Critique Please

[Big_B]

Hi all,

I posted these in the share forum a while back but would like a critique on the below. Specifically could you tell me which of the first two you prefer? Also what do you think of the third? Would it benefit from a tighter crop?

Any other comments are appreciated.

Thanks,

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/sam.blackie/Pictures/Sardinia2004/slides/DSC_2922b.jpg

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/sam.blackie/Pictures/Sardinia2004/slides/DSC_2942c.jpg

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/sam.blackie/Pictures/Sardinia2004/slides/DSC_2903.JPG

[PhotosGuy]

I prefer #2, but only because you asked - they're both good. Maybe crop up to the edge of the big rock at the left so he isn't so centered?
Don't think I'd crop the last, but I'd try to pull some detail out of the rocks at the left. If you shot in RAW, there are techniques that will let you do that.

Nice shots.

[jojo77]

i like the 1st one the most but two bad the two rocks he was between wasn't farther apart

[Big_B]

i like the 1st one the most but two bad the two rocks he was between wasn't farther apart

Talk about moving heaven and earth to get a photo :D

[Sailor Don]

My personal opinion is that your third shot is the best. The texture of the clouds in the sky, the rock formations and the "sunburst" lighting have a very dramatic (maybe dynamic) landscape presentation.

There is one tiny speck of light coming through a gap in the rocks (approximately dead center in the picture) that is very distracting. Looks like a piece of dust on a 35 mm negative. My personal preferance would be to edit that out, or if you are in the mode of accurately capturing the scene, I would move the angle just enough to get rid of that spot of light. (Maybe one of the elder President Bush's 1000 points of light :) )

Looks like the horizon could use some leveling.

Since you asked for opinion on 1 and 2, it's not a landscape shot. It's not an action shot. It's not an art shot. If you could see the jumper (more than silhouette), maybe that would give it some more human interest. Or if you eliminated the jumper, then you could go for the landscape. As presented, it just doesn't do anything for me.

If the jumper were a voluptuous female with flowing translucent clothing, well then you have an art shot. That would get my vote. :D

[Big_B]

There is one tiny speck of light coming through a gap in the rocks (approximately dead center in the picture) that is very distracting. Looks like a piece of dust on a 35 mm negative.

Hmmm. Not sure what that is - thanks for pointing it out.


Looks like the horizon could use some leveling.


Dagnamit, I thought I'd sorted them all out! (You should see the horizon in some of the ones I posted in shared... I must have been properly pi**ed :) )


Since you asked for opinion on 1 and 2, it's not a landscape shot. It's not an action shot. It's not an art shot. If you could see the jumper (more than silhouette), maybe that would give it some more human interest. Or if you eliminated the jumper, then you could go for the landscape. As presented, it just doesn't do anything for me.

If the jumper were a voluptuous female with flowing translucent clothing, well then you have an art shot. That would get my vote. :D

Thanks, I appreciate the honest criticism. On another note, I reckon I'd vote for pretty much any scantily clad female :lol: