Back to the grind stone ! I'll get my coat.
The contrast levels although handled well haven't done the image many favours .
The highs for me are placed incorrectly with the point of interest falling into shadow. Perhaps more light on the 'frond ' would pull my eyeback from the rear stone and RH toe tip area .
Its a well spotted and observed image with great potential . Worth a revisit for me.
an interesting image Chris that perhaps needs to be seen a bit larger to fully appreciate it (it took me a while to spot the fern ). As Mark says, it's a slight shame the light wasn't falling more directly on the fern, but a well 'seen' shot with originality and interest.
If you hadn't mentioned it was on a tripod, I'd have thought it was an accident when you where lifting the camera out of your bag...
What is the point of the image...? For nature, the bracken/fern isn't anywhere near prominent enough. For a still life study, well, if it was a worker in the mill it might have context and work... but it isn't.
For anything like this to work, it either needs to be part of a bigger pictorial story, or you need to forget 'nature' and do a lot more PS work on it with dodging & burning etc if you want it to work as 'art'. Or maybe you needed to wait until the light was 'right' and the slice of light crossed the plant... perhaps at sunrise on the solstice .
Sorry Chris, in case you can't tell... it doesn't do anything for me in any genre.
Thanks for some good solid critique - it is really refreshing that a (small) number of you have been prepared to get stuck in, instead of hiding behind the BS surrounding issues of peoples feelings on this forum. It is ONLY about critique for me, so thanks.
My critique on responses so far:
The image has failed. It has failed because I’ve not managed to get you to understand what it is about, possibly because of a narrow view of what 'nature' and nature photography is and can be. For instance, it interests me greatly that nearly all the comment revolves around the bracken frond.
I hoped the image would say something about mans dominance in nature through his excellence in the ability to consume. It is a statement about how a natural resource was taken, re-worked and then abandoned once it had been exploited. ‘Nature’ for me is not just about the biosphere, it includes man and the other systems which make life on earth possible!
Nick: I couldn't disagree more with your view but you’re entitled to it and I’m happy to receive it – that’s what makes life interesting. I'm glad to see you thought the image worthy of a response; it would be nice to have an opportunity to reciprocate on one of yours from time to time. I’ll try and stick to ‘constructive feedback’ instead of silly comments about accidents while pulling cameras out of bags.
Chris, it wasn't a silly comment - I've made similar shots many times due to the hair-trigger sensitivity on the 1d2's shutter.
Yes, you failed with the shot. You failed to put it into any sort of context for us to relate to. You failed to give us any bounds, or anything in which to hang meaningful critique from. That is why I said that if you used it as part of a bigger story then it may begin to work.
You say...
I hoped the image would say something about mans dominance in nature through his excellence in the ability to consume. It is a statement about how a once important natural resource was taken, re-worked and then abandoned once it had been exploited. ‘Nature’ for me is not just about the biosphere, it includes man the other systems which make life on earth possible!
As a disinterested viewer with no emotional attachment to the image (ie I didn't take it) I still contend that the image lacks any definite kind of focus or clarity. As the image stands how am I meant to read your mind? Is it meant to be an image of boots, of a stone, or of a tiny fledgling plant... you need to lead your viewers, to guide them to the story you want to convey in the image. The link between the boots, grindstone and plant isn't implicit in the shot to me - it might be to you, but then you took it and had an idea in mind when you took it.
As I say Nick, you are entitled to your view, that's what critique is about and I'm fine with that. Just practise what you preach as a Mod and stick to 'constructive critique' not silly, unintelligent comments please.
OK sorry if you took it that way Chris... but it wasn't intended as a silly comment. It was a perfectly valid observation, so you should accept it as such and try and understand why I said that. I have accidentally taken images like that when removing a camera from a bag, and that is what it reminded me of. Sorry if I don't have the ability to see what you as the artist were trying to say in the image - but you'll have to accept that you're not going to get everyone to see what you saw.
I stand by the earlier comments - your associations with the image don't resonate for me as a viewer. If it was part of an article or a body of work, then it might be a different matter as there'd be other clues to help me 'see' the image.
Hi Chris, without reading the above I didnt know what the picture was trying to depict. The feel of the image has something there though with that mysteriousness and darkness. I feel that this could be interesting if taken again in a different way.
Nick
No need for apologies; you are entitled to your point of view - there is no reason why we can't agree to differ over the legitimacy of your ‘camera bag’ comment. I perceived it to set a dismissive tone lacking in constructive critical merit.
Moving on, I do agree with you that the image would function better within a body of work, indeed that’s exactly why it was taken - it may not improve the appeal or technique for some but it will identify purpose and meaning.
As for being an artist, I'm neither tortured-of-soul or starving. Art is for others, I'm just trying new things to challenge myself to become a better photographer. If I get it wrong, then I learn. I accept some togs are happy to stay in their comfort zone, personally however, I’ve seen enough ‘bird-on-a-stick’ shots - yes, I'll keep taking some for stock purposes but I'll also continue pushing my personal boundaries through experimentation.
In the interests of forum harmony (and high comment numbers) perhaps I’ll stick to posting pretty pictures of nature in future.
Well I'll be disappointed if Chris or anyone else decides not to post images in these forums that they feel are interesting, or would like some feedback on. It goes without saying though, that if you do this, you have to have a thick skin. Personally, I was hoping that Chris was going to post the next image in the sequence where the alien's tentacle grabs the human by the dangly bits
Posted by David Taylor on May 19, 2010 at 12:48 PM
I for one applaud you for posting the image. I haven't a clue why you posted it, but that doesn't matter. you did, so that is what counts as far as I'm concerned. It has the ability to stimulate response and that is what your are getting so well done. To me it portrays Nature's ability to fill a niche, and the dominance of the human's legs makes me ask the question ' Is the fern going to be allowed to stay in the hole, or is it going to be removed?' An allegory for our current position as regards to the fragility of the natural environment and our industrialised society?
Good luck from someone who likes to photograph rotting carrots
I came back to this before commenting as it certainly challenged me. I hadn't picked up on the story until I read your commentary. To convey that in a more simple way, I feel there needs to be less conflict in the image. The area between the legs is a problem for me and I wish the fern was a lot more distinctive that it is. I do like the idea now you have explained the intention!
'Junk' its not and that word has no place at all on this or any other forum as its dis-respectful to the persons efforts,back to the image I like the B+W effect, when I look at the image it does make you look around to see whats going on,for that reason it works really well IMO
This is certainly a thought provoking image. The way I see it, it depicts the way that no matter what mankind throws at it nature will somehow always win through. I think that the image could be improved by colouring the fern green to make it stand out. What do you think?
Personally, I get the image. I appreciate the idea of mankind's dominance over every other species on the planet (although I don't like it very much).
Chris, if there was more light falling on the fern, I think the context would be clearer. If the fern was being shaded by the person's shadow I think that would be pretty cool. I'm sure you played about with comp etc.
Discussion
16 replies(Apart from "It looks dark") CRITIQUE very welcome.
Cheers,
Chris
1ds3, 16-35 mm, 1/40 @ f/11, tripod, FF
Looks like a fern coming out of a hole and a pair of boots !
Wonderful capture
Great stuff !
JR
The contrast levels although handled well haven't done the image many favours .
The highs for me are placed incorrectly with the point of interest falling into shadow. Perhaps more light on the 'frond ' would pull my eyeback from the rear stone and RH toe tip area .
Its a well spotted and observed image with great potential . Worth a revisit for me.
Matt
What is the point of the image...? For nature, the bracken/fern isn't anywhere near prominent enough. For a still life study, well, if it was a worker in the mill it might have context and work... but it isn't.
For anything like this to work, it either needs to be part of a bigger pictorial story, or you need to forget 'nature' and do a lot more PS work on it with dodging & burning etc if you want it to work as 'art'. Or maybe you needed to wait until the light was 'right' and the slice of light crossed the plant... perhaps at sunrise on the solstice
Sorry Chris, in case you can't tell... it doesn't do anything for me in any genre.
My critique on responses so far:
The image has failed. It has failed because I’ve not managed to get you to understand what it is about, possibly because of a narrow view of what 'nature' and nature photography is and can be. For instance, it interests me greatly that nearly all the comment revolves around the bracken frond.
I hoped the image would say something about mans dominance in nature through his excellence in the ability to consume. It is a statement about how a natural resource was taken, re-worked and then abandoned once it had been exploited. ‘Nature’ for me is not just about the biosphere, it includes man and the other systems which make life on earth possible!
Nick: I couldn't disagree more with your view but you’re entitled to it and I’m happy to receive it – that’s what makes life interesting. I'm glad to see you thought the image worthy of a response; it would be nice to have an opportunity to reciprocate on one of yours from time to time. I’ll try and stick to ‘constructive feedback’ instead of silly comments about accidents while pulling cameras out of bags.
Cheers,
Chris
Yes, you failed with the shot. You failed to put it into any sort of context for us to relate to. You failed to give us any bounds, or anything in which to hang meaningful critique from. That is why I said that if you used it as part of a bigger story then it may begin to work.
You say...
As a disinterested viewer with no emotional attachment to the image (ie I didn't take it) I still contend that the image lacks any definite kind of focus or clarity. As the image stands how am I meant to read your mind? Is it meant to be an image of boots, of a stone, or of a tiny fledgling plant... you need to lead your viewers, to guide them to the story you want to convey in the image. The link between the boots, grindstone and plant isn't implicit in the shot to me - it might be to you, but then you took it and had an idea in mind when you took it.
Cheers,
Chris
I stand by the earlier comments - your associations with the image don't resonate for me as a viewer. If it was part of an article or a body of work, then it might be a different matter as there'd be other clues to help me 'see' the image.
No need for apologies; you are entitled to your point of view - there is no reason why we can't agree to differ over the legitimacy of your ‘camera bag’ comment. I perceived it to set a dismissive tone lacking in constructive critical merit.
Moving on, I do agree with you that the image would function better within a body of work, indeed that’s exactly why it was taken - it may not improve the appeal or technique for some but it will identify purpose and meaning.
As for being an artist, I'm neither tortured-of-soul or starving.
In the interests of forum harmony (and high comment numbers) perhaps I’ll stick to posting pretty pictures of nature in future.
Cheers,
Chris
PS. Thanks for your comments All.
Good luck from someone who likes to photograph rotting carrots
Chris, if there was more light falling on the fern, I think the context would be clearer. If the fern was being shaded by the person's shadow I think that would be pretty cool. I'm sure you played about with comp etc.
The best bit is the juxtaposition of power.
Cheers,
Chris