Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Critique Corner 
Thread started 26 Aug 2018 (Sunday) 12:40
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Are flowers a distraction?

 
swbkrun
Goldmember
Avatar
1,090 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 300
Joined Oct 2010
Location: Washington
Post edited 6 months ago by swbkrun.
     
Aug 26, 2018 12:40 |  #1

Thoughts on this? Looking at different styles here, curious of thoughts on flowers as a distraction? Some people will totally disagree with the editing styles/colors, and I realize that's not for everyone. Just trying something "new" for me....

IMAGE: https://photos.smugmug.com/Children/Avery-and-Blake-2018/i-S5Vrd83/0/9dbf0f28/L/0U6A3869-L.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://photos.smugmug​.com …L/0U6A3869-L.jpg&lb=1&s=A  (external link) on Smugmug

IMAGE: https://photos.smugmug.com/Children/Avery-and-Blake-2018/i-FtCQzS7/0/09c78681/L/0U6A3866-L.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://photos.smugmug​.com …L/0U6A3866-L.jpg&lb=1&s=A  (external link) on Smugmug


One without flowers....

IMAGE: https://photos.smugmug.com/Children/Avery-and-Blake-2018/i-bKGXq8h/0/8bfb6400/L/0U6A3861-L.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://photos.smugmug​.com …L/0U6A3861-L.jpg&lb=1&s=A  (external link) on Smugmug

http://averymckenna.sm​ugmug.com/ (external link)
"When I stand before God @ the end of my life, I would hope that I would not have a single bit of talent left, and I could say, 'I used everything you gave me.'"
Erma Bombeck

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
bpalermini
Goldmember
Avatar
1,358 posts
Gallery: 85 photos
Likes: 594
Joined Mar 2011
Location: Ashland, Oregon
     
Aug 26, 2018 13:16 |  #2

To me, yes they are. I much prefer the third photo. I like the editing style though.


Bob Palermini
1DX, 5DIV, 14 Rokinon, 16-35L II, 24-70L II, 100L, 70-200 IS 2.8L, 100-400L II, 400mm 2.8 IS II, 1.4xIII, 2xIII, 580EXII, YN560IV, RRS TVC23 + BH55, LRCC, Fuji X-E2, Fuji X30
My Web Site (external link) | My Sports Portfolio (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Qbx
Goldmember
3,907 posts
Gallery: 45 photos
Likes: 403
Joined Dec 2010
     
Aug 26, 2018 13:44 |  #3

My eyes were first drawn to the kids in the car, so the flowers were not immediately distracting; however, I think if they were slightly more in focus (but not completely) and if you'd crop the image to place the car less centered and eliminate much of the bare driveway it would make a better shot.


-- Image Editing OK --

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bob_r
Goldmember
2,425 posts
Gallery: 23 photos
Likes: 591
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Cordova, TN
     
Aug 26, 2018 16:55 |  #4

swbkrun wrote in post #18693254 (external link)
Thoughts on this? Looking at different styles here, curious of thoughts on flowers as a distraction?

It seems odd to me that you only questioned whether the flowers were a distraction. The electrical service, mailbox, garage doors, excess pavement, etc. are OK, but you find the flowers distracting?

I like the 3rd image better too, but maybe because you allow them to dominate the image more than in the first image.
I think I'd crop the first image to a portrait orientation to eliminate many of the items that I found distracting and listed above.


Canon 7D, 5D, 35L, 50 f/1.4, 85 f/1.8, 135L, 200L, 10-22, 17-55, 70-300, 100-400L, 500D, 580EX(2).
Sigma 150 macro, 1.4X, 2X, Quantaray 2X, Kenko closeup tubes, Yongnuo YN685(3), Yongnuo YN-622C-TX. Lots of studio stuff.
** Image Editing OK **

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
-Duck-
my head is usually in the way
Avatar
1,650 posts
Gallery: 18 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 659
Joined Apr 2016
Location: Shelton, CT USA
Post edited 6 months ago by -Duck-. (2 edits in all)
     
Aug 26, 2018 17:32 |  #5

bob_r wrote in post #18693501 (external link)
It seems odd to me that you only questioned whether the flowers were a distraction. The electrical service, mailbox, garage doors, excess pavement, etc. are OK, but you find the flowers distracting?

These other elements mentioned do not have the same visual weight as the foreground flowers and do not appear as intentionally placed objects within the frame, therefore are not typically considered as visual distractions.

swbkrun wrote in post #18693254 (external link)
Thoughts on this? Looking at different styles here, curious of thoughts on flowers as a distraction? Some people will totally disagree with the editing styles/colors, and I realize that's not for everyone. Just trying something "new" for me....

The foreground flowers, are a consciously placed element by the photographer and has a direct influence on how a viewer looks at the image. This type of composition is generally used to create the feeling of surveillance or hidden observation. Because of the subject matter it can be perceived as a bit "creepy". Had there been more cover from the bush it would definitely be creepy.


"If you didn't learn something new today, you wasted a day."
Unitas Photography (external link)Blog (external link)Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hoblos
Member
Avatar
102 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Likes: 234
Joined Jun 2011
Location: Sydney, NSW, AUSTRALIA
     
Aug 26, 2018 17:37 |  #6

i would say yes, along with other items in the background. I like the third one


Canon 5DIV / Fujifilm X100F / Sigma 50mm 1.4 DG ART / 135mm 2 L / 70-200mm 2.8 IS II L / 430EX III-RT

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Croasdail
making stuff up
7,107 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 287
Joined Apr 2005
Location: North Carolina
     
Aug 26, 2018 18:45 |  #7

were these intended as "art" or just the best possible captures of your kids in your neighborhood doing their thing? Makes a big difference. If you are trying to do the later, good job. They are nice representations of a real life subject.

The best thing about the third is the interaction between the two. And I would crop it much tighter to keep that focus as paramount. You have a dark area encroaching into the grass area that is really competing with the kids because it is at the same level/band in the shot On the other hand I think the other two tell a lot more about your kids..and all that other stuff is great context. Net net I am pretty much disagreeing with the other posters here. I am really bored of shots that are so over simplified that they tell you not much of anything.


Mark
Its by knowing and mastering all the rules that you learn which ones you can break.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
OhLook
Spiderwoman
Avatar
17,964 posts
Gallery: 72 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 5235
Joined Dec 2012
Location: California: SF Bay Area
     
Aug 26, 2018 18:57 |  #8

The foreground flowers are a distraction, yes, and they seem so irrelevant to the rest of the scene that I have no idea why they were included. There must have been other spots from which to get a low shooting angle without giving the appearance of hiding behind the vegetation.


PRONOUN ADVISORY: OhLook is a she. | A FEW CORRECT SPELLINGS: lens, aperture, amateur, hobbyist, per se, raccoon, whoa, more so (2 wds.), shoo-in | IMAGE EDITING OK

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Left ­ Handed ­ Brisket
That's my line!
Avatar
9,317 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 2072
Joined Jun 2011
Location: The Uwharrie Mts, NC
Post edited 6 months ago by Left Handed Brisket.
     
Aug 26, 2018 20:01 |  #9

I think a much tighter crop of the first shot with the car on the right would make a nicer shot, reduce clutter and place more emphasis on the children. The flowers aren't perfectly placed, but are not terrible. If the were a little lower right it might work i out better.

The third has no sense of place and does nothing to me. It could be any street in the world.


PSA: The above post may contain sarcasm, reply at your own risk | Not in gear database: Auto Sears 50mm 2.0 / 3x CL-360, Nikon SB-28, SunPak auto 322 D, Minolta 20

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bob_r
Goldmember
2,425 posts
Gallery: 23 photos
Likes: 591
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Cordova, TN
     
Aug 26, 2018 20:44 |  #10

-Duck- wrote in post #18693532 (external link)
These other elements mentioned do not have the same visual weight as the foreground flowers and do not appear as intentionally placed objects within the frame, therefore are not typically considered as visual distractions.

I agree that background distractions do not have the same visual impact as foreground distractions, but they are still considered distractions.


Canon 7D, 5D, 35L, 50 f/1.4, 85 f/1.8, 135L, 200L, 10-22, 17-55, 70-300, 100-400L, 500D, 580EX(2).
Sigma 150 macro, 1.4X, 2X, Quantaray 2X, Kenko closeup tubes, Yongnuo YN685(3), Yongnuo YN-622C-TX. Lots of studio stuff.
** Image Editing OK **

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
swbkrun
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,090 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 300
Joined Oct 2010
Location: Washington
     
Aug 27, 2018 00:43 |  #11

bob_r wrote in post #18693501 (external link)
It seems odd to me that you only questioned whether the flowers were a distraction. The electrical service, mailbox, garage doors, excess pavement, etc. are OK, but you find the flowers distracting?

I like the 3rd image better too, but maybe because you allow them to dominate the image more than in the first image.
I think I'd crop the first image to a portrait orientation to eliminate many of the items that I found distracting and listed above.

The mailbox, service box, garage, are part of almost every home in our neighborhood. It don’t really find those are a distraction as they are not out of the norm here. But thanks for opening my eyes to them.

Again, as I mentioned I was looking at different styles here. Just trying to learn as much as I can. Sorry if it seems odd to you I only ask about the flowers.


http://averymckenna.sm​ugmug.com/ (external link)
"When I stand before God @ the end of my life, I would hope that I would not have a single bit of talent left, and I could say, 'I used everything you gave me.'"
Erma Bombeck

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
swbkrun
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,090 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 300
Joined Oct 2010
Location: Washington
     
Aug 27, 2018 00:48 |  #12

Thanks all... I appreciate all the feedback. I’m constantly trying to learn... look at different styles, and HAVE fun.

IMAGE: https://photos.smugmug.com/Children/Avery-and-Blake-2018/i-L9TCMb5/0/3bf7ba25/XL/0U6A0182-XL.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://averymckenna.s​mugmug.com …2018/i-L9TCMb5/A&lb=1&s=A  (external link)
Avery and Blake 2018 (external link) by averymckenna (external link) on Smugmug

http://averymckenna.sm​ugmug.com/ (external link)
"When I stand before God @ the end of my life, I would hope that I would not have a single bit of talent left, and I could say, 'I used everything you gave me.'"
Erma Bombeck

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Croasdail
making stuff up
7,107 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 287
Joined Apr 2005
Location: North Carolina
     
Aug 27, 2018 07:34 |  #13

If you want really cute images of kids, stop shooting down at them. Get the camera really low. It's what makes the difference between a snap shot - and thats what these are - and a true portrait style photo of the kids. Low, wide open, watch your backgrounds. Try to not have the camera higher then their heads. Makes a big difference. If your camera has a floppy screen, flip it out and hold the camera low.


Mark
Its by knowing and mastering all the rules that you learn which ones you can break.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bob_r
Goldmember
2,425 posts
Gallery: 23 photos
Likes: 591
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Cordova, TN
     
Aug 27, 2018 07:36 |  #14

swbkrun wrote in post #18693788 (external link)
The mailbox, service box, garage, are part of almost every home in our neighborhood. It don’t really find those are a distraction as they are not out of the norm here.

The fact that they exist in your neighborhood doesn't change the fact that they are distractions. If something in your image distracts your viewer's attention from your subject without adding a positive element to the image, it's a distraction. The flowers and the items I mentioned are all distractions. It's up to the photographer to try to eliminate the distractions. You could change your point of view by moving or changing your focal length to eliminate some of these distractions. You could also decrease your DOF to minimize them or perhaps you could have used a flash for your subjects and allowed your background to go darker. There are many options when trying to clean up a background.

There are times when allowing elements in the image to give a sense of place, a sense of scale, to visually balance an image or to give an image the illusion of depth that make those elements acceptable and desired even though they may have little to do with the subject. I don't find that to be the case with the flowers or the things I named.

SWBKRUN:18693788 wrote:
Sorry if it seems odd to you I only ask about the flowers.

I should be the one apologizing if I gave you more of a critique than you wanted, but since the question was about composition, I thought the entire composition should be considered rather than just the flowers.


Canon 7D, 5D, 35L, 50 f/1.4, 85 f/1.8, 135L, 200L, 10-22, 17-55, 70-300, 100-400L, 500D, 580EX(2).
Sigma 150 macro, 1.4X, 2X, Quantaray 2X, Kenko closeup tubes, Yongnuo YN685(3), Yongnuo YN-622C-TX. Lots of studio stuff.
** Image Editing OK **

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Altrisy
Hatchling
Avatar
3 posts
Joined Jan 2015
Location: Riyadh
     
Aug 28, 2018 05:44 |  #15

To me, yes they are. you just need to lower them a bit.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

1,266 views & 4 likes for this thread
Are flowers a distraction?
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Critique Corner 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Aprentice2019
851 guests, 324 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.