NPN has moved to naturephotographers.networkYou’re viewing the read-only archive of the original site (2000–2018). The community is active today, with new critiques and discussions every day.
Posted by Cheryl Surry on September 28, 2010 at 3:18 PM
On the last upload a couple of people mentioned wanting to see a slighty different angle and the possibility of more abstract. So even though I know most people will hate this I'm always open for some critique.
I guess it is a style of image you either love or hate and I tend to refer to them as marmite. Now whilst I dislike marmite I do like a number of these style of images.
Anyway do your worse. I can live with the consequences
Sorry forgot the settings:
ISO 200
1/4s
f/5
Posted by Ian Mason on September 28, 2010 at 3:51 PM
I do like it, both the concept and the execution. My only concern is it appears a bit light or maybe lacking a bit of contrast?
Hi Cheryl.if it were mine I would bin it to be honest
Posted by Cheryl Surry on September 28, 2010 at 3:58 PM
Not going to disagree Ian I thought the same thing, but according to the histogram it is across the full spectrum, so I was worried about darkening it too much for most monitors. Will reprocess later and maybe add an S curve to pick it up a bit.
I really, really like this, great sense of purposeful movement with both front legs surging forward, looks nice a nice sharp eye and good to see a different take on the subject. I'd seek the advice of the likes of Wylie, Astbury or Green regarding your processing however as I think this image could be processed a lot better. Worth noting though that I am looking at this on a rubbish laptop.
I like Marmite... but for me this one isn't quite working, I like the idea but there is nothing to keep my attention within the frame, not easy but I know but it does need a focal point... (Don't always believe the histogram
Posted by Neil Burton on September 28, 2010 at 4:08 PM
I like this kind of shot but only if the face of the animal in question is sharp(ish). Here it is all blur. Can be improved with darkening the midtones a touch.
Posted by Cheryl Surry on September 28, 2010 at 4:08 PM
Also working on a laptop, so probably not the best environment. As not a full member at the moment I can't post a modification, so it will have to stay as is.
I like to play with these from time to time but agree there is a fine line between what works and what doesn't. There were another couple from the same sequence and to be truthful I found it hard to say one was better or worse than the next. Did even try some at 1/2sec, but maybe no one is ready to see those
Posted by Cheryl Surry on September 28, 2010 at 4:17 PM
Just had a quick play with the darkening of the midtones and it does make a massive difference (even on dodgy laptop), so thanks for that I shall definitely look at that when processing any of the other slow shutter speed ones.
Posted by Oscar Dewhurst on September 28, 2010 at 4:37 PM
I like it Cheryl, and would also like to see the ones at 1/2 sec
The front legs being forward really gives movement, along with the motion blur.
Oscar
Posted by Chris O'Reilly on September 28, 2010 at 5:51 PM
Cheryl
The processing nit aside, this isn't as strong as your previous 'blur bear'. I'm a big, big fan of the technique but on this occasion it isn't quite there for me.
Cheers,
Chris
Posted by eric weight on September 29, 2010 at 1:37 AM
To be honest I can't make my mind up, which I guess means that I don't like it enough. What I do like though is the fact that you have not taken the easy option and produced another shot the same as everybody else's which makes you a far more interesting photographer. In my limited experience it is far harder to get a shot like this to work than it is with a standard sharp image but the results can be well worth the effort and when it comes off the image has a whole extra dimension which feeds the imagination. Its a 'very nearly' from me Cheryl. Good to see you posting a few too.
eric
I wouldn't mind seeing the re-work will it not accept it in a reply?
Posted by Cheryl Surry on September 29, 2010 at 3:32 PM
Thanks for all the comments, see I learnt that I am allowed to play with the midtones
To be truthful I spend all day in front of a computer, so unless printing all my images get a standard set of processing. Perhaps this is just a touch lazy on my part and I should sometimes pay a little more attention. So duly noted.
Then again I could have just posted safe images on here, but where would the fun be in that.
Eric, unless I am missing something obvious you can only post another image in the thread if a paying member. I could be wrong on that, but I don't see an option to post an image after the initial upload. I am thinking about joining again - I was a full member back in 2005, but never discovered the forum and found the galleries a little pointless
Discussion
12 repliesI guess it is a style of image you either love or hate and I tend to refer to them as marmite. Now whilst I dislike marmite I do like a number of these style of images.
Anyway do your worse. I can live with the consequences
Sorry forgot the settings:
ISO 200
1/4s
f/5
Thanks
I really, really like this, great sense of purposeful movement with both front legs surging forward, looks nice a nice sharp eye and good to see a different take on the subject. I'd seek the advice of the likes of Wylie, Astbury or Green regarding your processing however as I think this image could be processed a lot better. Worth noting though that I am looking at this on a rubbish laptop.
Andy
I like to play with these from time to time but agree there is a fine line between what works and what doesn't. There were another couple from the same sequence and to be truthful I found it hard to say one was better or worse than the next. Did even try some at 1/2sec, but maybe no one is ready to see those
The front legs being forward really gives movement, along with the motion blur.
Oscar
The processing nit aside, this isn't as strong as your previous 'blur bear'. I'm a big, big fan of the technique but on this occasion it isn't quite there for me.
Cheers,
Chris
eric
I wouldn't mind seeing the re-work will it not accept it in a reply?
To be truthful I spend all day in front of a computer, so unless printing all my images get a standard set of processing. Perhaps this is just a touch lazy on my part and I should sometimes pay a little more attention. So duly noted.
Then again I could have just posted safe images on here, but where would the fun be in that.
Eric, unless I am missing something obvious you can only post another image in the thread if a paying member. I could be wrong on that, but I don't see an option to post an image after the initial upload. I am thinking about joining again - I was a full member back in 2005, but never discovered the forum and found the galleries a little pointless