What Do You Think Of This Photo

OK. My criticism is frank. Remember you asked what I think.

On my frist glance at this thumbnail, I didn't see much, but was drawn to investigate the photo, and clicked on the image to follow the link to the photo in your portfolip.
My reaction was disappointment. I was hoping to find activity under the lights, particularly where the trees partially screen the light. No sign of human activity, no people, no animals, nothing to hold my interest. The (magnolia?) tree in the foreground is distracting, and the sky isn't compelling. It's nice to show stars, but better to show constellations, and our galaxy (milky way) and the colors of the sky. I didn't find any of that gratification anywhere in the photos. I really like the night shot in your avatar, compared to a blase reaction to this image.

Your red mountain image, in comparison, is very interesting, great color, a good strong silhouette of the rocks and person, good composition, and a wonderful sky. I suggest that you don't dilute your portfolio with your B shots. You only get a few seconds with each customer as they search the web. Use those seconds wisely!

I don't follow that advice well myself, but I'm working on a complete rework of my portfolio, re-editing and culling. You've got some very nice photos, keep at it.

very blurry - need a strong tripod

why were you skeptical? because if you figure that out, you'll be able to whittle down your own images and correct mistakes.

What were your settings? Go back and look, see what happened.

I see so much in this beautiful image. I happen to be a sky watcher. I have this window that is six feet by six feet and it's on the top story of my home. My bed is right near that window and I watch the sky; this photo reminds me of what I see every night as I gaze. Since I love crosses, I see a cross not only on a hillside but in the sky above and I think it's lovely. Great job.

Lisa I think he means the photo "Golden lights" that he posted here.....correct me if I am mistaken

When you question what you do, you're self critiquing, which is not a bad thing. Gregory basically called it. Now that you're double-guessing yourself on it, you have starting points as to why.

I must have had a hard day today...I didn't even see it. Thanks.

Brandon,

Whose image is this? How did you take this? Tell us?

Rich

Too much darkness, too little golden lights.

It should not matter to you what others think, you can get all the critiques you want but this won't make your next photo better necessarily, what will make you better is to keep shooting and reading online to hone your skills. Too many times I see posts like yours and the vipers strike, the replies here have been kind but sometimes all you end up with is a personal opinion and not a critique. I like the photo but it is just my preference. Keep shooting and you will see your photos develop, so to speak.

Gregory pretty much summed up my impressions on the image in the OP so I will leave it at that.

Brandon, I know you are pretty new to photography so I am going to talk a little about copyright and protecting your images. Photographers tend to look out for each other and will find people trying to pass off your work as their own. It will probably distress you to find out that another photographer has the Red Mountain Galaxy image and claims that he shot the image.

While I am not an attorney and cannot give legal advice I can tell you how I would pursue such an issue. There isn’t much that irritates me more than finding someone else claiming my work as their own. If I found such a thing on Instagram or Facebook I would probably just send a takedown notice but if I found someone trying to sell my work I would pursue all my legal avenues including suing for punitive damages.

The good news for you is it is really easy to prove copyright ownership in a court of law. I would imagine this was shot in raw and since a raw file cannot be altered and saved the exif data will show the date, time, camera settings and in some cases the name of the photographer and location of the original shot. That serves as absolute proof that the image was taken with a specific camera on a specific date. Of course then you would simply show that you own the camera and you can be awarded both actual and even punitive damages if it is registered with the copyright office.

Speaking of copyright registration, every so often two photographers try and register the same image but luckily the one registering under false pretenses is committing a federal crime and can actually be prosecuted in criminal court for that.

When shooting things like stars or clouds or leaves or really anything that changes from minute to minute, a photograph is a lot like a finger print. No two are exactly alike. Heck, with a star shot like yours it isn’t hard to actually show exactly where on the planet that shot was taken so long as you have the date and time.

Even if you didn’t shoot in raw there are of course myriad ways to prove ownership of an image. Since you shot this with your Christmas gift the other photographer could not have possibly had the image before December of last year so that will help if you choose to pursue this.

Since we want to help we have taken the liberty of contacting the other photographer that claims ownership of this image. As soon as he gets back to us we will go ahead and give both of you each other’s information so the real owner can take legal action on the matter. We have saved screen shots of all your prior discussions if you need them for any kind of documentation for the courts. Just let us know if you need copies.

We are here to help.

Warning....

Some others might simply assume that the image belongs to one photographer or the other and want to make accusations with no proof. There will be NO assuming of anything until one side or the other has presented absolute proof of ownership of the image.

Any further posts on this thread shall stick to the original question on that photo.

Understood?

i don't like it at all. it show no detail, there is too much black, there is no content. its not very sharp, there's noise, and motion blur on the stars. don't point the camera at just anything. in order for us to see the stars as a reflection, get it as an hdr, but that is very advanced, and it's still not interesting because the background is dull.


---Mike Savad
MikeSavad.com

i know my advice in the past was to shoot night shots, but with the exception of that one - guy standing in front of the milky way shot. the rest of the images look very beginner, so i'm not sure what exactly happened to the rest. so i'm going to reverse my advice and tell you to shoot during the day time instead. until you can get a good handle of controls, framing, story telling during the day. maybe that shot was a lucky shot, maybe you had help from your friend, its hard to tell.

or shoot at night with your friend so he can help you with the content of the images. photography is a tough thing to get into, you need to know technical aspects as well having the ability to see an image and shoot it in a way that we can all enjoy it. this takes many years, and usually happens way before you get into selling it.


---Mike Savad
MikeSavad.com

Way too dark, no detail, looks kinda blurry. If I had taken that shot, it never would have left my computer... if I had even bothered to transfer it from my camera in the first place.

Brandon, long exposures are not easy. You cant expose a night shot for the sky and hope lights wont be blown out below. Since you seem to love night photography, you will need to read up on multiple exposures. although The beauty of night photography is that it can be all trial end error, but take a long time to master it.

Come on Rich, leave this kid alone.

Brandon, I agree with Gregory and Mike. The image is a little blurry and grainy. You can tell that it's a beginners photo. You're learning. If you don't have a remote for your camera, I'd recommend getting one. Or you can set your camera to a 2 second delay. When you push the button, the camera will shake a little which in turn affects long exposures. So it's a must to use a remote or the 2 sec timer. Keep practicing. Long exposure shots are challenging especially for those just learning.

In Rich's defense he did track down the other photographer that has an image exactly like Brandon's thus helping us help Brandon get to the bottom of all this.....

Enough said on that though, the image presented for critique is what is on the table here.

Brandon,

Your strength of composition and how you frame each shot is extremely good.
Note for Rich, a beginner can have such good instincts. That though is not the technical side
of the equation. He needs both and that is why he keeps asking us for critiques.
Well Rich JC and I posted at the same time......we shall see eventually.....

I dont know much about photography, but you can not shoot everything at 30s.

Dave

technically i gave the info to rich prior to that, just so you know. the images are nearly identical, i would say taken about 5 minutes apart, but from a slightly different angle.

---Mike Savad
MikeSavad.com

Mike, you were told to leave the discussion off that now. Let's do just that.

Back to the topic

fine

---Mike Savad
MikeSavad.com

Abbie,

Mike is right and as I mentioned in the first email to JC, Mike found the photo on another site. I had asked him to search,since he's much better at that,than I am.

Mike, let's see what happens and I think you're up to date with what Iv'e done so far, if not,email me,

Rich

i am going to close this because everything I post is a loop and goes right back to the topic "these aren't your photos" im going to delete the photo so everyone stops attacking me.