For this first Wednesday Photo Critique, I decided to go back to a typical image of mine from 2010. (The temporal distance and my positive learning curve since then just might make this easier!) And remember, these critiques are really for me so I can learn to really look closely, systematically and impartially at my own images–and that, I find, is a hard thing to do. Perhaps you will learn something along the way as well.
Metadata: Nikon D90 (1.5x crop factor sensor) with Nikkor 10-24 f/3.5-4.5 zoom at 11mm, f/16, 1/160, ISO200, hand held.
OK, now lets follow the 7-Step Critique Guide I outlined in my November 14, 2012 post.
1) EXAMINE. OK, I’m looking…looks like the main subject is that door…maybe contrasting with the other wall textures…edges look OK–except for some weird green thing at the bottom left.
2) EMOTIONAL RESPONSE. When I look at this, I don’t have a strong emotional response…maybe just a reaction of mild curiosity about the building and the brightly painted door.
3) TECHNICAL POINTS. The image seems to be reasonably well done–good exposure and color balance. It might just be the monitor I’m using, but it does appear to be a bit soft–maybe because a tripod was not used, or lack of sharpening in post? It also could be lacking a bit of contrast. I also wonder if it needs to be rotated slightly right to level the door and wall relative to the edge. You might even need to use the distort tool to get this image square with both the top and bottom margins. Maybe perfect lines are just my fetish, but…think about it anyway.
4) ARTISTIC QUALITIES. Artistically, this one doesn’t really do much for me. Yes, I think it was the door that attracted your eye and that particular subject might be slightly interesting, but it is lacking a stronger story. As I have said in a previous blog post, this may be a case of setting the stage and leaving it empty. It would have been more interesting if the door were slightly open and a figure were to be partially visible…or, the back half of a cat were going in the door…or an abandoned doll were visible on the ground next to the partially open door…Pictures of colorful doors are a bit cliché–a peso per dozen–so there needs to be some other element to make it stand out. Also, I wonder what exactly the right half of the image (the stone wall) does for it. I suppose the photographer was contrasting the various textures of the building but, to me, it leaves the photograph somewhat unbalanced and is not really necessary–after all, it was the door that attracted the eye, no? Why not focus more closely on that? Maybe consider a square crop, or move in closer to just the door. Finally, I’m not sure about the title–is the door really lime green, or is it more of a shade of yellow?
5. POSITIVE POINTS. I like the color contrast in this image–that certainly is interesting and I see why the photographer was moved to press the shutter. Unusual color contrasts like this do have the potential for interesting images. This color contrast, to me, creates a bit of tension as it is captures neither complementary colors (opposites on the color wheel) nor analogous colors (side by side on the color wheel).
6. IMPROVE. To improve this image or to improve subsequent similar images, think about what attracted your eye in the first place, then really move in on that. Cut out extraneous parts of the image. Also, ask yourself if the image really tells a good, strong story…or if it evokes a particularly strong or unusual mood. Ask yourself what might be added or subtracted from the image to make it more interesting. Definitely clone out that green thing at bottom left. Technically, do everything you can to create the best possible image–if it is supposed to be sharp, then make it sharp–use a tripod, mirror-lock up, exposure delay mode, an IR remote, appropriate sharpening in post, etc.
7. OVERALL. Overall, I think the image is mildly interesting due to the unusual color combination, but it lacks that something special to set it apart from a million other pictures of colorful doors.
Leave a reply