So, I got somewhat detailed in my critique and I don’t necessarily expect all of you to see the things I did. For that matter, I have no doubt that I didn’t see all the potential positives and negatives of the photo. We all have different perspectives, and we all have things that draw our eye more so than others. As such, no two critiques are likely to be the same, and no one observation is inherently better than another.


OK, here’s another photo:




Red-orange mycena, Mount Rainier National Park


Photo taken by Vaccinium. f/2.8, 1/8th sec., ISO 100, Color temperature: 6500, Sigma 105 mm macro lens on a Canon 10D camera body, from tripod under tree canopy and shade, optimized sharpness, color, and contrast using Adobe Photoshop CS2


This photo is much simpler than the previous one, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t as many positives and negatives. Just find at least one positive and negative, and post them. less

I suppose I've also never really dealt with a critique that wasn't "black and white" either. In high school when we did critiquing the teacher was more like "this is what's wrong with it and this is what you could have done better" and there wasn't really any artistic wiggle room. Like a photo I took of a Coke bottle that's super blurry but looks a lot like it could be an ad, and I believe that one was graded as a 2/10 lol.

It's refreshing to see such open minded critiquing. less

Sometimes the simplest photos can be the most difficult to critique, because there is so little going on. Many of you found the major issue I have with this photo (although it is easily remedied). Here’s my critique, so you can see whether you saw the same thing I did:




The miniscule depth of field of this photo is every bit as important as the subject matter. The eye-catching, vibrant orange and texture of the mushroom gills draw the eye in and make the eyes focus and scrutinize them. The out of focus mushrooms at the bottom left and top right also add a lot to the photo, as the soft blotches of color add a certain dreaminess to the image. At the same time, the greens break up the image just enough so that it isn’t all orange and brown-black. Focus is very good, although perhaps a slightly different orientation might have brought more mushrooms into focus, and sharpness is spot on. Exposure seems good, as there are no obvious blown out areas, and most of the dark areas still have recognizable features.


The biggest negative is the negative space in the top left corner that is derived from the fact that the line of mushroom heads falls below the 1/3 line of the image (as espoused by the Rule of Thirds). Cropping the image slightly from the top would eliminate some of that negative space and bring the line of mushrooms to the 1/3 level or slightly above. Cropping slightly from the bottom would also eliminate the slightly distracting light object at the bottom left of the image and some of the somewhat negative space at the bottom right.


Did all that make sense? less

I'm terrified of writing critiques on the tumblr site. I don't want to scare away anyone, but I need to give an honest critique at the same time. From the other end, I don't enjoy hearing about aspects of my photography that aren't up to snuff, but there's no other way to improve. less

Sometimes the simplest photos can be the most difficult to critique, because there is so little going on. Many of you found the major issue I have with this photo (although it is easily remedied). Here’s my critique, so you can see whether you saw the same thing I did:




The miniscule depth of field of this photo is every bit as important as the subject matter. The eye-catching, vibrant orange and texture of the mushroom gills draw the eye in and make the eyes focus and scrutinize them. The out of focus mushrooms at the bottom left and top right also add a lot to the photo, as the soft blotches of color add a certain dreaminess to the image. At the same time, the greens break up the image just enough so that it isn’t all orange and brown-black. Focus is very good, although perhaps a slightly different orientation might have brought more mushrooms into focus, and sharpness is spot on. Exposure seems good, as there are no obvious blown out areas, and most of the dark areas still have recognizable features.


The biggest negative is the negative space in the top left corner that is derived from the fact that the line of mushroom heads falls below the 1/3 line of the image (as espoused by the Rule of Thirds). Cropping the image slightly from the top would eliminate some of that negative space and bring the line of mushrooms to the 1/3 level or slightly above. Cropping slightly from the bottom would also eliminate the slightly distracting light object at the bottom left of the image and some of the somewhat negative space at the bottom right.


Did all that make sense? less

Sometimes the simplest photos can be the most difficult to critique, because there is so little going on. Many of you found the major issue I have with this photo (although it is easily remedied). Here’s my critique, so you can see whether you saw the same thing I did:




The miniscule depth of field of this photo is every bit as important as the subject matter. The eye-catching, vibrant orange and texture of the mushroom gills draw the eye in and make the eyes focus and scrutinize them. The out of focus mushrooms at the bottom left and top right also add a lot to the photo, as the soft blotches of color add a certain dreaminess to the image. At the same time, the greens break up the image just enough so that it isn’t all orange and brown-black. Focus is very good, although perhaps a slightly different orientation might have brought more mushrooms into focus, and sharpness is spot on. Exposure seems good, as there are no obvious blown out areas, and most of the dark areas still have recognizable features.


The biggest negative is the negative space in the top left corner that is derived from the fact that the line of mushroom heads falls below the 1/3 line of the image (as espoused by the Rule of Thirds). Cropping the image slightly from the top would eliminate some of that negative space and bring the line of mushrooms to the 1/3 level or slightly above. Cropping slightly from the bottom would also eliminate the slightly distracting light object at the bottom left of the image and some of the somewhat negative space at the bottom right.


Did all that make sense? less

Could be. For future reference, I never use Gaussian blur or any other blur. I like getting it right the first time (or not, but I just don't like artificially blurring my images). jpeg artifacts are definitely a concern.

For those of you who don't know, whenever you convert an image .jpg format, you are compressing your data, and it can lead to "off" looking areas. less

Could be. For future reference, I never use Gaussian blur or any other blur. I like getting it right the first time (or not, but I just don't like artificially blurring my images). jpeg artifacts are definitely a concern.

For those of you who don't know, whenever you convert an image .jpg format, you are compressing your data, and it can lead to "off" looking areas. less

OK, let’s take a little break and ask a trivia question. As always, if you’ve been reading the articles I post on the Eden Clubs and Events Blog, you stand a much, much better chance at winning. Are we ready? less

OK, let’s take a little break and ask a trivia question. As always, if you’ve been reading the articles I post on the Eden Clubs and Events Blog, you stand a much, much better chance at winning. Are we ready? less