Got a thin skin? Then look elsewhere. Post a link to an image that you've made, and invite others to offer their critiques. Honesty is encouraged, but please be positive in your constructive criticism. Flaming and just plain nastiness will not be tolerated. Please note that this is not an area for you to showcase your images, nor is this a place for you to show-off where you have been. This is an area for you to post images so that you may share with us a technique that you have mastered, or are trying to master. Typically, no more than about four images should be posted in any one post or thread, and the maximum size of any side of any image should not exceed 950 px.
Moderators: Greg B, Nnnnsic, Geoff, Glen, gstark, Moderators
Forum rules
Please note that image critiquing is a matter of give and take: if you post images for critique, and you then expect to receive criticism, then it is also reasonable, fair and appropriate that, in return, you post your critique of the images of other members here as a matter of courtesy. So please do offer your critique of the images of others; your opinion is important, and will help everyone here enjoy their visit to far greater extent.
Also please note that, unless you state something to the contrary, other members might attempt to repost your image with their own post processing applied. We see this as an acceptable form of critique, but should you prefer that others not modify your work, this is perfectly ok, and you should state this, either within your post, or within your signature.
Images posted here should conform with the general forum guidelines. Image sizes should not exceed 950 pixels along the largest side (height or width) and typically no more than four images per post or thread.
Please also ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is.
by surenj on Sun Dec 13, 2009 10:50 pm
Ok This is the last of the Cockatoo posts....  I am quite keen to get your thoughts especially on the 2nd image. I couldn't resist posting a photo of the cruise liner. I had a few minutes and tried to capture the sense of scale here.  When I took the photo, I left an empty bit in the middle and only realised what I could add when I got home....  I suppose they haven't yet replaced the asbestos. 
-

surenj
- Senior Member
-
- Posts: 7197
- Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 8:21 pm
- Location: Artarmon NSW
by Greg B on Mon Dec 14, 2009 8:27 am
I like them all, #1 moderately, #3 more so, and #2 is a beauty. The added shadow works really well and the result is a fantastic image. Well done.
Greg - - - - D200 etc
Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see. - Arthur Schopenhauer
-

Greg B
- Moderator
-
- Posts: 5938
- Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2004 7:14 pm
- Location: Surrey Hills, Melbourne
-
by Matt. K on Mon Dec 14, 2009 8:32 am
Suren #2 is beautiful in a strange sort of way. It would make a great CD cover.
Regards
Matt. K
-

Matt. K
- Former Outstanding Member Of The Year and KM
-
- Posts: 9981
- Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2004 7:12 pm
- Location: North Nowra
by ATJ on Mon Dec 14, 2009 9:02 am
Suren, I think the first one would be better if it was a bit lighter. It looks under exposed to me.
The second one doesn't do much for me. It looks faked. Sorry.
The third one is of fibreglass, isn't it? I like the lines.
-

ATJ
- Senior Member
-
- Posts: 3982
- Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 10:44 am
- Location: Blue Mountains, NSW
-
by Mr Darcy on Mon Dec 14, 2009 9:21 am
#1,2 I agree with ATJ #1 instead of a full lighten, perhaps just lift the port side of the boat #3 Yes it is fibreglass. It is badly weathered and probably quite brittle. The sheets to either side look like colourbond steel, so no asbestos here. Sorry. If you want some, I dug some up in the back yard the other day. I buried it again, but I can show you where to dig. Don't worry. No snakes at the moment. 
Greg It's easy to be good... when there is nothing else to do
-

Mr Darcy
- Senior Member
-
- Posts: 3414
- Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 11:35 pm
- Location: The somewhat singed and blackened Blue Mountains
by Willy wombat on Mon Dec 14, 2009 12:09 pm
#2 is gorgeous
-

Willy wombat
- Senior Member
-
- Posts: 2284
- Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2005 10:47 pm
- Location: Bentleigh, VIC Australia
by gstark on Mon Dec 14, 2009 2:22 pm
ATJ wrote:The second one doesn't do much for me. It looks faked. Sorry.
Yes, it does look faked. But so what? I think it's a great idea, quite original, and very well executed.
g. Gary Stark Nikon, Canon, Bronica .... stuff The people who want English to be the official language of the United States are uncomfortable with their leaders being fluent in it - US Pres. Bartlet
-

gstark
- Site Admin
-
- Posts: 22924
- Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 11:41 pm
- Location: Bondi, NSW
by ATJ on Mon Dec 14, 2009 2:54 pm
gstark wrote:ATJ wrote:The second one doesn't do much for me. It looks faked. Sorry.
Yes, it does look faked. But so what? I think it's a great idea, quite original, and very well executed.
I thought the purpose of "Image Reviews and Critiques" was for people post their opinions. That's what I was doing. It looks faked to me and I don't like it. Get over it.
-

ATJ
- Senior Member
-
- Posts: 3982
- Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 10:44 am
- Location: Blue Mountains, NSW
-
by biggerry on Mon Dec 14, 2009 2:58 pm
That second image takes you to another place suren, well done. I also liek the last one, its neat how it could either be a wall looking up or a roof looking horizontal - that there are some leading lines...
-

biggerry
- Senior Member
-
- Posts: 5930
- Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 12:40 am
- Location: Under the flight path, Newtown, Sydney
-
by gstark on Mon Dec 14, 2009 3:06 pm
ATJ wrote: It looks faked to me and I don't like it.
Andrew, please. No need to get snippy. You don't like it, and that is fine. I have no problem with that. My "So what" comment was not directed at you, but more towards the fact that you had stated that the image was faked, but that it bothered me not that it was. I do like it, and I expect that my opinion carries, no more, and no less, weight, as an opinion, than yours. As you know, I welcome diverse opinions on the images posted here, but not comments like "Get over it". I think that was uncalled for.
g. Gary Stark Nikon, Canon, Bronica .... stuff The people who want English to be the official language of the United States are uncomfortable with their leaders being fluent in it - US Pres. Bartlet
-

gstark
- Site Admin
-
- Posts: 22924
- Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 11:41 pm
- Location: Bondi, NSW
by Wink on Mon Dec 14, 2009 3:47 pm
I like the first because the perspective makes the bridge as opera house look tiny compared to the ship.
I'm not feeling the planes shadow on number two. I would've tried cloning one of the tents into the empty space.
-

Wink
- Senior Member
-
- Posts: 911
- Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 4:23 pm
- Location: Seymour, VIC
-
by surenj on Tue Dec 15, 2009 1:32 pm
Greg B wrote:I like them all, #1 moderately, #3 more so, and #2 is a beauty. The added shadow works really well and the result is a fantastic image. Well done.
Thanks Greg. Matt. K wrote:#2 is beautiful in a strange sort of way. It would make a great CD cover.
Now you've got me thinking..... ATJ wrote:The third one is of fibreglass
Mr Darcy wrote:If you want some, I dug some up in the back yard the other day
Ahem, I was kidding. I didn't know what it was, but I knew it wouldn't be fibreglass. Thanks for the offer Greg, I will come with a shovel next time I visit the blue mountains. ATJ wrote:Suren, I think the first one would be better if it was a bit lighter. It looks under exposed to me.
Will have a play Andrew, Thanks. Willy wombat wrote:#2 is gorgeous
Thanks Willy. biggerry wrote:That second image takes you to another place suren, well done.
Thanks Gerry. Wink wrote:I like the first because the perspective makes the bridge as opera house look tiny compared to the ship.
That was the idea wink. that ship is so HUGE!! And Also, thanks for the negative feedback on the #2. I like to push the envelope as much as I can. Otherwise we will never find out what we can do. Sorry for causing a little controversy!
-

surenj
- Senior Member
-
- Posts: 7197
- Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 8:21 pm
- Location: Artarmon NSW
by photomarcs on Tue Dec 15, 2009 3:50 pm
gstark wrote:I do like it, and I expect that my opinion carries, no more, and no less, weight, as an opinion, than yours. As you know, I welcome diverse opinions on the images posted here, but not comments like "Get over it". I think that was uncalled for.
and this is why i join dslrusers. Amen.
-

photomarcs
- Member
-
- Posts: 417
- Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 10:47 pm
- Location: Liverpool, Sydney Australia
-
by photomarcs on Tue Dec 15, 2009 4:01 pm
ATJ wrote:Suren, I think the first one would be better if it was a bit lighter. It looks under exposed to me.
Agreed, it does look slightly underexposed, but i like the composition. By underexpose, i believe what i mean to say is that the bottom left of the image where the cruiseliner is docked, the shadow area there has no detail, that is pretty much my only criticism. also, in image #2 : how did you implant this ? just brush and opacity on a new layer? heres something for you to try, find an image where you've got a plane in similar perspective, using the pen in photoshop, draw around the plane to make the selection, lightly feather ( 5px depending on original size). cut and paste on you're empty space. Using Hue/Saturation pull the lightness right down till its black, confirm then enter again into hue/saturation and lighten. Once you've done that, go to Filters>blur>gaussian blur and try to make it more shadow like than just a straight edge. and reduce opacity to your liking. Maybe change blending mode to darken or overlay, not sure how it would turn out on this step. Just a suggestion, but thats how I would have done it.. not to say what i'm doing is the only way to do it, but its ONLY a suggestion. still i like the way you've done yours, great job 
-

photomarcs
- Member
-
- Posts: 417
- Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 10:47 pm
- Location: Liverpool, Sydney Australia
-
by gstark on Tue Dec 15, 2009 5:05 pm
surenj wrote:Sorry for causing a little controversy!
Don't apologise for that. Controversy is a good thing. It leads to open and active and forthright discussions. And those discussions will hopefully lead to us all making better images.
g. Gary Stark Nikon, Canon, Bronica .... stuff The people who want English to be the official language of the United States are uncomfortable with their leaders being fluent in it - US Pres. Bartlet
-

gstark
- Site Admin
-
- Posts: 22924
- Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 11:41 pm
- Location: Bondi, NSW
by surenj on Thu Dec 17, 2009 11:53 pm
photomarcs wrote:Agreed, it does look slightly underexposed, but i like the composition.
Thanks Marc. I have taken everyone's comments on board and adjusted the image somewhat. My camera doesn't allow too much shadow recovery without the noise monster rearing it's head but.... I have pulled a "wendell" on the blue skies....  photomarcs wrote:also, in image #2 : how did you implant this ? just brush and opacity on a new layer?
Thanks for your tips Marc. I imported a silhoutte of a plane from a free stock site. Then blurred with gaussian. Blended with some mode ?can't remember. added noise and reduced opacity. Me thinks that we should collaborate on various photochop challenges.... I am sure there is much to learn. gstark wrote:And those discussions will hopefully lead to us all making better images.
Amen to that. Thanks for your interest in these images.
-

surenj
- Senior Member
-
- Posts: 7197
- Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 8:21 pm
- Location: Artarmon NSW
by zafra52 on Fri Dec 18, 2009 10:10 am
2 is the best. 3 is very good, but the colours are not as vibrant as they could be, at least on my computer screen. Possibly the result of the polariser filter and a low ISO?
-

zafra52
- Senior Member
-
- Posts: 4855
- Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 10:22 pm
- Location: Brisbane
by surenj on Sat Dec 19, 2009 8:07 pm
zafra52 wrote:2 is the best. 3 is very good, but the colours are not as vibrant as they could be, at least on my computer screen. Possibly the result of the polariser filter and a low ISO?
Thanks Zafra. I didn't use a polariser. The dark colour is due to the processing. I also selectively increased the contrast of the fibreglass to make the fibres stand out.
-

surenj
- Senior Member
-
- Posts: 7197
- Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 8:21 pm
- Location: Artarmon NSW
Return to Image Reviews and Critiques
|