Last P&S shots before my dSLR days start, CC..

Hey, these are my 2 favorites that I've done with my epsilon point and shoot. Ive been reading a lot about color management and ICC profiles. Keep in mind I'm a complete newcomer so please critique me as much as possible (I'm looking to improve as much as possible).

The shot with the dog has some flaws. First off the stamp tool wasn't that successful with the tree as some of it was erased. I had to use photoshop blurs to achieve DoF so it looks a bit off. Also, as mentioned before, I didn't color manage and I've noticed some blotches on the dog when I looked at the picture on different screens.

The guitar has some of the same problems I just mentioned. I'm looking for critique on the style (angle, positioning etc..). I'd love to pick up on some concepts and theory (as I know how to avoid the color problems I've run into here) so my future photos look even more professional.

HTTP response: 404 | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | Byte size: ZERO

Sorry as I said I'm a noob, here are the flicker links I don't know how to directly attach a photo:

Dog: http://www.flickr.com …153909009/in/ph​otostream/

Guitar: http://www.flickr.com …153909187/in/ph​otostream/

I don't like the processing of the first picture. The tree behind the dog's head looks extremely OOF and blown out...

And it doesn't appear to me that anywhere on the guitar is in focus.

Yes I know the tree is poorly processed as I mentioned. The guitar's line of focus is right a cross the strings however the picture is very large and I couldn't attach it. It is much clearer in the larger picture. Aside from the processing, do you have any thoughts on the positioning of the subject, angles etc..?

I've reviewed the larger version of the guitar on your flickr. The only area of the photo that appears in focus is the top string. About an inch of it...

There's not much going on in either pictures, and positioning is fine. I can barely get my own dog to sit still for two seconds so I can brush him. But the guitar one is the same photo I've seen about 33458492 times before.

AmandaMarie wrote in post #9124821
I don't like the processing of the first picture. The tree behind the dog's head looks extremely OOF and blown out...

And it doesn't appear to me that anywhere on the guitar is in focus.

This is because the tree is in the background, falling out of the DoF. This would mean that it is not in focus; the dog is the subject, hence it is in focus as I would expect. It also appears blown because there is a cloud behind the tree, showing through the branches/leaves.

I agree, the processing is a little over-done on the first. The framing is nice. Mike, I would use a lens that blurs the background MORE, as to isolate the doggie more as the subject.

AmandaMarie wrote in post #9124864
I've reviewed the larger version of the guitar on your flickr. The only area of the photo that appears in focus is the top string. About an inch of it...

There's not much going on in either pictures, and positioning is fine. I can barely get my own dog to sit still for two seconds so I can brush him. But the guitar one is the same photo I've seen about 33458492 times before.

This is because he used a lens with an extremely shallow depth of field. I am guessing that was the intended effect. Nothing says that for a photo to be good, it has to be completely in focus or sharp all the way through, or w/e. Look at the patterns in the wood to see where the focus lays.

I agree Mike, the guitar shot is cliche, but not bad per se. The most important thing about a photo being successful is the message/impact on the viewer being one that is powerful.

AlphaChicken wrote in post #9124963
This is because the tree is in the background, falling out of the DoF. This would mean that it is not in focus; the dog is the subject, hence it is in focus as I would expect. It also appears blown because there is a cloud behind the tree, showing through the branches/leaves.

I agree, the processing is a little over-done on the first. The framing is nice. Mike, I would use a lens that blurs the background MORE, as to isolate the doggie more as the subject.


This is because he used a lens with an extremely shallow depth of field. I am guessing that was the intended effect. Nothing says that for a photo to be good, it has to be completely in focus or sharp all the way through, or w/e. Look at the patterns in the wood to see where the focus lays.

I agree Mike, the guitar shot is cliche, but not bad per se. The most important thing about a photo being successful is the message/impact on the viewer being one that is powerful.

I was grasping for the words. The tree just looked incredibly weird.

I don't feel the focus in the guitar is generally good at all. But thanks for giving your opinions on my opinions. They have clearly been very helpful.

Thanks for the feedback guys, I'll keep your advice in mind.

You're welcome Amanda. I agree, the tree looks weird. Could be from lens imperfections, could be from post. I was just saying that it makes sense it is "OOF" and that it is not necessarily a bad thing since it is the background.

Never said the guitar focus was good. Was just making it apparent why so little was in focus.

I am glad my opinions were clearly helpful, though I don't see how they were _clearly_ so. Unless, you were being facetious...at least I gave helpful comments for Mike, unlike both your posts which seemed quite unhelpful and rather, quite focused on simply pointing out the bad.

AlphaChicken wrote in post #9125168
You're welcome Amanda. I agree, the tree looks weird. Could be from lens imperfections, could be from post. I was just saying that it makes sense it is "OOF" and that it is not necessarily a bad thing since it is the background.

Never said the guitar focus was good. Was just making it apparent why so little was in focus.

I am glad my opinions were clearly helpful, though I don't see how they were _clearly_ so. Unless, you were being facetious...at least I gave helpful comments for Mike, unlike both your posts which seemed quite unhelpful and rather, quite focused on simply pointing out the bad.

Glad you picked up on my sarcasm.

The OP stated he already knew how to fix his color problems (ie. the tree) and he felt his guitar picture was in focus in the area he wanted.

Not much else I can say.