John-
You are absolutely correct in noting that my photo is "too familiar to
be at all interesting." That's why I called it "Classic Machu Picchu."
As I noted in the image details, it is a hackneyed shot that is pretty
much the same shot taken from the same place where everyone stands when
visiting the place. There was absolutely no originality in my
composition. Nor was there meant to be.
The purpose of the image was to share the existence of the place with
the uninitiated.
And thanks for pointing out the apparent overexposure. You showed me a
major flaw in my workflow. The original was a bit overexposed, which I
corrected in Picasa. At that point, it was not overexposed and it
actually looked pretty good.
However, I forgot that Picasa does NOT change the original and when I
sent the original through Photoshop to reduce the size of the image to
fit PhotoForum standards, the original mild overexposure was magnified.
In my haste to meet Andy's deadline, I forgot to re-examine what the
resized image looked like. I looked at the new photo, but not
critically. I should have reworked the image before submission. This
critical re-examination of my own work was missing from my workflow.
Looking at the photo through your eyes made me realize my just how badly
the submitted picture fell short of my goals.
I do try to learn from my mistakes and I hope to improve in the future.
To do that, I need folks to continue to point out my flaws. Without that
kind of critical observation, I would simply continue making the same
mistakes over and over again.
Thanks again for you honest and critical comments.
peace,
rand
---------------------------
On 7/28/2012 9:00 AM, John Palcewski wrote:
Rand Flory, Classic Machu Picchu. This is too familiar to be at all
interesting, and what's more it's overexposed.
