This should be fun. I dont want positive feedback, I want to know whats "wrong" with this photo. Be as savage as you want I have thicker skin than most.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
Negative comments only....
- Thread starter Wes Peterson
- Start date
If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).
The eye is not in focus
tomfranic
Active member
All good 4 me. I would like to see a little bit less vignetted version.
You cut off the feet!!?? Did you get the catch as he yanked his head out from the water? <-- That is the money shot.
JP Onstwedder
Well-known member
Can’t see the eye, and you’ve left out the colour . Whisper it but it’s a really nice capture!
. Whisper it but it’s a really nice capture!
David Berry
🇦🇺 Australia 🦘
I cannot figure out the connection between the water droplets in the air and their stripy reflections – if that's what they are – in the water.
When you are that low reflection on the imperfect surface of the water become very distorted. None of it is "photoshoped"
I have a ton of those shots but the water drops are usually gone by the time they pull the crayfish out.
The one small drop along the right edge (about even with its tail) is distracting..................as is the bright whitish half circle along the bottom right edge.
The one thing I really dislike about this photo is the fact I didn't capture it.
I'd probably crop or clone out that bright blob down in the lower right of the image as it doesn't add anything and pulled my eyes down there.
Yeah I wanted to crop that out but it would take away too much of the vertical reflections that I feel kinda make it special to me. Cloning isnt really an option if its going to be in contests.
Fair enough. Have you already burned it down a stop or two, most contests are fine with dodging and burning.
Yeah it was closer to the splashes in brightness, sometimes you just gotta take what nature gives ya lol
jfredrick
Well-known member
The bottom right "blob" can be cleaned up in photoshop with work and the PS smudge tool to pull down reflections. Strong water highlights can also be darkened with luminosity masking and processing. Special shots may warrant work with digital tools but most of the time I will can a shot if it needs a lot of post work and strays away from the original scene.
arbitrage
Well-known member
The stripy reflections are too distracting....send this one to the bin and try again or PS them out.
The stuff in the bottom right corner needs to be gone...clone or crop.
The stuff in the bottom right corner needs to be gone...clone or crop.
raptor photo
Well-known member
Not a fan of circles in the water (dust?) but doesn't really matter that much, can't see the eye. Hate the vignette.
Robert S
Well-known member
It's crap. The colors don't work. Have you considered doing brass rubbings as a hobby?
My best negative comments .....
Work sucks. My landlord sucks! Walmart sucks! The world sucks! My beer got warm, it sucks! The sun won't rise tomorrow. I see more of your bird's arse than its face.
Work sucks. My landlord sucks! Walmart sucks! The world sucks! My beer got warm, it sucks! The sun won't rise tomorrow. I see more of your bird's arse than its face.
On a serious note - it is a very pleasing image but I do think the eye - or lack thereof - would / could / should be important. The eye is where the focus should go in the image. If not for the no-show eye, I would score it high in a competition. And I am with Jeff. Wish it was mine!
Having an eye visible in the photo doesnt trump the story being told in the photo. Plenty of wildlife contests are full of photos with no eyes visible. I respect your opinion but personally i think needing to see a sharp eye is a set of creative handcuffs you shouldnt put yourself in.
Why ask for NEGATIVE comments in the first place?
Where you unsure of this photo? - then there is no reason to defend your thought process so vehemently
Where you 100% happy with it? then there is even less reason for asking for NEGATIVE comments
There must be a reason why you asked specifically for negative comments. Who does that!
You asked for other people's opinions - There is a saying - Careful what you wish for.
Don't judge me as donning a pair of creative handcuffs because you don't agree with me.
You don't have to respect it or like my comments. I don't really mind or care - it is your photo.
You can print it upside down if you like.
I really like your photo, for lots of other reasons.
I want valid negative comments because hearing "nice photo" has zero benefit to me. I want to know what I "missed". I didnt defend anything "vehemently" I was simply trying to point out that a baseline criteria such as needing to see the eye could be limiting. You seem to think Im upset or something at your initial comment which isnt true. I only replied because I genuinely think in this case NOT seeing the eye is perfectly acceptable since the birds head is partially submerged.Why ask for NEGATIVE comments in the first place?
Where you unsure of this photo? - then there is no reason to defend your thought process so vehemently
Where you 100% happy with it? then there is even less reason for asking for NEGATIVE comments
There must be a reason why you asked specifically for negative comments. Who does that!
You asked for other people's opinions - There is a saying - Careful what you wish for.
Don't judge me as donning a pair of creative handcuffs because you don't agree with me.
You don't have to respect it or like my comments. I don't really mind or care - it is your photo.
You can print it upside down if you like.
I really like your photo, for lots of other reasons.
It's your photo. You can decide what you find acceptable in the photo. But you can't decide what's valid and what's not, as this is subjective.
I have no issue with your creativity - but you have to understand that if you invite comments - negative ones at that - that for me a valid comment may mean something different to what it means to you. You want to know what you missed - I tell you what I think you missed and you decide it's not valid and I might have limiting thoughts. That's not how it works
I think you already have your own opinion on the photo. And in the end - that is really all that counts. You don't need anyone else to tell you what you missed. I think you are good enough to know what you want.
I have no issue with your creativity - but you have to understand that if you invite comments - negative ones at that - that for me a valid comment may mean something different to what it means to you. You want to know what you missed - I tell you what I think you missed and you decide it's not valid and I might have limiting thoughts. That's not how it works
I think you already have your own opinion on the photo. And in the end - that is really all that counts. You don't need anyone else to tell you what you missed. I think you are good enough to know what you want.
Robert S
Well-known member
I am still of the opinion that the photograph is crap. It does not do anything for me. Other people may well find something in the photograph that does something for them. I have no problem with that. Elsa says: "But you can't decide what's valid and what's not, as this is subjective." I agree with that. One of my favorite photographers is Eugene Smith. Some of his photographs have a profound effect on me. That does not entail that I think his series 'From the Loft' is worth the time looking at. I think it's crap.
I watch 'Fake or Fortune' [the tv show]. It is entertaining but imo grounded on a premise that is bs.
Wes posted: "I want valid negative comments because hearing "nice photo" has zero benefit to me. I want to know what I "missed"." Seems reasonable at first glance but then who decides the validity of negative comments? Also, what is missed is subjective so defies explanation.
Are there valid comments? Arguments that are deductive can be valid but only if the premises are accepted as true. Then again there are lots of logics. Is a logic discovered or invented?
Who gives a flying sexual connection. And so it goes on and on and on.
You asked for comments on the photograph Wes. My comment is it is crap.
I watch 'Fake or Fortune' [the tv show]. It is entertaining but imo grounded on a premise that is bs.
Wes posted: "I want valid negative comments because hearing "nice photo" has zero benefit to me. I want to know what I "missed"." Seems reasonable at first glance but then who decides the validity of negative comments? Also, what is missed is subjective so defies explanation.
Are there valid comments? Arguments that are deductive can be valid but only if the premises are accepted as true. Then again there are lots of logics. Is a logic discovered or invented?
Who gives a flying sexual connection. And so it goes on and on and on.
You asked for comments on the photograph Wes. My comment is it is crap.