, horizons & knowledge! I hope this clearly indicates that I have neither 'attitude' nor disrespect! Quite opposite!

[Pol]

Re: Arty-Clarty stuff

To clarify a point, I wrote 'my sincerest apologies' to Pol for having offended her.....meaning by taking the liberty of altering her work without prior consent! I don't know what is meant by taking ones ball home attitude is quite honestly & if it means a high & mighty attitude, that I assure you it wasn't! I also said I took the comments on board & meant just that, I will not alter peoples work again as an illustration of what I suggest could help! I had what in retrospect was maybe incorrect on my part, that Pol had felt the subject not quite big enough or significant enough & would put it on the backburner! No way was I suggesting that the work was not good enough or mine to be any better! I am not presumptious & am well aware of my limited knowledge compared to the likes of many people on this forum, Pol being one of them! Merely a suggestion illustrating what could be used to achieve the end result! My comment that perhaps including getting more involved in a graphics oriented forum actually being a good idea was just that....to widen experience, horizons & knowledge! I hope this clearly indicates that I have neither 'attitude' nor disrespect! Quite opposite!

Hey Jocelyn, don't worry about it! the expression "taking one's bat (or ball) home" simply means 'packing up and leaving ..... nothing to do with attitude.

I know you were simply trying to help and I'm not at all offended. As I keep saying - I'm just anxious that this particular forum stays fully focused on photography critique and 'verbal' suggestions and explanations so that the original poster can consider and try out those suggestions for themselves. Then they can always ask for 'how to do it' explanations in the likes of "Software Solutions" or maybe in the discussion forum.

I still think you'd enjoy an additional dedicated 'Arts and Graphics' forum if you can find a good one. I've been using PS since 1997/98, started off with version 4 and learned loads of the basic stuff from a young'un aged 16 who had a burning ambition to be a Graphics Designer.

I mainly use for Photographic processing now but there's no doubt about it that arts and graphics are a great way and also a fun way to get to grips with the various Image Editing software tools.

Hang loose and hang on in here too hun and good luck with the search for a good graphics forum. The one I always liked best was on Usenet and Pops and I joined about the same time but that one folded a few years ago. They used to post a 'Challenge' every week and the members had a week to use it as a basis for producing an individual graphic. The rules were that they were supposed to Use Adobe Elements 2 for the editing but Pops and I cheated, in a way because he used PSP and I used PS4.

Neither of us ever used to win so that was ok ..... I think.

Pol