Printable View
Good point. I've thought about adding a line in my signature saying "all comments and critique welcome" or something to that effect. When I was auditing photo classes the critique part was always my favorite class times. It's nice to know when people like, or dislike, a certain photograph, and why.Quote:
Originally Posted by DennisD
Hopefully something was lost in translation!
I like the wide open bedrock of the second shot. Reminds me of summiting granite hills in the Adirondacks, so an effective photograph to do that!. Bald mountains are cool!
Well, let's talk constructively.Quote:
Originally Posted by Corran
What did you want to show these pictures? What you could bring 8x10 camera on the mountain? It seemed to me that these pictures were taken directly from the path when lifting.
Whether they are shot on 6x6 Hasselblad camera or 11h14, they would have remained with sketches tracking.
Yes, sometimes you can shoot on the move and I'm doing this, but it should see something interesting. Beautiful light or textured sky or something else.
The first shot of the entire oiled because of the wind. Try to re-shoot it on a smaller format with excerpts shorter.
the second shot, I will not discuss the - too many rocks.
I did not want to offend, I'm surprised such a reaction to the negative review ...
Arkasha,
No offense taken - I simply felt the statement of "I would not waste film" was a bit less than helpful and wanted to point out that helpful criticisms should be encouraged.
As evidenced by Nicholas' comments above, we all perceive things differently. I wanted to evoke the feeling I had when climbing the mountain and reaching the summit. I clearly failed in this regard for most viewers but it resonated with Nicholas. That's the interesting thing about photography (or art). Ultimately I shot what I shot with the camera I had on hand. Please understand that I was not trying to debate the merit of the photo, just the presentation of the critique. There may be some language barriers and cross-cultural things here too. No problems.
I absolutely welcome any and all thoughtful critique on anything I shoot. I am always learning.
Arkasha, your more constructive criticism in post #12044 would have sufficed. The comment about wasting film was quite rude.
I'm not foreign to wasting film. This was my first, or second shot with slide film. The composition isn't exactly great. But the light and colours look ok in my eyes.
https://c5.staticflickr.com/9/8353/2...beba84c2_b.jpgMasfjorden 2 by Fredrick D. Fjeldsbø, on Flickr
Lovely, Fredrick.
Corran's comment about learning a new landscape is something I can relate too. Mountain scenery comes a little easier to me than say Florida swamps (I have lived nearly all of my life in the Adirondack or northern Rocky Mountain regions). I think I would have a hard time getting interesting photos in Florida unless I lived there awhileQuote:
Originally Posted by Corran
I like both of Corran's recent scenes (post #12034), but the trail one has better composition and tonal range. The exposures on both are good (the slab less so), and again, the trail scene is especially good given that woods scenes can be tough to expose well.
Were these hand-held shots? It's hard to tell, but some of the foliage looks blurry in the trail scene -- was it windy?
I wonder if the rock-slab scene could be improved with better composition (the slab less centered than it is now), and including an interesting crack that could lead the viewer's eye somewhere, or at least into the scene. Of course your scene does have a crack, but it is not prominent throughout. The scene sort of falls apart near the middle. Stronger side-lighting could help, but then long shadows from trees could interfere.
Topography in heavily forested mountain scenery is hard to capture for obvious reasons. One subject that may be fun to try are the small, forested streams. These mid-scale scenes are usually more manageable under a wide range of lighting than the broader landscape scenes -- at least it works that way for me.
Here is a scene I am not very happy with, but was inspired to post it after responding to Corran's recent posts (it's not easy to capture mountain scenery well). This is Bear Butte, near Sturgis, South Dakota, taken in early morning this spring. The sky was much more interesting up until about 5 minutes before I took the picture. Bear Butte is a striking feature up close and from afar, but I found it hard to capture because of the many distractions around it (roads, power lines, etc). I cropped it so to remove some shrubs and trees in the foreground, I usually leave them in, but I could not fit them in a pleasing way.
Attachment 155020
Comments (+and -) are welcome, as usual.
This was taken with a 90-mm F8 Schneider-Kreuznach Super Angulon, 1/18 sec f22, with K2 yellow filter, with some rise, on Ilford FP4+ developed normally in Ilford ID-11
One thing I have trouble with is sizing the photos according to the LFPF rules. When the width is set to 750 pixels, the photo becomes quite soft on the screen. I noticed that at least some photos posted far exceed the LFPf's pixel limits. Does this photo look sharp enough? (the negative is very sharp).
Thanks.