Image |
Comment |
| 04/06/2009 10:17:48 PM |
|
Photographer found comment helpful. |
| 04/06/2009 12:43:11 AM |
Passing throughby optixComment by spiritualspatula: Hello, I’m from the Critique Club;
In regards to the challenge, as other users have noted, IMHO this would not be considered abstract or motion. When I think of depicting motion, the first thing I think of is blur. There are other ways to depict motion, such as freezing action but still including reference points in the photo to give the viewer a sense of the motion. The background of this photo doesn’t give me a good reference point for any movement, because it is far off and there is no scale given. As far as the abstract part goes, I think that is one of the most difficult concepts to pin down when you’re considering what you’re going to photograph and how. Many people have hugely varying opinions on this, and if you ever feel the need to further confuse yourself on the topic, you can find numerous threads in the forum in regard to “what does abstract mean?” It seems to me that a good starting point is to make things a bit more difficult to identify. Some require it be unidentifiable, others enjoy photos that are simply difficult to discern, but I would say few if any think abstract refers to perfect focus and exposure on the subject. An alternative way to photograph this scene would be to increase the exposure time and pan with the subject to more effectively blur and streak the background. Also, if possible, some camera movements might be welcomed to help blur the gull itself.
If this photo were entered a challenge more fitting of it, I think it could have scored significantly higher. You did a great job on the focus. The definition on the feathers is very good. Colors seem well saturated. You left space in front of the gull to help give some sense of the motion. I might’ve considered stretching it out a bit more and giving some additional room in front of the gull, but that might just be me. Some additional isolation from the background might be nice, especially that fellow standing there. Being located right at the head of the bird and wearing strongly contrasting clothes makes him rather distracting for a background element.
Mostly, I think this was just a case of not quite meshing with what voters came into the challenge expecting.
-Derek
|
| 03/31/2009 08:43:54 PM |
|
| 03/30/2009 10:43:07 PM |
Passing throughby optixComment by vawendy: I've been using the definition: "Of, relating to, or being a style of art in which natural objects are not represented realistically." With this in mind, it really doesn't fit abstract, IMO. |
Photographer found comment helpful. |
| 03/30/2009 07:57:16 PM |
|
Photographer found comment helpful. |
| 03/30/2009 09:11:06 AM |
|
Photographer found comment helpful. |
| 03/29/2009 01:58:16 PM |
|
Photographer found comment helpful. |
| 03/28/2009 07:09:04 PM |
Passing throughby optixComment by Teafran: This is great and it tracks very well, but it's not abstract. Great action shot of a Herring Gull though - nicely done. |
Photographer found comment helpful. |
| 03/28/2009 10:32:39 AM |
|
Photographer found comment helpful. |
| 03/27/2009 11:03:09 PM |
|
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: 04/04/2025 07:08:56 AM EDT.