Another point is learning how to edit--both when deciding on what to train a lens on and which of the captured photons to pass over when deciding which ones are keepers. Learn to be your own harshest critic. If you don't think something quite works, it probably doesn't work. Why might it not work?
Here's a short list of flaws from this week's Gallery:
Unfocused blob in a corner--see the whole frame when photographing.
No real center of interest--decide what you are trying to say with the photograph.
Unsharpness--focus more carefully, use a higher shutter speed or use a tripod. Or all of the preceding.
Technical flaws in printing--use the proper equipment.
Subject smack dab in the middle of frame--try for more dynamic composition. Work the subject.
Equipment failure--sometimes results in interesting pictures.
Poor cropping--what is left out may have raised the quality of the picture. What is left in may be extraneous. You decide.
I suppose that could count as a minor review of the Gallery. I don't have time to do a real one as it's late here and I have to check out of the motel in the morning.
Curious though, is this one CRAP? http://richmason.com/utne/mooned.jpg Or just someone making an ass of themselves?
Cheers, Rich Mason
On Saturday, October 23, 2004, at 12:53 AM, Deen Hameed wrote:
I am finding this particular discussion about the standard of the work contributed (and the issues that will arise out of reviewing crappy images) very interesting. I think, quite often, we _do_ pop stuff up here that we would not normally feel the need to 'exhibit', and perhaps we need to consider more carefully just what we are putting up for discussion.
I don't think it needs to be 'good', just that it should be worthy of comment.
Wish I could take down the silly cat... what _could_ you possibly say about it anyway...?
Oh well, next week and beyond.
Best regards, Deen 2004-10-23 17:50:45
