What is wrong with this shot? [M8]

[Jim Radcliffe]

So, out of the blue he asks... What is wrong with this shot?

It's often interesting to actually ask what is wrong with a photo rather than just posting it and waiting for the attaboys, great shot, good eye, comments.

People seem to feel more inclined to respond with a negative when that is what was asked for. I don't pretend to know it all. I just know what I like and in the case of this photo I found the finished photo to be very appealing to me but.....

Over the last couple of days I've had mixed reviews of this shot. Some could not say what it was they did not like.. they just did not like it. Others simply indicated that they did not like the vignetting or post work. A few just hated the subject matter. So, my question to you guys is what is wrong with it? Understanding how others look at something that I find appealing gives insight into how others see what I see.. and that can be a valuable lesson.

This was taken with the M8 and the 28mm Elmarit with post in CS3.

 

[carstenw]

I'll bite

I like the shot. If I would have anything changed, then I would probably reduce the vignetting a tiny amount, and also reduce the HDR treatment just a touch. Other than that, I don't see anything to complain about, other than the slight possibility that it needs to be rotated very slightly, but I am not sure about that. It just has a slightly leaning feel to it, possibly because of the building itself, possible the angle of the road on the left.

 

[stevem8]

Hey Jim,

I like the shot and commented over at the other forum. I find that many people HATE vignetting, and some are not fond of PP. I use quite a bit of vignetting in my images and I get an e-mail here and there asking why I do this, or "why don't you use a P&S if you are going to PP".

Some just shoot and export without touching the files. I have the same thoughts as you, that an image you shoot and like SHOULD be enhanced with color, contrast, levels, or even vignetting if it enhances the subject. I feel your PP is terrific here and it enhances the mood as well as makes it way more enjoyable to look at. I can guess that the original looks much different and not as exciting.

I can not find anything in the shot that I do not like. But, no way to please everyone as we all have different tastes with processing.

 

[Chris_R]

Jim,

I really like the colors contrasting to the less than bright sky an the overall dinginess of the building. The only thing I would change is to rotate the image to straiten the base of the building, I like the vignetting. You should pay no attention to my thoughts on the subject matter because I love tacos.

Looking at your site, you have a great eye. I respect your work a lot.

Cheers
Chris

 

[TRSmith]

I'm a strong adherent to the "If it feels good, do it" philosophy. I think it's important to fortify your intuition by following your own sense of what's good. in other words, trust yourself. It's unlikely that everyone will respond positively, but it's your decision how important that is to you.

With that as a disclaimer, I do find the heavy processing bothersome. There's definitely a shot in there, but to me, the heavy, saturated, grainy look wears off quickly and becomes more prominent than the content. After a short time to assimilate what's going on in the image, all I can see is the processing. But hey, it's your shot (see first paragraph).

 

[Seascape]

I think it is an interesting shot, I would probably tighten up the composition with cropping the cars (both left and right) out of the shot. Take some off the foreground if you want to keep the same aspect ratio.

I see a lot of "actioned" images on the internet these days, and while they are obviously popular, I tend to prefer straight images (I suspect they may stand the test of time better IMO).

Your choice on the PP, I would like it better with less actions.

 

[fotografz]

I'll bite also. I usually don't say anything unless I really like a shot.

I initially liked the shot, it has presence. Part of it, is that I like subjects like this. Part of it is that we're conditioned to heightened pictorial sensationalism.

However, the initial "hit' wears off quick and there's nothing else to sustain it. No story. No humor. No humanity. No drama, except what was superficially added.

I have to admit that I'd probably shoot this myself if I came across it because the light is cool ... but it'd probably never make it to print.

If there was a Chihuahua staring up into the window, then maybe.

Better yet a tattooed gang member walking the Chihuahua.

No wait, if it was a dog being taken into a restaurant, then it'd be better if it was a Vietnamese restaurant.

-Marc

 

[nei1]

I think its become a digital thing to over process a shot to make up for boring images,it seems to an uneducated observer,like myself, that an ability to post process has become the art to some,it seems that some have forgotton that photography deals with reality.
Id also like to say that this thread is so obviously a "red flag to a bull"that it makes me laugh.

 

[docmoore]

Jim,

I am glad to see that after our conversation you have invested a bit more of yourself on this site. I hope that we in the end reward that effort on your part.

Concerning your post: I think that the comments will split along the lines of "reality" and freedom to express your vision with post processing.

I do wish that we had the benefit of driving all of those who respond down Harry Hines ... on Friday night and early Sunday morning so that they could perceive just what it represents.

Personal reflection: maybe a bit over the top with regards to neon color...it works so well with the carnival or the renaissance fair but here it may marginalize the grittiness that is truly Taco Stand on Harry Hines. Marc - HH is more pitbull on heavy chain than Chihuahua...most of them will not pay the bus fare to come down this far.

Personally I like the picture but wonder if you distress it a bit more whether it would meet a more universal acclaim.

Glad to see you here...keep posting. Your eye for whimsey and color is a wonderful addition to the forum.

Bob

 

[Jim Radcliffe]

I think its become a digital thing to over process a shot to make up for boring images,it seems to an uneducated observer,like myself, that an ability to post process has become the art to some,it seems that some have forgotton that photography deals with reality.
Id also like to say that this thread is so obviously a "red flag to a bull"that it makes me laugh.

I think it best to sometimes take at face value the explanation offered.

As someone who spent many hours in a wet darkroom with various contrast papers, pushing teperatures, film and chemicals, cross processing and dodging and burning.. these chemical tricks have their digital coutnerparts and they have always been part of the art form.. unless you just sent your film to the drug store for processing.

I am interested in why some might not like this particular photo. The purist are easy to understand... whatever comes out of the camera is "it".. a philosphy I do not agree with but I can respect.

To me, this photo was not boring. It is a slice of current day Americana in Texas.. but to others who may believe people must be present or some interaction must be going on for an image to be "valid", it's just a matter of personal taste.

I like shooting old decaying buildings, others like blue sky landscapes. I might find the blue sky landscape to be boring but I have a high enough IQ to realize that those landscapes are pleasing to many.

No, my question was and is legit. So far there have been the following:

Too much vignetting
Too much post processing
Building is not level
Crop is not close enough to exclude cars

It's interesting to examine what we feel is good and then to hear what others feel is wrong with what we are happy with.

 

[jonoslack]

Well, I couldn't answer until I'd had an artistic lead in from Mark and Neil . . . .

Actually, I think that you both have good points.

Still, first of all I should welcome Jim - great to have you hear, please do hang around.

Marc. whilst I understand you . . . I think your Chihuahua is a pretty poor substitute for Irakly's alligator . . . (one of my formative photographic moments was having Irakly point out that picture I was proud of needed an alligator in the top left hand corner).

I also agree with Seascape about cropping the cars. . . .

Surely the point of the picture is the visual impact . . and it does have impact (surely we can all agree). It isn't boring, and it isn't unattractive, and it has a bit of the down and out to give it a feeling of weight. There's plenty of human impact . . perhaps adding an actual human (or a Chihuahua) would simply transfer the impact and change it into something quite other. (my picture really DID need an alligator).

Neil - post processing surely is wonderful . . . as long as it isn't just an end in itself (and I don't think it is here). As for being a red rag to a bull, Jim's an intelligent guy, he thought he'd like to join in here, and surely this is a good way to do it?

I actually like the picture (apart from agreeing with Seascape about the cropping). I'm not sure that it has a great deal to say . . beyond the aesthetic. . but perhaps that's a good thing?

 

[Jim Radcliffe]

Jim,

Concerning your post: I think that the comments will split along the lines of "reality" and freedom to express your vision with post processing.

Personal reflection: maybe a bit over the top with regards to neon color...it works so well with the carnival or the renaissance fair but here it may marginalize the grittiness that is truly Taco Stand on Harry Hines. Marc - HH is more pitbull on heavy chain than Chihuahua...most of them will not pay the bus fare to come down this far.

Personally I like the picture but wonder if you distress it a bit more whether it would meet a more universal acclaim.

Glad to see you here...keep posting. Your eye for whimsey and color is a wonderful addition to the forum.

Bob

Bob,

I enjoyed meeting you Saturday. It was a pleasure to run into another serious hobbyist in Grapevine.

I agree that most of the comments will fall as you have suggested but if I get one that is unexpeceted and relevent, it will have been worth it.

I'm sure we can both imagine how boring photography would be if we all saw, shot and post processed the same way.

Thanks for the welcome.

 

[helenhill]

I actually LIKE the Overall Composition Very Much....
The Mood, The Mania...

if it was Mine (and it could be if I was there)
I would have just Tweaked the Saturation DOWN abit
more of a Watercolor style than Pop Art

Coool Jim ...Best-H

 

[nei1]

With photography there comes a certain responsability to the viewer,a debt to reality.If one wishes to "interpret"(for want of a better word)to the nth degree maybe one should stop being lazy and learn to paint.

 

[jonoslack]

With photography there comes a certain responsability to the viewer,a debt to reality.If one wishes to "interpret"(for want of a better word)to the nth degree maybe one should stop being lazy and learn to paint.

If a photograph is only worth a thousand words . . . maybe one should just say the words?

But you're wrong - there's an immediacy which is available to the photographer which is a luxury the painter simply doesn't have . . . look at HCB's photos . . . then look at his drawings . . .

 

[Jim Radcliffe]

Jono...

Still, first of all I should welcome Jim - great to have you hear, please do hang around.

I actually like the picture (apart from agreeing with Seascape about the cropping). I'm not sure that it has a great deal to say . . beyond the aesthetic. . but perhaps that's a good thing?

Jono, you have been missed in that other forum... and thanks for the welcome. I actually joined back in March I believe but just have not posted. I have been reading a bit. I see that Tim, Terry and a few others are here It's good to be in such good company.

And once again.. great job with the M9 photos you have taken.

As for Irakly.. well, I still can't figure out most of his stuff.... but I respect it... Aligators, nudes or whatever.

 

[nei1]

If a photograph is only worth a thousand words . . . maybe one should just say the words?

But you're wrong - there's an immediacy which is available to the photographer which is a luxury the painter simply doesn't have . . . look at HCB's photos . . . then look at his drawings . . .

Bresson was neither lazy nor inept Jono.

 

[fotografz]

With photography there comes a certain responsability to the viewer,a debt to reality.If one wishes to "interpret"(for want of a better word)to the nth degree maybe one should stop being lazy and learn to paint.

Painting it too damed hard ... and it's really messy.

 

[jonoslack]

Bresson was neither lazy nor inept Jono.

Touche (I stand guilty as accused). . . but his 'debt to reality' was given with his photography, not his drawings. I think that every form of art must have some kind of debt to reality. Actually, it's in interesting obsession of mine, although I'm mostly trying to portray the reality people didn't notice rather than the one they hadn't understood.

Still, having accepted that I'm lazy and inept, at least I'm not excluded by an obsession over the process.

 

[docmoore]

I also agree with Seascape about cropping the cars. . . .

I don't know Jono...messing with a Texan's car is fairly dangerous stuff -
I would refer you to Lyle Lovett's Don't Touch My Hat. Similar stuff!

Besides it is a DRIVE THROUGH...no walking involved. We may not ride horses in the city but drive through is very Dallas. The only carbon footprints here are related to burnt end ribs (with or w/o jalopeno) ....also highly recommended.:ROTFL:

I always like seeing the vision that others project in their pictures...helps my myopic view of the world.

Bob