| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/29/2010 04:03:25 AM |
I think for starters the best of is going to be the hardest to get a good score, lower scores are going to be handed out more. Technically, overall it looks a little soft and flat to me, did you sharpen it after resizing? I did a very quick and dirty edit ....
 |
|
 Photographer found comment helpful. |
|
|
01/09/2010 09:50:04 AM |
| Not a bad image, and certainly an interesting travelogue item. I see too much dead space, though. Just not enough interest in the water or sky to need that much space. Had I voted this FS, I would have scored it a 5. Free Study scores usually tend to be lower, so this would likely have finished 5.5 to 5.7 in a regular challenge. |
|
| Photographer found comment helpful. |
|
|
01/08/2010 06:43:56 PM |
In response to your thread request, here are my feelings on the image.
I think 5.1 is a little low, but not overly so. If I had looked at this in the challenge I would probably have guessed it would finish in 5.5 - 5.7 area.
The structure to me has no meaning or context, I have no idea if it's sitting right next to the shore or 1 mile out like you describe so it's just a structure on the water and doesn't have much in the way of interest.
The colours like others have said are a little flat and the shot in general is lacking a touch of contrast, not overly so though. This has resulted in the water and the sky not really differentiating from each other.
The cloud formations are quite nice but I don't think you've managed to bring the best out of them, remember, whether you're for or against post processing, if you want to score well in the Free Study you really have to bring things like that out.
Personally, if I had voted, I would probably have given you a 5 based on what I've said above. Hope that helps. |
|
| Photographer found comment helpful. |
|
|
01/08/2010 01:53:38 PM |
hmmmm...in response to your thread....I think your edit is not far off from what I would have done, which is why I don't enter many landscapes. I don't know what to do with them. Looking at Neil and Bear's edits of your original, I personally think they're both better, and bring the image from a 5 to a 6 or 7 for me, mostly because the crop they used is better than what you've done here. The positioning of the house in the frame seems awkward for some reason, maybe too high up in the frame. In the original, it seems less awkward. I think the other thing is the fluorescent pink sky. It's a lovely sky, but the brightness draws my attention away from the house, and makes the house seem kinda drab in contrast.
What you'd do about those things, I haven't a clue. Bear and Neil seem to have it nailed, though. |
|
| Photographer found comment helpful. |
|
|
01/08/2010 01:22:14 PM |
| I agree with Eagle40Fox2, I gave this a 7 and found it to be a nice image. I don't know what could be improved on it, or how to do it. I guess the only thing I don't really like about the image is the black "v" bars on the roof... they contrast a little too much with the sky. Other than that, I do like the image and am surprised it didn't score higher. |
|
| Photographer found comment helpful. |
|
|
01/08/2010 11:16:37 AM |
| when I first initially look at this photo my mind thinks, the colors defeat each other, the contrast is a nudge high, but not too bad, and the comp is pretty good. I think its just the mixing of the colors....everything else is okay. |
|
| Photographer found comment helpful. |
|
|
01/08/2010 11:12:49 AM |
Well despite the final avg vote, I voted a 7 on this image. I thought it to be a very solid subtle shot that didn't need any wham bam color explosion.
:] Good ole FL sky |
|
| Photographer found comment helpful. |
|
|
01/08/2010 06:37:33 AM |
| Colours look un-natural to me. Lack of contrast in the sky may be hurting this image too. Do you have any shots of this at a later time, like 15 minutes or so? Skies would surely look better with some darker blues. But you were rocking in a boat so I guess they're all blurry since you needed to shoot at an even slower speed. lol Did you think about climbing onto the dock itself for a shot? |
|
| Photographer found comment helpful. |
|
|
01/08/2010 06:33:20 AM |
| Technicals aside, I can't connect at all with this. And I love the water, as can be seen from my portfolio. I found the wiki quote you provided very interesting. Had I known what this was, and what it's history meant, I might have connected; but that might not have been good enough to make it a good photo for me, with respect to impact. |
|
| Photographer found comment helpful. |
|
|
01/08/2010 04:56:01 AM |
| Per the thread request--I think the main production issue is that the light is, or seem, flat. Also, might be a matter of interest with the structure. Personally, I'd have gone and shot the lighthouse! |
|
| Photographer found comment helpful. |
|
|
01/08/2010 04:01:57 AM |
Responding to thread request...
I gave it a 6. Thought it was "ok" overall and hovered between the 5 & 6 button on this one.
Couple of things for me that held this back:
1) Aspect ratio and the composition. It seemed like you were trying to tell two stories here; the lighthouse and the water structure. End result was an awkwardly balanced comp. The letterbox border was the right choice, given the comp, but I would have really beefed up the top and bottom black borders by another 30-40 pixels at least to offset the wide presentation.
2) Something about the colors. Looks like a levels adjustment is needed. The colors seem a tad forced and the lighting a little flat.
Those are some quick observations. Hope they're somewhat helpful. |
|
| Photographer found comment helpful. |
|
|
01/08/2010 03:59:32 AM |
| For me, it's not the slightest bit interesting. |
|
| Photographer found comment helpful. |
|
|
01/08/2010 03:52:00 AM |
The first time I ever saw Stiltsville was on Miami Vice while living in L.A. ...now that I am in the state I see it featured in the papers from time to time. To locals this capture would instantly grab our attention - to the larger (inter)national public the picture will have to work harder to capture and captivate attention. Critiquely looking at the photo it is slightly above average but needs some extra 'umph' to put push it into the 7-9 score category. The thing about the sky is that those colors are almost in competition with the hues on the building (certainly true of the pinks) and the blueish hues of the ocean - thus not letting the building truly pop off the page nor having the ground (sea) plane stand out/separate from the sky portion. I have seen spectacular sunrise and sunset colors in the sky down here so I am spoiled in the fact that Mother Nature could have done a better job for you on this day:-) Don't you just wish that you could have Mother Nature on speed dial on your phone to ask her to give you a better backdrop to work with?:-) (I know I wish I did). Some other have said the composition of elements could be better. Perhaps a bit more cropped so that the Stiltsville house dominates (and slighter bigger in view) the far right third of the photo. Keep the lighthouse in the far left of the photo. As you have it now the house looks like it is 'facing' and looking at the lighthouse and shore in the far off distance. Cropping and bringing us closer in how you compose the elements will just make that imagery of the Stiltsville house gazing at the lighthouse in the distance all the more stronger.
Message edited by author 2010-01-08 08:55:12. |
|
| Photographer found comment helpful. |
|
|
01/08/2010 03:21:01 AM |
| It really just doesn't grab me. The building doesnt stand out, the sky colour is nice but the blue clouds detract from it a lot, it's really just an average picture. That being said you have absolutely NOTHING to complain about if 5.1 is your second lowest score. This shot's score is higher than my average vote received. |
|
| Photographer found comment helpful. |
|
|
01/08/2010 03:17:25 AM |
| I have to echo most of what oscarthepig has said. Your subject building isn't aesthetically pleasing to me and leaving aside my strong dislike for this style of border, I'd like to know why you cropped it this shape - more of the sky please. |
|
| Photographer found comment helpful. |
|
|
01/08/2010 03:10:43 AM |
| I think it has something to do with composition, too. The main subject is in a slightly awkward position (rule of thirds would work much better). |
|
| Photographer found comment helpful. |
|
|
01/08/2010 03:06:34 AM |
| Since you asked, I personally think it's just a boring, ho-hum image. The architecture of the building and the fact that it is built on stilts in the water is somewhat intriguing. The almost insignificant--based on its size and position--lighthouse does add a little bit. The sky looks like it wants to be interesting, but it just looks a little odd to me. The aspect ratio looks painfully stretched out along the horizontal, and the border does nothing for me. Add to all that the fact that it's in a Free Study where scoring is harsher (from what I've heard, anyway). I sat and looked at it, trying to find a reason to like it (or buy it since that is what you said your goal is), but I couldn’t. It’s basically just a picture of a building. |
|
| Photographer found comment helpful. |
Comments Made During the Challenge  |
|
|
01/04/2010 11:38:38 AM |
| There is huge possibility here for face slapping colours. However they are not here, and I feel this image is left feeling flat and cold. |
|
| Photographer found comment helpful. |
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/06/2025 04:19:41 AM EDT.
Add photograph to your favorites
Add photographer to your favorites
