Lead sky

Critiques

Show newest first		Show most helpful first
Show oldest first		Show least helpful first

		from martijn/Rob (6,882) on February 7, 2004 1:47:55 AM CST (5) Indeed controversional opinions. The technical aspect and the achievement of photographing a leaden sky are met. As image is it not particularly inspiring. Regards, Rob. Reply  Show ratings		Rate this critique Helpful No opinion Unhelpful
		from maxart/Max (79,830) on February 7, 2004 1:08:00 AM CST (6) Controversial opinions on this one Eugenio - It's been mentioned before, it is under exposed, even if you are going for the diffused shape of the sun some pictures are not possible, the overall look is dull and grey, but this can be fixed in post processing. I think the composition would be better if you cropped the bottom where the trees start and just slightly on top, making a wide angle panoramic view would give a better sence of space. Try and see what you think, cheers ;o)-max- Reply  Show ratings		Rate this critique Helpful No opinion Unhelpful
		from jitterbug/Monika (1,528) on February 6, 2004 5:51:59 PM CST (5) This must have been hard to shot, but you did a wonderful job Eugenio.... I love the light and the smooth feeling the snow has... colors are great and composition as well! It gives me a romantic feeling.... grazie! moniKa Reply  Show ratings		Rate this critique Helpful No opinion Unhelpful
		from euzebius/Wiley (7,078) on February 3, 2004 7:52:55 AM CST (6) Hi Eugenio, as refer to your photo title "lead sky" , the composition is fine. But as some critiques from other photographers mentioned, this photo is underexposed. The snowy foreground can't shown any detail. It is surely a underexposed snowscape. Although white subject reflect 36 percent of light, they must be metered as if they were neutral-gray subjects; these reflect approximately 18 percent of light. The meter understands this excessive reflectance to mean that less exposure time is necessary. The result recorded is an under-exposed image. As mentioned by ahriman/Angra, he is right. You should try his method to overcome the problem. Looking forward your result and keep shooting. Reply  Show ratings		Rate this critique Helpful No opinion Unhelpful
		from motiezra/Moti (177) on February 2, 2004 11:19:39 AM CST (5) very good picture. i liked the line at an angle and the croping of it. it is very good exposure that gives meaning for the sun. keep on going!! Reply  Show ratings		Rate this critique Helpful No opinion Unhelpful
		from chungho/Ray (24,827) on February 2, 2004 9:49:47 AM CST (5) Eugenio, I think the composition of this shot is OK, at least I can see the diagonal from left bottom to right top. Actually, this is a potential shot, but the time of taking this shot is wrong, because the light is too hard and too blue. Therefore, try to take this photo earlier that the lighting as warm as possible. If you cannot do it, take the pic in late noon time (sunset period) is much better. Reply  Show ratings		Rate this critique Helpful No opinion Unhelpful
		from ebenammat/Eben (2,396) on January 31, 2004 4:15:32 PM CST (2) One might question the exposure in this shot, but then again perhaps this is what the photgrapher wanted. It's "Lead Sky" after all. But what is the subject of this picture? The whole in the sky? It must be, because everything else isn't interesting. Nothing interesting happens in the sky either. It falls nicely under the infamous description of 1TD. Reply  Show ratings		Rate this critique Helpful No opinion Unhelpful
		from dmax/d (353) on January 31, 2004 1:36:42 PM CST (8) I must say that the context of the photo is interesting and that from the full feeling of a dark day classic of the winter in mountain. devo dire che il contesto della foto è interessante e che da la piena sensazione di un giorno cupo classico dell'inverno in montagna. Reply  Show ratings		Rate this critique Helpful No opinion Unhelpful
		from chip/Chip (3,363) on January 31, 2004 11:50:41 AM CST (15) 1st the critique-the composition is in need of something interesting in the forground.a person on skis or a snowmobile would add greatly to the image.you could even set it on self timer & insert yourself into the image for greater interest.the sky has only one item[the sun/moon you failed to identify]& is not interesting-just a round light sorce.the snow is not white-could be blue from long exposure or night shot.no detail in shadows .you need to find a different day or time to shoot.the content is boring-by the look of the area you are in there should be countless opportunities for great images. now I just want to say that this image does not belong on the main page.many of these 3 thumbs are just useless pats on the back with no help for this photographer.I am sure that I will get unusefull thumbs for this critique however you will not be doing this photographer ,or the critiquers a fair service.this is what will bring this site down! Reply  Show ratings		Rate this critique Helpful No opinion Unhelpful
		from mikescot/Mike (26,435) on January 31, 2004 10:46:00 AM CST (9) Nice nature landscape shot. I like very good location and good composition with sun or moon.... Nice mood of this shot and good settings. Regards, mike. Reply  Show ratings		Rate this critique Helpful No opinion Unhelpful
		from greenjade/Green (31,115) on January 31, 2004 10:03:47 AM CST (7) Hi , Eugenio!! Great image with this ice cold mood :-)I like this diagonal perspective a lot...it makes tne situation exciting. The fading sun also works very well...well done! Meaybe you look at my last one... Best wishes GJ! Reply  Show ratings		Rate this critique Helpful No opinion Unhelpful
		from baba/David (31,808) on January 31, 2004 9:52:45 AM CST I don't know if it is my monitor, but I find the green/purple noise I see on the snow to be quite unappealling. It is also present in the sky. It doesn't look like lead to me. I don't particularly care for such "stark" images but that is a personl issue and really doesn't reflect on the photographer's composition. It is too bad that there can't be a little more detail pulled out of the shadowed trees. This is where a neutral density gradient filter might have helped. I think this deserves a 0, but since I was challenged by someone, I have completed the critique. Hence the empty thumb. Reply
		from memo/Mehmet (38,244) on January 31, 2004 3:42:45 AM CST (12) hello Eugenio, snowy mountains are always been favourites of photographers.. and this one is hard to get against the sun. i liked it. Regards <|MehmeT|> Reply  Show ratings		Rate this critique Helpful No opinion Unhelpful
		from rvwv/Ray (11,803) on January 31, 2004 2:02:25 AM CST (14) Interesting photo Eugenio. Love the snow laden mountains that you have captured in this shot. Interesting lines how one slope intersects the back ridge. The shot is somewhat underexposed. Might try some PS. Reply  Show ratings		Rate this critique Helpful No opinion Unhelpful
		from jerrymouse/Gerald (161) on January 30, 2004 8:08:01 PM CST (9) good location and landscape photo, lead sky, silver snow, but overall photo is underexposed, see no details in image. wish you successful attempt next time. sorry, for minus point. Reply  Show ratings		Rate this critique Helpful No opinion Unhelpful
		from deleted8947/Deleted (12,487) on January 30, 2004 5:52:29 PM CST (15) I clicked on this rather boring and uninteresting shot on the main page thinking, "How many fake accounts have rated this one?" Now I see what the story behind it is. Let's see, where to start. Effort, that's a good place. Aside from being out in the wild and in the cold not a lot of effort is really put into this shot. Almost point, tilt, click and cross fingers it looks half decent. Well, it doesn't. Angra points out that some filter work would be nice, He is right. Better exposure would work to. Getting a good sky as well as a well balanced and exposed forground would raly make this image appeal a lot better. However, even if this was well exposed and somewhat interesting in the sky and forground with some filter work (on camera not in photoshop) I can't say that the composition is all that interesting either. Kind of a double whammy there. Needs more forground interest. Something that gives it more scale would be nice. I think a lot more effort into a scenic shot would show a lot though. To us other photographers it shows us you care about your work and that you love taking pictures that please the eyes of the viewers. Reply  Show ratings  From yagoryo/Eugenio (14,335) on January 30, 2004 6:10:18 PM CST Hi. If it doesn't interest yourself and does it annoy yourself because you have wasted time to write a criticism? Angra has reason and me I have thanked it for her suggestions. What you intend for " Fake account" yours is a serious affirmation. You can define them friends, but not of forgeries. I pray you you apologize to them. Reply  From deleted8947/Deleted (12,487) on January 30, 2004 6:17:13 PM CST No apology... Reply  From monfared/H (33,083) on January 31, 2004 4:43:55 AM CST Then what was after all the story you were going to tell us about the seemingly undeserved success of this picture? Are there, or are there not, any 'fake accounts' on this page after all? Reply  From deleted8947/Deleted (12,487) on January 31, 2004 7:31:13 AM CST No fake accounts... Just a bunch of people pushing a bad image to the main page for a friend as usual. Just a bunch of three thumb fluff that does not help the photographer at all. In fact its unhelpful. If the photographer thinks this is good he/she might go out and shoot something similar and never improve themselves. Reply  From baba/David (31,808) on January 31, 2004 9:47:47 AM CST Success? Does getting to the main page mean a photo is a success? Maybe in you and your friends' opinion, but I think this photo is anything but a "success". Reply  From monfared/H (33,083) on January 31, 2004 10:14:08 AM CST I have been referring to Robert's comments where he speaks of the 'main page'. It may or may not be a success as you wish to name it. Photos on the main page are those with most critiques. If this is not success for a photo, then the neglected photos are the most succssful. But maybe what you mean is that 'successful' is not necessarily the same as 'good', and in that I entirely agree with you. Reply  From ebenammat/Eben (2,396) on January 31, 2004 11:36:17 AM CST " But maybe what you mean is that 'successful' is not necessarily the same as 'good', and in that I entirely agree with you." Especially when success is fake. Reply		Rate this critique Helpful No opinion Unhelpful
		from mtpsuper/Maria Teresa (40,702) on January 30, 2004 5:15:53 PM CST (5) Ciao Eugenio. Here it is an unusual winter scene, because usually we see more lightning images; here, instead, you choosed to have a strange image which has the sensation of gray (you said even lead) as the protagonist. Also the composition is not so usual, with this sort of diagonal line which cross the image, dividing it in two parts, and in the upper part, and in the right place, there's the sun's ball so clashed by a so gray sky. All these words to say that I like very much this composition and the final effect. I would like, maybe, to have an image a little more "clean" and tidy, but maybe it's due to my monitor. Anyway I like this your photo, and this nearly monocromatic choice. Ecco una scena invernale insolita; di solito vediamo immagini più luminose, qui, invece tu hai scelto di avere uma immagine strana che ha la sensazione del grigio (tu dici addirittura piombo)come protagonista. Anche la composizione non è così consueta, con questa specie di diagonale che attraversa l'immagine dividendola in due, e nella parte superiore ed al posto giusto, c'è la palla del sole così contrastata da un cielo così grigio. Tutto questo per dire che mi piace molto questa composizione e l'effetto finale. Forse mi sarebbe piaciuto avere un immagine anche più "pulita" e nitida, ma forse è dovuto al mio monitor. Comunque mi piace questa tua foto, e questa tua scelta di quasi "monocromatico. Reply  Show ratings		Rate this critique Helpful No opinion Unhelpful
		from ahriman/Angra (1,051) on January 30, 2004 3:15:08 PM CST (21) Very stark, but tonally doesn't feel right. A grad filter (or, when shooting into the sun, a couple of 3 stop grads stacked on top of each other) would have allowed you to control the glare of the sun and maintained a good exposure on the snow, allowing it to appear white rather than mushy grey. I know the S304 doesn't have a real manual mode, but you can fool the metering with grad filters to get a good result In addition, I do feel that you would have been better served to have included a single bush up close in the lower half of the frame as a foreground subject - the three scattered areas of darkness on the foreground do not seem to have any connection. Reply  Show ratings  From yagoryo/Eugenio (14,335) on January 30, 2004 4:08:11 PM CST Thanks for the detailed criticism, unfortunately the S304 is not as the D60. The space of manoeuvre is really little. Reply  From ahriman/Angra (1,051) on January 30, 2004 4:53:33 PM CST Place an S304 in my hands with some grad filters, and I will show you that you can improve on the shot in the ways I have detailed. Everything in my critique was worked around the limitations of your camera - I am a realist and I do read the tech info supplied with each shot! Reply  From deleted8947/Deleted (12,487) on January 30, 2004 5:53:33 PM CST there are ways to fix and attach filters to just about any camera. Angra is right on the money in his crit. Reply		Rate this critique Helpful No opinion Unhelpful
		from marionella/Marion (26,499) on January 30, 2004 3:05:48 PM CST (14) Eugenio, I like the diagonal composition of the shot and the blue cast adds to winter feeling... But unfortunately in the snow almost all details are lost. Maybe du to a slight underexposure? Regards Marion Reply  Show ratings		Rate this critique Helpful No opinion Unhelpful
		from gian87/Marta (59,446) on January 30, 2004 2:52:52 PM CST (6) Excellent winter landascape Eugenio!More winter than what shows this picture could not be.They are the ice colors of the winter with an enormous and cold sun that transmits this almost unreal atmosphere to me.Sadness, immensity and solitude.Compliments! Marta Reply  Show ratings		Rate this critique Helpful No opinion Unhelpful
		from grimaud55/André Jean (126) on January 30, 2004 1:33:27 PM CST (14) The undulation of the land makes for an interesting lead to the picture's bright spot. For the sake of amplifying colour, dictated by the blue cast, I would have loved to see a little touch of some colour. Reply  Show ratings		Rate this critique Helpful No opinion Unhelpful
		from niggmanfred/Manfred (56,458) on January 30, 2004 1:31:25 PM CST (8) hello Eugenio, by a gap the sun shines and delivers its jets on the snow covered soil, here in the mountains lies the white splendour completely the soil covered, a weather tendency those new-fallen snow brings certainly, I thinks you very good submission in the mountains succeeded, the colors is adapted weather conditions, excuses my English, best regards Manfred Reply  Show ratings		Rate this critique Helpful No opinion Unhelpful
		from kienmoser/Gisela (66,983) on January 30, 2004 1:29:28 PM CST (10) hello Eugenio ,a pretty winter landscape , the cold colors fit well too this winter tendency ,I think the perspective you well succeeded,the winter sun gives a special note to this picture , the trees and shrubs form a good contrast to the snow for covered mountain , nice photo...best regards , Gisela Reply  Show ratings		Rate this critique Helpful No opinion Unhelpful

Comments

Add a comment

From deleted8947/Deleted (12,487) on January 30, 2004 5:55:35 PM CST Good lord folks, at least write some objectionable critiques. Just because some users return critiques doesn't mean you have to fluff their images to get it. Reply  From yagoryo/Eugenio (14,335) on January 30, 2004 7:45:32 PM CST If I don't like a photo, I prefer to ignore it. It doesn't seem me that I receive a lot of criticisms of return. You are suggesting me intentions that I don't have. Because this resentment toward who it appreciates the photos? Reply  From baba/David (31,808) on January 30, 2004 8:17:53 PM CST It is not a matter of liking or disliking a photo. This is a critique site and Robert felt that this photo was worthy of his time and effort to critique it. You choose to ignore photos you don't like, while others find those photos the more challenging to critique. It is easy for you and your friends to throw three thumbs around and provide critiques with very little substance. People who look at your photo should be exposed to all reasonable appraisals of your photo. If you can't stand the heat of the main page, than don't submit pictures here, especially when your friends help it to get to the main page. Accept critiques for what they are and move on to improve your photographs. Reply  From yagoryo/Eugenio (14,335) on January 30, 2004 8:54:08 PM CST I have not despised the criticism of Robert. I have marked her Helpful. I am not is not liked the way with which has insinuated that there pits of the forgery. Happens that for problems of language he doesn't succeed in writing detailed criticisms. For the one who knows well the language they are enough few minutes, for the one who has to use a translator, and to correct, owes use her a lot of time. And it is not my objective in the life go to main page. I accept gladly criticisms to improve Reply  From baba/David (31,808) on January 30, 2004 10:30:55 PM CST I know your objective is to critique your friends and other members and get critiques back and if you happen to land on the main page, it is a bonus..... We are all aware that your friends are real people and not fake accounts. However, his rating was based on the photograph and not how you got here. Frankly, I find it a pretty uninteresting photo too, but did not even want to spend any time trying to explain why. I will critique you and your friends if I find something about a photo that I think might actually be helpful and hasn't already been said. Until then, I will leave the critiques to your friends and strangers and hope that they are being sincere in their ratings. Reply  From memo/Mehmet (38,244) on January 31, 2004 3:33:17 AM CST david, you are saying "..but did not even want to spend any time trying to explain why.." but spending to much time for replies.. Reply  From deleted8947/Deleted (12,487) on January 31, 2004 7:34:30 AM CST David is not critiquing the image but going more in depth on the practice of critique trading and swapping. this is something that belongs in the comment section and not as a critique. So what he is doing is fine. Reply  From baba/David (31,808) on January 31, 2004 9:57:53 AM CST My critique is above for you, Mehmet. At the moment, I have critiqued more photos that you have. And I would be willing to make a wild boast that I have critiqued more individual members than you have, so please don't try to tell me how to spend my time. Reply

Return to photos