[EquityNetworks]

only five photos but you get the idea...I love the dreamy, blurred, low light, painterly look.
I'm thinking of blowing prints such as these to 5 ft by 5 ft, but I just don't know if they're even worthy!

[Sinnick]

Originally Posted by EquityNetworks

only five photos but you get the idea...I love the dreamy, blurred, low light, painterly look.
I'm thinking of blowing prints such as these to 5 ft by 5 ft, but I just don't know if they're even worthy!

I'm not sure if you'll be able to blow them up to 5'x5' without a serious loss in quality images would need to be 18,000 px x 18,000 px (324 megapixels) or shot with a large format camera (if source is film) like a view camera to be blown up that big without the distraction of pixels/film grain . also, their aspect ration isn't 1 to 1, so you'd end up clipping some of the image or skewing it to fit.

since you're basically asking for a critique, here goes:

from left to right;

Photo 1- I have no idea what I'm looking at here...my best guess is that it's a photo of a canal, worked over heavily in photoshop. It's asymmetrical, but the asymmetry doesn't seem to serve any purpose (aesthetically or otherwise).

Photo 2- it's too symmetrical and your subject is dead center. since it's a tunnel, it draws your eye immediately to the center and keeps it there. Fortunately there's a lot going on in the center to keep the eye occupied and the blur does work well with the texture of the tunnel simulating a sort of smokey texture. I'd suggest, putting the camera almost against 1 side of the tunnel , creating a distinct asymmetry horixzontally, with a symmetry vertically, focusing maybe on on the texture of the tunnel up close, but blurring the subject and the rest of the tunnel. and maybe having the subject do something other than just stand there...maybe lean up against 1 side of the tunnel, etc.

photo 3- overall it's very muddy/dark. again you centered your subject, drawing the eye to the mid section of the photo, but the muddiness means the eye has no real reward for looking there, the blur takes out any definition that would have been interesting and instead, there are some white dots (possibly dead or dust on your lens). I would suggest moving the town towards the bottom more (like almost at the bottom), and focusing either on it, or the falling snow mid-air, also, using a longer exposure time with a smaller aperture which would increase the contrast to get rid of the muddiness (would also help with the focus).

photo 4- looks like it was a group photo/snapshot and the camera was inadvertently shaken.

photo 5- This one has the most potential of all of them. The selective focus, on the water, gives some detail to draw the viewer in. unfortunately there are dead pixels/dust distracting from it, and the blurry tree/greenery in the foreground dominates the scene. a possible suggestion for improvement would be to move the tree to the far right, and have the water fill up most of the left. or, focus on the greenery/ tree and blur the water but zoom out more, to see the silhouette of the tree more.

I'm not sure if you've had your work critiqued before, if not, don't take it personally.

[angrypuppy]

hmm. Not to sound mean, But these look over processed and the effects look like the default photoshop choices, which are not very good. I understand what you are trying to do and the effect you are trying to go for. I just dont think this is the best choice. I would use layers of the original image. Use an effect and then blend them together, then move to the next kayer.This looks like an effect on the single image. You will get better results with 5 or 6 layers vs 1.
I like to use other programs in conjunction with photoshop. Dynamic Photo HDR or PhotoKey 2. Then finish off in PS.

This is an example. I wanted the dark ominous effect. I used 3 pics of the same image. From dark to very light. I blended them and boosted the contrast and then lowered the saturation. Saved the image then duplicated it. Cut out certain areas of the pic and lowered the saturation again, then raised it on the areas i didnt cut. I got exactly what i wanted, but it took more time.

[EquityNetworks]

Wow - of course I forgot about my post from last December(!)

I did my first two art fairs this summer in Chicago and my photos were well received, lots of great feedback. Such a great feeling, for a hobby.

I don't photoshop anything. I've cropped a little on some. These are just photographs that I took. I have no idea how to use photoshop.

Like any art, it's best seen in person, right? Thanks for your feedback.

www.patwil.com

[angrypuppy]

HAHA. I didnt even look to see when it was posted. See how observant i am?! I guess not much action happens here in the camera world section.lol

[asher27]

the orange and blue ones are my favorites - the rest seem underexposed.

you should really learn photoshop, at least to adjust the levels and stuff so your photos have a better balance of light/dark.