>From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >----- Original Message ----->From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Subject: Re: PESO -- Sunset Over W__*Ma__ > > > > > Beautiful sunset, but not so hot foreground. In fact, it looks a bit >like > > a > > Wal-Mart ad, unfortunately. > > > > I have seen countless beautiful sunsets... right outside our Safeway >when > > shopping for groceries. I no longer try to bother to take them. > >Good decision. >The majority of the pictures that get posted here fail simply because the >scene, while it may have a couple of nice elements, is ruined by >distracting >elements or technical flaws. >If the picture can be fixed, I'll use the one of the sunglasses that Igor >posted the other day, then great. It isn't a really strong picture, but at >least it holds together in a cohesive manner. OTOH, Bruce posted a shot the >other day of a bit of a building. The shot had some nice elements in it, >but >failed because of poor technique, in that there wasn't enough depth of >field >to keep what needed to be in focus in focus. >I realize it was a framing element, but because it wasn't sharp, the >picture >went from one that had the potential to be pleasing to a sub par image that >was annoying. >I realize that it may have been impossible to secure sufficient depth of >field with the equipment he was using, even if he had bothered with a >tripod, which means he was using the wrong equipment. A view camera would >probably have been a better choice, but that is work, which no one seems >willing to do anymore. > >Sometimes the best choice is to not push the button, and look elswhere for >a >picture. > >William Robb >
I agree with this and my comments that follow will be sure to ellicit the ire and wrath of some. Oh well, what's new? My assumption is, probably because it's been my desire ever since starting in photography, that most everyone here that shows photos is striving to improve as a photographer. Is that a valid assumption? I hope at some level it is. What I see here seldom bears that out. Not picking on anyone in particular. A pretty sunset with a ho-hum unappealing foreground, is not a great shot. Plenty of those have been displayed, often to much praise. A different image, a landscape with an obvious skewed horizon and poor focus, meets with similar applause. Another photo with a blown out background, and consequent underexposed main subject, unlevel, and poorly composed is also praised. I often wonder if the criteria for showing an image is simply because it was the best of an even more lackluster collection. I believe I'm leaving plenty of room for subjectivity and personal taste, but I could always be wrong. It seems that very few look at their photography with an analytical, critical eye. And even fewer beholders appear to do so. Sure, let's share photos of our personal lives that don't meet the bar for being a great image, we do that, I've done it. But let's not fool ourselves into thinking that every image warrants praise just because we've taken it. The only way to improve one's skills is to realize failures for failures, pleasing scenes with failures as failures, and really exciting shots with failures as failures. Otherwise we doom ourselves to mediocrity. Tom C. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
