fresh out of the dark room

[blinking8s]

i would appreciate some serious critique here...dont cut me any slack...

these are all shot 35mm ilford hp5 400 speed with a 50mm f1.8 for my Universities Intermediate Photography class...I handed these in today for my first assignment. My scanner sucks so sort of imagine prints with a lot more detail and clear contrast...

http://www.blinking8s.com/etsu/intermed_photo/assignment_01/cloud.jpg

http://www.blinking8s.com/etsu/intermed_photo/assignment_01/car_wash.jpg

http://www.blinking8s.com/etsu/intermed_photo/assignment_01/layers.jpg

http://www.blinking8s.com/etsu/intermed_photo/assignment_01/old_man2.jpg

http://www.blinking8s.com/etsu/intermed_photo/assignment_01/rocks.jpg

[Radtech1]

Okay,

I will give it to my best try. My favorite shot of the batch is No. 4. Something about it really appeals to me. Technically it is excellent, with excellent shading throughout, and a very pleasing positioning of components. The man's expression is a fantastic blend of both weariness and agreeability. Balance is excellent, you managed to place the subject in the center of the frame and yet the image is not static. This one is the guaranteed A.

No. 5 is my next favorite. Technically perfect, beautiful contrast, couldn't ask for more. Sort of a double edged sword for my only critique of the shot: that is, although excellently executed, this is one of about 5000 pictures like it around. The "other edge" of this sword is that there is a very good reason why they're 5000 pictures like it around: it's an appealing image. Likely A, but a possible B for lack of originality.

No. 1 I think is the next best of this batch. The problem is, to my eyes at least, it isn't too terribly good. I can see that you're going for sort of positioning the angular building against the amorphous cloud. Even still, doesn't do too much for me.

I am torn on No. 2 as I love to take photos of signs. I would really really like to like the shot, but it just doesn't do anything for me. Maybe it is personal preference, I think the kind of signs that I like tends to be a little bit more rundown. Not sure, it just doesn't quite catch it.

The third one I think is the dog of the batch. Lots of things wrong with this, but the two primary problems are a) your reflection in the window, and b) no real center to the image - that is to say - too much is going on with nothing to look at.

Hope that helps, good luck in school.

Rad

[blinking8s]

Radtech1 - one of the best crits ive ever had here. I enjoy everyones input...each person sees a photo differently...

one thing when looking at these though, remember its an ART class...things like the photo with the reflection are meant to be like that. This current assignment was actually to portray our technical understanding of our cameras through 5 photographs...

[Radtech1]

one thing when looking at these though, remember its an ART class...things like the photo with the reflection are meant to be like that. This current assignment was actually to portray our technical understanding of our cameras through 5 photographs...

In that case, you may have failed to present an understaing of one of the basics of photography, that is the f-number/Depth of Field relationship. If you can still add to the assignment, I would strongly urge adding a shallow DOF shot. When I had a similar assignment in High School, I took one of our cat walking on the keys of a piano. Low f-number close up of just the front leg and paw with the piano keys blurring as they receeded. Maybe something like that.

Alternatively, you could re-shoot the window shot, low f-number, with the items in focus and the reflection out of focus. Show the instructor that you can selectivly blur a component.

Rad

PS, just my opinion, but I think it's right.

[blinking8s]

i understand what you are saying and maybe next time Ill give it a try, but at the moment it wasnt really what I was shooting for...thanks for the tip though...

[uvadtmfub]

Perhaps it would help if you can tell us what techniques you're trying to portray in each shot? We can give you a better critique that way.

[neil_r]

I am not sure if you had to produce "Finished Prints" as part of your assignment, but a really interesting point that these pictures make is that dust is not just a digital problem. I used to be scrupulously clean in the darkroom and still had to spend ages spotting the prints. Dust may be a problem in the digital world but the clone/healing brush is a lot less bother than inks.

As stated it would really help if we knew the asignment you were working on, as whilst these pictures are ok they dont exacly shout for your attention.

N

[blinking8s]

to portray our technical understanding of our cameras through 5 photographs...ie proving our exposure capabilities

actually i got lucky and only 2 prints really need spotting. But 3 of them are perfect...my scanner just blotched some of the prints...

neil...these are all film and processed in the dkrm...no digital here other than the scanner, which yes, dust was a pain in the ass on

[rick barclay]

I like people shots, so #4 gets my vote. Don't really like #'s 1, 2, and 5.
#3 is very interesting.

[blinking8s]

they all are not really good as photographs...since its not a real advanced photography class I was aiming more towards proving myself as capable of making great negatives...which taking a somewhat intersting photo...the subjects were random and rushed sadly....

thanks for the comment though

[MattSEG]

#'s 2 & 4 are brilliant...I really like them both.

The others don't do it for me, too bland.

#4 is my favorite, great shading, good composition, interesting, and I love people photos.

[Jagman]

I've got to go with the consensus and pick #4 as the best of the bunch, but I have to say that #1 speaks to me, it has a simplicity that is difficult to produce, and I find the angle the building is on almost jaunty, like the building wants to play with the cloud. or perhaps wear it as a hat, I don't suppose that's what you were aiming for, but that's how I enjoy it :-)

I would have liked to have seen some of the same simplicity with #2, I feel that were the photo taken from a lower angle, the sky would have framed the sign better, with the background only at the bottom of the frame to provide the setting, as it is the slogan leads the eye into the billboard on the other side of the street, and distracts from what I feel should be the focal point, all parts of the composition set so that your eyes end up there, like a punch line if you will.

Of course, I don't see how this critique helps with showing how you can use the functions of your camera.

[blinking8s]

Jagman - that actually is a very simlar idea to what i had for #1

as for #2...I think I ruined it enough to be the runner up for potential but lacking just about everything important...next time...next time

and this critique isnt really to help me with my camera, the photos were to go out and do something different in each shot with my camera, of course lighting needed to be somewhat similar since i was only going to dev 2 rolls of film, but different situations...I suceeded on that part, now its just to looka t the quality of the photos I got from it, as well as the content...

[BDM]

Well. I won't add much to the comments you already have except to note that pics one and two seem to have a number of dust or dirt spots. They should be cloned or otherwise retouched out. My eye goes right to them.

I also think you might want to experiment with a slower speed film for good light shots - - perhaps Delta 100 or FP4 if you are an Ilford fan. Some of the shots with large grey areas show the grain and while some folks don't mind that, I am not a fan of grain in this type of shot. I realize that other folks may feel differently about that but there is no harm in experimenting and comparing the results.

You may also want to ease up on the contrast of the water and rocks shot. I think that type of shot benefits from more detail in the shadows and I don't see a lot there. Take a look at the negatives. There should be some detail in the shadow areas. If there isn't you need a bit more exposure. If that causes the highlights to block, you then need a little less developing time. Try setting you meter for around half the manufacturer's ISO rating and then cutting back on the development time to bring the highlights into printable range. That may take a bit of experimenting but it is well worth the effort.

Bruce