Hey everyone,

I have really learned a lot when I get feedback on my shots, so would appreciate scoring / critique of the attached.

Dave

Ok….here we go…:~)

Composition/use of frame space = 3
While you have a nice diagonal, you have not leveraged the trees well enough to justify them being in there. It has a tilted about 3 degrees clockwise kind of feel to it as well.

Colors/White Balance = 5
Not bad at all, good base colors to work in with PP….(see PP notes for rest)

Exposure = 4.5
Good exposure, the water is not washed out in the highlights, the depth of the shot has nice exposure support…detail rendered nicely throughout.

Creative use of Aperture/Shutter = 3
You only have 2 choices here and you took the most common one…which is make everything sharp..not a no-no…but definitely not rated as creative. One way to really get some creativity here in this arena would be to have a foreground tree trunk be a bit out of focus…..not totally sure but might be something to experiment with.

Perspective = 4
Good use of depth and perspective on this….has a solid 3D feel of the 2D plane.

Creativity = 3.5
A bit above average to me….but nothing destined for limited print status. I just think there is more to capture of this area and you might have missed some real potential.

Emotion = 4
While the creativity is not mind numbing to me….I really like the serenity of the shot and find it VERY aesthetically pleasing. Would LOVE to be there taking in the scenery.

Forethought/Visualization = 2
Here is where I think the hardest part of this picture lies with me. Even if you went down to the bank and used that rock between those two trees as an anchor point you could have come home with a shot with MUCH more wow factor. Sometimes you can’t see what was missed…but in this shot…I can already see 3 or 4 non exploited potential great shots…you REALLY have to walk your subject to get a feel for it before you even unpack your camera.

Post processing = 4.5
Pretty good, but could be better…I like the 3Dness and micro-contrast….the colors are pretty good…could use a touch of tightening in CYMK and LAB…but pretty darned nice. Easily tightened up.

Roman,

Thanks for your insight. Your comments really help me know what to concentrate on. The scoring categories are also helpful.

It looks like my next step on this shot is to drive 1200 miles back to Yellowstone and find a different composition!

Thanks again.
Dave

LOL..best start driving now....you'll mis the best light!!!



Of course....you can continue to use the advice on new pieces...even closer to home.;)

Roman

Hey Daveman,

Thanks for sharing your photograph. I am trying to figure out if the new criteria that we are using makes things more anxiety provoking for people or if they like the fact that there are some real criteria with which to judge the photos with.

I know that Roman rated it already, but I figure the more the merrier. I am going to rate it as following:

Composition/use of frame space = 2.5 - 3
I think that the composition has a lot of potential. My only gripe is that there is a lot of clutter in the center of the photograph that distracts the eye. For example the branches in the top corner and center of the frame. Otherwise, the photo has a nice 'flow' and the eyes follow well to the bottom right of the photograph.

Colors/White Balance = 4
The photograph seems rich, and the colors seem natural.

Exposure = 5
The exposure seems well captrured throughout - shadows and highlights all seem in order.

Creative use of Aperture/Shutter = 3
The aperture looks narrow - everything is in focus. It is pretty standard for a shot like this.

Perspective = 3 - 4
As I was mentioning earlier, the image flows well. It has a sense of size to it that is captured on the paper. Well done.

Creativity = 3
The image is definitly not a 'common' shot of a common stream. It is a bit different - though it does not capture my imagination.

Emotion = 3
I think that this show would speak much more to me if it jumped out more. Because of all of the clutter, I find it hard for the photo to grab me in the ways that Roman mentioned.

Forethought/Visualization = 2
I agree with Roman here. The problem with this image is that it lacks the 'wow' factor. It is a nice photograph, but I think you wind up losing the forest (or in this case, the stream) for all of the trees.

Post processing = 4
A very nice, solid job keeping all of the highlights and shadow tones in line. Well done.

I hear what you are talking about in terms of the desire to drive right back and re-take the photo, LOL. I feel that every time I am done on a trip.

James

James,

Thanks for scoring and insight. I personally gain a lot from comments like yours and Roman's. I look at the comments and the photo and can understand your perspectives. Funny - I never noticed the clutter until you mentioned it. I am going to try to clone some of that away.

This shot was my first attempt at some of the techniques from the first couple of chapters of the Margulis books, so it was helpful to hear comments that I attribute to those techniques.

I would say knowing the photo will be viewed with this new criteria is a plus for me. It certainly made me nervous about posting, but I figured I would get over it. In this case I knew the shot was not "stunning", so I wanted to know what I might have done to make it "stunning". You both answered that in a way that probably would not have happened without the criteria.

Thanks again for your suggestions.

Dave