New Member, Please Critique My Work

This one



is very noisy and grainy. It has no key words or tags to help people find it. There's also no caption to help tell what the picture is of because in this case, I don't have an idea. Coffee mug? Candle holder? A caption should tell the viewer what they are looking at while the keywords help FAA and Google catalog it. You've basically put something in the middle of a room, turned off all the lights, shut the blinds and closed the doors in hopes that someone will stumble onto it.

Also consider titles. "No Title" is not a title. A true title would tell a little bit more about the photograph or at least get the person interested to look more and click on the shot. Not entirely sure about all of the drab tree limb shots either. Would these look on a wall somewhere?

You did spend some time on a bio, at least, but you start it out by mentioning things that have nothing to do with your art, that you're in nursing. Opinions will vary, but the FAA bio should concentrate on you and your work, not your day job. I'd also never put in that "I have only taken up photography just recently." That's just sending in a resume to a place you want to get a job at and saying, "I've never done this type of work before." Remember that you are here to sale your photographs. It's all about making people want to consider you seriously.

Welcome Aboard!

Your photos have too much noise. To keep noise low shoot at an ISO of 100 to 400. That depends on you camera, but the higher the ISO, the more noise.

Never up size the number of pixels. Keep the size that comes from the camera, minus and cropping.

Don't mark your art with the word "copyright" and don't use a business name. Just a signature is is fine, but use a nice font. If you must, use a copyright symbol keep it small. They will reject for a signature that looks like a watermark if you make a sale.

Find interesting subjects and shoot them in good light. Keep doing that over and over.

There is a lot to be learned about marketing here. Search the discussions.

the avatar is a bit overdone. get something with your face in it.


you need better titles, and descriptions. this is too grainy, it won't print. it might be done on purpose, but it may not matter. it's a bit soft, kind of too close, and the light is too extreme to make heads or tails from it.


all these tree images are kind of boring. rather dark. there is no description, hardly any keywords, and you call it light but its dark and uneven. when shooting you have to ask yourself - what room do i see this going into? would i hang it on my own wall?


i haven't a clue what i'm looking at. the faint watermark at the bottom that says COPYRIGHT - won't print because of that. but without descriptions or keywords - you won't find anyone. they won't find you.


of your images this is probably one of the better. but no title, description, keywords. and how many want a picture of potpourri on their wall is unknown.


the fog is nice, but the setting is dull. cluttered with signs, that straight tree in the back and it's overly too bright. fog is used typically to bring a scene down. to eliminate distraction while at the same time adding depth by showing only layers. but this has a lot of clutter - fences, signs, curbing, etc. you don't want any of that. but is this or would this be interesting to buy? for me, no. i think if you can't think of enough words to describe it, it may be near impossible to sell as well.


the lines are ok on this, but there is no way anyone would want to buy it with a name that large at the bottom, that's why it won't print.

the bio is uninspiring. while its nice to know your just picked up a camera, try to focus on what your specialties are. knowing what you do in real life, unless it translates in your image, i wouldn't even mention. because the buyer knows that you being an artist is your job, and this isn't just some hobby. telling people how exciting it all is, doesn't leave a professional opinion in a buyers eye. its like telling patients that you just got out of med school. in other-words lacking experience.


---Mike Savad

All your images have been done a million times (and much better) by a million other artists.....

Except for one which I think is pure art..."B and W."

Whether you know it or not, this image is quite wonderful and shows much imagination. I am fascinated by the cup, the page with words, the grain....It gives us a mood to explore. This is an excellent example of an "art" image. The type of image that would be seen in an art gallery.

I suggest you focus your work on this type of subject matter for a while. I see you have a Bachelor's degree in psychology. OK, good. Explore more cerebral images like your B & H....

Back to your nature images....Nature photography is one of the hardest subjects to sell. Why? Because the world has some thousands of outstanding nature photographers who travel the world with the best of equipment.

You can email me and I can give you the names of photographers who do images like your B & H.....

Joseph - I added a couple more key words to the photo you are referring to. However, this is an abstract photo. It is meant to make the viewer ask the very questions that you are asking. The artist adds the objects and photographs them in such a way as to draw a emotional response from the viewer, and make them ask questions. I realize that this type of photography may not be for everyone, but that is what I'm trying to accomplish.

As for the 'no title' for a title? Well, if it is helpful to add a specific title, I will certainly do that. Regarding the trees and all of the winter shots, that is all subjective. I just think that winter is a beautiful time of year; but like I said everyone's taste is different. I will try to get some more photos uploaded, with a different subject matter. Because I do understand what you are saying. I need to add some variety to my photos. Good info about the bio. I just thought that people would like to know a little bit more about me than just my interest in photography.

Bradford - I try to keep the ISO low, but it is a little difficult during those early evening shots; and especially difficult at night. But that's something I am working through. It takes some time to achieve that balance. My export settings for pixels is at 240. Great information about copyright. I've been reading several of the forums on copyrighting; and it seems like the debate will never end. Right now, I do have a copyright title (not a symbol) in the bottom left corner. I tried to make it as faint as possible, so it wouldn't be intrusive.

I will keep these suggestions in mind and try to readjust accordingly. Thank you for the great critique. This is very helpful. I really appreciate it!

What are your ideas for post processing or are your shots as-is? If nothing else I would suggest a noise-reduction type of software.
In your bio you mentioned that you were just entering photography. I would suggest using the search for a treasure trove of information.

About copyrights, this is from the FAQ on the site --

Everything that appears in your images will appear in your prints.

Digital signatures are fine as long as they look "stylized". Think of it this way - if you were a buyer, would you want to see that signature on the artwork?

Copyright notices are generally frowned upon. No one wants to see COPYRIGHT 2012 JOHN SMITH printed across a piece of artwork that they want to hang on their wall.

http://fineartamerica.com/contactus.html?tab=faq

Stacie, I think that my main critique is that as you grow in your photography, you will learn what works and what doesn't work, what only you may see and find beautiful (which, to be clear, there's absolutely nothing wrong with!), and what a wider audience might desire to hang on a wall. You'll also grow as a photographer, through learning and evolving. That would be something I'd suggest keeping in mind. That said -- of course, this is also opening a wider philosophical topic re. art itself. After all, most artists create out of a love of it, and while selling is desirable, for many, it may not happen, and not everyone wants to cater to their audience.

I find nature beautiful as well -- and I think that I'm prone also to find beauty in some of the things you have posted -- the patterns of tree branches, the way snow clings to twigs, and so on. I think the art becomes learning how that can be transferred into something sensational -- and to really work with light. Some of your images seem somewhat flat and overall rather dark. My critique would be to start factoring in lighting more, light and shadow, the interplay between the two.

there are millions of abstract shots on this site. abstract is a personal thing either you like it or you don't. if any person here scratches their head at it, it probably won't sell. if other photographers like it, they aren't buyers. the images are usually for someone.


---Mike Savad

My main point about keywords is that no one is going to find your photographs. Even the other shots you have that aren't abstracts don't have a lot of keywords and tags. While I don't have any abstracts of my own, if I did, I'd figure out some way to keyword them so someone could find them, even if I had to poke around another photographer's site to see how they did it.

the only way you can get away with selling without keywords is if you can sell it in person and send people over here. still when they are here, and have to use the internal search on the site. still won't find what your talking about.

abstracts can be very flexible with keywords, adding emotions, movement and flow. however they have to be abstracts. tree limbs - aren't really abstract. things totally out of focus, still lives, etc - are also not abstracts. you would get more hits calling it a still life than an abstract.

---Mike Savad

" . . . if any person here scratches their head at it, it probably won't sell."

That's one of the most outrageous over-generalities I've read in these forums -- ever. Mike, I can't imagine what you're thinking with this!

Welcome, Stacie!

"However, this is an abstract photo. It is meant to make the viewer ask the very questions that you are asking. The artist adds the objects and photographs them in such a way as to draw a emotional response from the viewer, and make them ask questions. "

"What is it?" should never be one of those questions.

"I try to keep the ISO low, but it is a little difficult during those early evening shots; and especially difficult at night. But that's something I am working through."
There are myriad tutorials and blogs about how to balance ISO with shutter speed and aperture. Depending on the camera, ISO can add so much noise that the image becomes unprintable. Learn not to depend on it in low light.

As for copyright/signature, BIG no-no. Look online for cursive fonts that you can download, like from http://www.fontspace.com/category/cursive?p=6, to use as a signature.

As previously mentioned, when posting work, you need to look at it objectively and imagine it on a wall.

Phone wires and rooftops are not generally desirable.

Take your time shooting, don't just shoot everything in the belief you are gaining experience.

Your DOF is too shallow and there is no white or black, just grays.


Cut off tree tops? Branches that aren't complete and lead nowhere? Neither make this image compelling. And the center of the image, something that our eyes should have been lead to, is empty.

Unlike others here, I believe the grain works in your "B and W" and the other black and white "No Title" image because they look like old film pieces and it looks intentional. (And I hate grain, generally.) The colors in this piece are lovely. This is my favorite of your works. Keep going!

Getting found and making sales here all hinges on buyers being able to find you. That means they use the FAA search engine, and I promise you no one will be searching for "no title". :)

not really, how many have you sold that had the buyer wondering what the heck it was, but bought it anyway?


---Mike Savad

Oh, dear . . .

Mike, I could be wrong, but I think Stacie is creating photography with her personal artistic vision, which is different than photography done to sell to the masses, i.e., mountains, monuments, landscapes. That is my impression, anyway. Maybe I said that wrong, but I think Robert Frank has the idea.

she can do that, but she asked for a critique anyway, and so far a few people are scratching their heads over it. i've seen images that have that look, but how well it's implemented and how well it works will be tricky. if there was more cup in there, it might sell to a coffee house. but it's too abstract and too grainy. film grain isn't as special today as it was when it was out (it wasn't so special then either).

speaking from experience as a buyer of goods, if i scratch my head wondering what something is, i almost never buy it.


---Mike Savad

To me, it's obvious it is a kitchen shot and that is a cup, and there is a handwritten note beneath it. I totally agree with you in that I don't like to wonder what something actually is. I have a few abstract pieces, but I explain what they are. I didn't scratch my head over this one. I guess we can agree to disagree on the grain. Like I said, I usually hate grain, but in these two cases it works.

for me, a good shot is one that can describe itself as soon as i look at it. even if it takes a few seconds. while i could figure out that it's at least a cup in there. it's more like the question as to why, more than what.


---Mike Savad

To be fair, Mike wasn't the only one that didn't know what it was at first, as evident by my own post.

Regarding night/evening/low light, the only way to control ISO and be successful at these is to use a tripod, or stabilize the camera on a static object.

You're right, Joseph. I jumped in after only skimming the other critiques. One thing I do agree on wholeheartedly is that the copyright language needs to come off, because it won't print with that showing.

Chuck, that is so true! It's the one thing I struggle with, because I have a cheap, rickety tripod. Setting up is a pain and a chore. I'm going to try a monopod.

I look forward to seeing more of your work, Stacie! Putting you on my watch list.

Patricia - a monopod you must hold - I'd shoot for a better tripod AND a remote shutter control - so you have your hands off the camera.

Two things

Tripod and remote shutter release.

Or relegate your shooting to good light.

I though B W was more a 'diner' shot. I like the mood of it. You can reduce 'noise' and add back 'grain' for a vintage look. As for Pattern, I don't think it's necessary to say what an abstract image is but you do have to come up with descriptive tags or it will never be found in search. Pattern also has noise.

Are you using any programs currently for post processing your work? Like Lightroom or Topaz for example?

You are on the right track, just keep going and you will keep growing....

You might also want to join a photography club if you have one in your area. Just for the fellowship and advice and competition.

"My export settings for pixels is at 240.

Why would you change your DPI? That's just metadata that FAA does not use. They will take care of the DPI setting. Think about what you are trying to do. Whatever DPI you use is arbitrary. There is no need to mess with that on export. Just be sure if you do change the DPI you are not re-sampling and forcing an up res. Your file is pixels. It has no size dimension and therefore no DPI.

Export in Lightroom means "save as" another file type. That's it. Don't let their export options dictate your workflow. Especially DPI. I don't use it much but I would assume you can save multiple edit versions in different sizes if you need to , so save them as LR files and you will always have them with the original in LR.

I think the confusing LR dialogue box accounts for a lot of inadvertent upsizing. I never change DPI on anything unless I am printing at home. No need to. It is just meaningless metadata until you change it and inadvertently up-sample your work.

i think she's shooting with an SLR, photoshop has those default at 240dpi for some reason.


---Mike Savad

Depends on the camera. My A77 defaults at 350dpi and 16 bits while my A100 defaults at 300 dpi, 8 bits, same Photoshop.
She's holding a Canon in the avatar (which should be rotated as to be facing correctly) but can't make out the model.

by the size of it, it looks like a cropped frame. beyond that, unknown.

---Mike Savad

Stacie,
I agree with other posters about the copyright line, titles and don't forget descriptions (coming up with titles for my photos drives me crazy but they are important and I enjoy reading the descriptions on others' photos).
Mike is confusing do dads with potpourri and I've seen lots of still life photos of do dads on peoples' walls! :)
It's true you will learn quite a bit from these discussions (once you wade through the opinions and concentrate on the useful tips).
Keep shooting and posting and as your photos improve you can delete some of these earliest posts.
Welcome and good luck!
Kathy

I've looked at each and every photograph, worked on them some more in LR, deleted the old photographs and uploaded the "new and improved" ones. I have also erased the old titles and created new ones, or added to them. Same goes for the key words. Excellent suggestions from everyone; especially about the noise reduction! Thanks again. This really helped me.

All photos were shot with a Canon 70D and kit lens. No other equipment. LR for post processing. I got the camera about 9 months ago; but have only been using it/practicing for about 2. I still have a lot to learn. My hope is (when I get enough money) to buy a Canon 5D MarkIII, and a couple of sharp prime lenses.

But the Canon 70D is what all of the photos were taken with. That's all I have to work with right now.

You already have a great camera. Learn to use it. Invest in gear, a tripod, perhaps better lenses.

This one caught my eye. Nice color contrast. I'd like to see more room around the leaf. Its really close to the edge of the frame.

Camera manufacturers love people who believe if they just get the greatest camera, then great photography will flow. Better to practice, practice, practice and develop a vision.