need honest critique!

I like the composition, including the horizon. Although I'm a little thrown off by a hibiscus in a corn field, I think the subject is framed quite nicely. The only things I would change are colors, contrast, and brightness. Here, I've adjusted them slightly - sort of a midway between the original and Speedie's (which I also find a bit to contrasty). Here are two different versions of your original. In the end, it's a matter of taste and style. I personally like my second one.

Overall, nice shot and nice meaning behind it.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

airfrogusmc wrote in post #6150724
I think the brighter flower would represent something bright in a dull world and the rule of thirds is vastly OVERRATED and over used.

Agreed on the rule of thirds (which is why I somewhat irreverently referred to it as the "guideline" rather than the "rule"). I do think it holds true in more cases than not - but there are certainly shots that require otherwise.

Regards
Mark

LeuceDeuce wrote in post #6151785
I'm not so sure I agree with this entirely. I agree that people should not get defensive over constructive criticism; check your ego at the door. I do, however, believe that if the photographer is trying to convey a meaning or emotion, and has failed, then telling the panel what they were trying to do could gain specific tips on how to achieve their goal.

LeuceDeuce echoes my take exactly.

Bigbitt9706, I liked your image from the beginning when its connection with me was through my own interpretation of it. But it really really rocked for me after you revealed the meaning you were trying to convey. It works for me.

Also, you are very considerate and appreciative to reply individually to each and every commenter. Dude, you rock!

midnitejam wrote in post #6160414
LeuceDeuce echoes my take exactly.

Bigbitt9706, I liked your image from the beginning when its connection with me was through my own interpretation of it. But it really really rocked for me after you revealed the meaning you were trying to convey. It works for me.

Also, you are very considerate and appreciative to reply individually to each and every commenter. Dude, you rock!

+1

I like speedies edit much better, and I don't think it loses anything. When I look at the original shot I'm not thinking it is a drab scene, I'm thinking it's a drab photo of a scene. I'm a big fan of pop.

It's a good idea and a nice composition. What exactly is that? It looks like a burned sugar cane field to me.

This seriously had me LOL'ing.

"I'm not sure about the ethics of dropping in the flower"

This seriously had me LOL'ing.

You and me, both. But I think it was intended to make us laugh.

midnitejam wrote in post #6165061
"I'm not sure about the ethics of dropping in the flower"

You and me, both. But I think it was intended to make us laugh.

I'm never posting again! You guys are just mean. (j/k)

Yes, it was a "funny" since I went on and actually posted something useful afterwards. Well in my own head it seemed useful.

aram535 wrote in post #6167401
I'm never posting again! You guys are just mean. (j/k)

Yes, it was a "funny" since I went on and actually posted something useful afterwards. Well in my own head it seemed useful.

aram, please don't leave. I value and benefit from your comments and I enjoy your images. We knew you were funning--that's why we were laughing. I'm too familiar to many of your other comments to not have known when you were kidding.

I'm kind of dense sometimes. I thought you might be a flower hugger or something.

I love the approach and premis. I would have liked to see a wild flower in lieu of the one that is there.
I get it, I did before I read anything. Nice work.
B

scorpio_e wrote in post #6151571
When getting a critique you should not interpret your work and you’re not here to defend it either.
The best thing you can do is to never respond to any criticism. Take the criticisms on board as points of reference for future photographs.

Learn from your mistakes and learn what makes your photo emotionally connect with others

It's tough not to defend you work or try to explain what you were trying to accomplish.

A good critique will point out the positives of a photograph and will include some suggestion for improvement.

I mostly agree with what you say. That is basically the way that juried competitions work whether it pertains to photography or any other phases of artistic evaluations. It should be a little less rigorous in this forum where, for the most part, we are not really talking about the work of people who are professional artists (yet). Also, I suspect that most of us come here to learn and improve our skills and provide peer evaluations of the work of other members. However, the basic premise of artistic critique is still a good guideline. And I agree about checking your ego at the door -- it is hard to improve if one is not willing to take the comments without countering what others say. I think that it is fair to provide information about the image and intention of the photographer when it is requested.

airfrogusmc wrote in post #6152200
You have to be able to defend your work (without getting defensive). Its a must in all aspects of photography. You have to defend it all the time in the commercial world, weddings, fine art, in ever area of photography and the better you get at it the better your chances of getting the work you feel really strongly about shown.

I would agree somewhat, but the commercial world of photography can be a different beast. It is not the same thing as an intermediate to advanced photographer seeking feedback that will help in developing one's skills and be able to find out how others perceive their work. I only know a couple professional photographers and have not ever noticed that they had any sense of needing to defend their work or even act aggressively in their marketing. But, I am sure that there is probably a lot of photographers, especially with franchised studios, who do that.

I almost forgot that this is a critique thread and Bigbitt8706 wanted feedback.

I understand your intent about capturing the morning fog/haze and getting a soft appearance. The one problem that I see in your image is that the image is too dark and I believe that the hazy look would have been enhanced with more exposure rather than less. Another trick that I figured out a couple years ago to capture morning fog is to use flash. Sort of like using the high beams while driving in fog, the flash will be reflected back from the fog and enhance its appearance considerably. You may need to play around with the flash level, but full flash will usually wipe out the image if the fog is heavy. I think that a reduced manual flash level of around 1/32 to 1/8 full power works the best. Also find a good focus point on a close object of interest and make sure that it is sharp ... use a wide aperture of f/2.8 or larger to help the background softly disappear into the fog.

lhoney2 wrote in post #6168356
I'm kind of dense sometimes. I thought you might be a flower hugger or something.

Hah! If it was up to me, I would have photoshoped the flower in there. Why waste the $2 on Lowes or Home Depot.

He's got L glass, he can swing it.

Personally I do very much like the flower in this shot. Considering all that's been said, this shot certainly wasn't about presenting a "natural" image of a processed corn field, it was an artistic statement...which is what I took it for initially. Unfortunately I think that many photographers often get so caught up in trying to capture "the truth" of a given situation, often as accurately as possible (in regards to color, sharpness, composition, etc) that many often forget about aesthetic appeal and/or artistic interpretation.

Now I do have to agree with Speedie's interpretation as well...I think the original is a bit too washed out and under saturated. I certainly appreciate Bitt's comments in regards to "pop", but with such limited compositional elements, I believe that a fair degree of contrast is needed to make this image stand out. In fact, to me this image is all about "contrast"...the living beautiful flower against the dead field, etc., and to functionally rob the technical side of this image of the same is a mistake (in my always and ever so humble opinion).

Just my $.02,
Jim