PJmak wrote in post #18936662
How would you identify my style...if at all?
Can you critique my work and at the same time tell me if it would fall under a certain type of style?
I am looking for something consistent in your body of work; something that ties the different images together; something they all have in common. But I am not seeing it.
Some images are very carefully composed, with an aesthetically appealing degree of separation, or overlap, between the subject and the surrounding elements. Whereas other images have somewhat awkward overlap or "almost overlap" or "almost separation" between the subject and the supporting elements.
I am looking to see if you have a consistent way in which you like to align the various elements in your images, and I am not seeing this consistency. It almost seems as though you are primarily concerned with your subject, and sometimes don't even think about how precisely it lines up with what is in front of it or behind it.
One example of this would be the woman's hands holding the camera on the edge of the sofa. That is a well thought out concept and it is technically very solid, with excellent color rendering and very effective lighting that emphasizes the subject. Yet the bottom edge of the lens just barely overlaps the upper part of the beading in the sofa cushion's fabric. Was that intentional? DId you really want the bottom of the lens to come to exactly that point? It seems as though this calls attention to the lens/beading junction, and takes attention away from the lens and the fingers that are holding it. Wouldn't it be a more effective composition if the bottom of the lens overlapped the sofa cushion beading more? Like, if the very bottom of the lens were about a half inch below the beading, then the intersection of the two would not draw one's eye and be a distraction.
Another similar issue is evident in the photo of a woman sitting on the land and looking out over the ocean, which has some huge rocks protruding from the surface. The woman's hair appears to be blowing in the wind, and the hair that is to the left is overlapping a group of those distant rocks. And so a powerful element (her blowing hair) is visually lost because it overlaps something that is generally the same dark tone. If you had moved a bit to the left, you could have gotten separation between her hair and that group of rocks. Then her hair would stand out and not get lost in the background. It looks like you weren't even thinking about lining her hair up with the most favorable part of the background; like you just took the picture from wherever you were, regardless of how everything lined up.
Conversely, there are two images that exhibit very precise, pleasing placement of the compositional elements. One of these is the close-up of the front of the bicycle in motion, with the yellow line of the road being very nicely placed in relation to the bicycle's parts and the riders' forearm. Excellent and precise framing! Love it!
Another example of precise framing is the image of the backlit woman walking away from the camera on the beach. There are people in the near background, but none of them are overlapping her in a distracting way that would obscure the clean clear outline of her form. It looks as though you were conscious of everything in the background, and waited until she was "clear" of any overlapping that would undermine the visual statement that you intended to make.
So in your body of work I am seeing what appears to be very precise framing and placement of the compositional elements, and also seeing some cluttered compositions that look like the various alignment of things "just happened" by accident, instead of being carefully controlled.
This is the main reason why I think your images, collectively, look incongruous, and don't necessarily "belong with" each other. There is both haphazard placement of compositional elements, and appealing placement of compositional elements. This makes it look like two different photographers at very different levels took the photos.
PJmak wrote in post #18936662
Friend asked an interesting question.
He said if you want to be successful in photography, you have to be able to tell the client what kind of style your work is.
I didn't really have an answer.
Apart from the few odd pictures that dont belong, I believe I am keeping some sort of consistency with my photos.
I am interested in knowing what consistency you think you are keeping. I'm sorry about how that sounds - as though I am being harshly critical. I do not mean it that way. If you think you are maintaining a form of consistency, I am truly interested in knowing what that is. What a photographer thinks about his work is very important, as it has a huge affect on what he will produce, moving forward.
"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".