A nice pic I took today - opinions?

[homercles337]

Originally posted by: tfinch2
They also teach you in junior high the Civil War was caused by slavery...

WTF?

 

[dighn]

Originally posted by: episodic

You tossed it out there - you said the photo was for the viewer. Most viewers would regard the sunset - the sun specifically - in this photo to be the center - as I intended.

honestly, why must there be a subject? why can't it be the overall scene that you enjoy? personally I thought the photo was great. but then I guess I don't have the training to appreciate a photo properly

 

[FilmCamera]

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: episodic

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: iamaelephant

Originally posted by: homercles337
I remember when i was in junior high and took a photography class. One of the first things we were taught was concerning composition. The simple rule being DONT SPLIT YOUR IMAGE WITH THE HORIZON. Either focus on the sky or ground as your subject. There now, you know too.

And why not? If a photo looks good (which is totally subjective) why do some arbitrary rules about composition matter? That's a load of crap. Anyone who gives you strict rules for composing a piece of art isn't worth listening to.

OP, I really liked you first picture. Can't look at your flickr thing because I don't have a Yahoo account.

Learn ONE or TWO things about photography. The point is that you dont want a "divisive eye." Composing a photograph involves the viewer. Do you want to draw the eye to the ground or sky? What is the SUBJECT of your photograph? If you cant figure this out then so be it, youre a "cliker" not a photographer.

Isn't your eye drawn to the sunset? I mean the sun was my focus.

Clicky click.

Wow, way to come off as a jerk.

Composition "rules" are not really rules to me...more guidelines. Sometimes an excellent photo will break every "rule."

I don't always use the "rule of thirds" though it can be a helpful guideline for some compositions.

To the OP - don't listen to this jerk. Although I don't think that your photo is all that wonderful, at least you are out there working at it. It's the only way you will get better.

 

[Oblivionaire]

Originally posted by: episodic

Originally posted by: beemercer

Originally posted by: episodic
Hmm, I took another today - maybe this will meet with expectations

http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=300551424&size=l

It wants me to sign in.

Woops here it goes. . .

http://static.flickr.com/102/300551424_6be195040a_b.jpg

Don't like it. The background brick wall ruins it. With people pics, try using a very shallow DOF, if your cam supports it. This is where DSLR large sensor cams shine, their DOF is shallower than that of most point n shoots. You need a shallow DOF and a far off background, nothing close like that brick wall. I really did like your first pic though. I thought the sunset looked beautiful through the trees.

 

[homercles337]

Originally posted by: FilmCamera

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: episodic

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: iamaelephant

Originally posted by: homercles337
I remember when i was in junior high and took a photography class. One of the first things we were taught was concerning composition. The simple rule being DONT SPLIT YOUR IMAGE WITH THE HORIZON. Either focus on the sky or ground as your subject. There now, you know too.

And why not? If a photo looks good (which is totally subjective) why do some arbitrary rules about composition matter? That's a load of crap. Anyone who gives you strict rules for composing a piece of art isn't worth listening to.

OP, I really liked you first picture. Can't look at your flickr thing because I don't have a Yahoo account.

Learn ONE or TWO things about photography. The point is that you dont want a "divisive eye." Composing a photograph involves the viewer. Do you want to draw the eye to the ground or sky? What is the SUBJECT of your photograph? If you cant figure this out then so be it, youre a "cliker" not a photographer.

Isn't your eye drawn to the sunset? I mean the sun was my focus.

Clicky click.

Wow, way to come off as a jerk.

Composition "rules" are not really rules to me...more guidelines. Sometimes an excellent photo will break every "rule."

I don't always use the "rule of thirds" though it can be a helpful guideline for some compositions.

To the OP - don't listen to this jerk. Although I don't think that your photo is all that wonderful, at least you are out there working at it. It's the only way you will get better.

Hey n00b, learn the definition of constructive criticism. This clicky is crappy. Care to post any "excellent photos" that break every "rule?" Yea, i didnt think so...

 

[episodic]

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: FilmCamera

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: episodic

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: iamaelephant

Originally posted by: homercles337
I remember when i was in junior high and took a photography class. One of the first things we were taught was concerning composition. The simple rule being DONT SPLIT YOUR IMAGE WITH THE HORIZON. Either focus on the sky or ground as your subject. There now, you know too.

And why not? If a photo looks good (which is totally subjective) why do some arbitrary rules about composition matter? That's a load of crap. Anyone who gives you strict rules for composing a piece of art isn't worth listening to.

OP, I really liked you first picture. Can't look at your flickr thing because I don't have a Yahoo account.

Learn ONE or TWO things about photography. The point is that you dont want a "divisive eye." Composing a photograph involves the viewer. Do you want to draw the eye to the ground or sky? What is the SUBJECT of your photograph? If you cant figure this out then so be it, youre a "cliker" not a photographer.

Isn't your eye drawn to the sunset? I mean the sun was my focus.

Clicky click.

Wow, way to come off as a jerk.

Composition "rules" are not really rules to me...more guidelines. Sometimes an excellent photo will break every "rule."

I don't always use the "rule of thirds" though it can be a helpful guideline for some compositions.

To the OP - don't listen to this jerk. Although I don't think that your photo is all that wonderful, at least you are out there working at it. It's the only way you will get better.

Hey n00b, learn the definition of constructive criticism. This clicky is crappy. Care to post any "excellent photos" that break every "rule?" Yea, i didnt think so...

Look at the third pic down - vertical break - rule of thirds - practically like mine only different focus.
http://www.thedailyshooter.com/article/Composition+Part+I+:+The+Rule+of+Thirds

 

[irishScott]

Originally posted by: episodic
Well crud, I was really thinking that this one was good. I liked the lens flare. . .

same. Almost looks like a pic of the sun (as in the star itself) in the center of the photo. Other then that building in the backgroun, nice pic.

 

[FilmCamera]

Originally posted by: homercles337
Hey n00b, learn the definition of constructive criticism. This clicky is crappy. Care to post any "excellent photos" that break every "rule?" Yea, i didnt think so...

noob? lol whatever man. There's a difference between constructive criticism and being a jerk. You're obviously the latter.

http://photoinf.com/General/Gloria_Hopk..._Articles_-_Breaking_all_the_Rules.htm

http://www.pbase.com/reddishtiger/image/68448512

http://www.pbase.com/nordic/image/68435326

http://www.pbase.com/nickythurgar/image/68441314/medium%5B/img%5D

http://www.pbase.com/jswaters/image/68445083

(NSFW slight nudity in the following link)

http://www.theonlinephotographer.blogsp...6/great-photographers-on-internet.html

http://www.pbase.com/image/68432604

*Note that not all of these are superb awesome photos. I have seen plenty of them in galleries though...but I can't exaclty go take a photo of them and put them online now can I?

 

[Vegitto]

Originally posted by: Aimster
I dont like it, sorryy

 

[bucwylde23]

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: FilmCamera

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: episodic

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: iamaelephant

Originally posted by: homercles337
I remember when i was in junior high and took a photography class. One of the first things we were taught was concerning composition. The simple rule being DONT SPLIT YOUR IMAGE WITH THE HORIZON. Either focus on the sky or ground as your subject. There now, you know too.

And why not? If a photo looks good (which is totally subjective) why do some arbitrary rules about composition matter? That's a load of crap. Anyone who gives you strict rules for composing a piece of art isn't worth listening to.

OP, I really liked you first picture. Can't look at your flickr thing because I don't have a Yahoo account.

Learn ONE or TWO things about photography. The point is that you dont want a "divisive eye." Composing a photograph involves the viewer. Do you want to draw the eye to the ground or sky? What is the SUBJECT of your photograph? If you cant figure this out then so be it, youre a "cliker" not a photographer.

Isn't your eye drawn to the sunset? I mean the sun was my focus.

Clicky click.

Wow, way to come off as a jerk.

Composition "rules" are not really rules to me...more guidelines. Sometimes an excellent photo will break every "rule."

I don't always use the "rule of thirds" though it can be a helpful guideline for some compositions.

To the OP - don't listen to this jerk. Although I don't think that your photo is all that wonderful, at least you are out there working at it. It's the only way you will get better.

Hey n00b, learn the definition of constructive criticism. This clicky is crappy. Care to post any "excellent photos" that break every "rule?" Yea, i didnt think so...

Since you are an expert photographer, let's see some of your pics? I think the picture isn't the best that I have seen, but I see no problem with "splitting the horizon" in this case. The flare is a bit much, however.

 

[RaynorWolfcastle]

Hmm not a bad picture, but I agree with the others, the composition could use a bit of work. IMHO, the foreground tree is too close to the center, and gives the impression of being in the way. You might get away with centering something like a tree if there's something to look at on it, but in this case because of the intense backlight, you can't see anything on it. Also, as was said by others, I think this picture would have worked a bit better had the horizon been a bit lower or higher in the picture. Just remember that since the sun is so bright, the viewer's eye will be drawn to it regardless of where it is; unfortunately, if you center it, that's all the viewer will likely see.

Take a look at this shot I took to see how placing the horizon a bit higher in the picture could have helped Sunset

 

[homercles337]

Originally posted by: episodic

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: FilmCamera

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: episodic

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: iamaelephant

Originally posted by: homercles337
I remember when i was in junior high and took a photography class. One of the first things we were taught was concerning composition. The simple rule being DONT SPLIT YOUR IMAGE WITH THE HORIZON. Either focus on the sky or ground as your subject. There now, you know too.

And why not? If a photo looks good (which is totally subjective) why do some arbitrary rules about composition matter? That's a load of crap. Anyone who gives you strict rules for composing a piece of art isn't worth listening to.

OP, I really liked you first picture. Can't look at your flickr thing because I don't have a Yahoo account.

Learn ONE or TWO things about photography. The point is that you dont want a "divisive eye." Composing a photograph involves the viewer. Do you want to draw the eye to the ground or sky? What is the SUBJECT of your photograph? If you cant figure this out then so be it, youre a "cliker" not a photographer.

Isn't your eye drawn to the sunset? I mean the sun was my focus.

Clicky click.

Wow, way to come off as a jerk.

Composition "rules" are not really rules to me...more guidelines. Sometimes an excellent photo will break every "rule."

I don't always use the "rule of thirds" though it can be a helpful guideline for some compositions.

To the OP - don't listen to this jerk. Although I don't think that your photo is all that wonderful, at least you are out there working at it. It's the only way you will get better.

Hey n00b, learn the definition of constructive criticism. This clicky is crappy. Care to post any "excellent photos" that break every "rule?" Yea, i didnt think so...

Look at the third pic down - vertical break - rule of thirds - practically like mine only different focus.
http://www.thedailyshooter.com/article/Composition+Part+I+:+The+Rule+of+Thirds

You still dont get it do you? In that pic (with the cow or the license plate) NEITHER of them split the horizon. What is it that you dont understand. These pics, while pretty crappy, actually apply the rules of which im speaking. Fsck, please tell me youre not that dense. Here is a quote from your link.

This composition also positions the horizon right along the top third. Landscape photographers will often place the horizon on the top or bottom thirds of the frame for maximum impact.

Jebus...:roll:

 

[homercles337]

Originally posted by: chrisg22

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: FilmCamera

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: episodic

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: iamaelephant

Originally posted by: homercles337
I remember when i was in junior high and took a photography class. One of the first things we were taught was concerning composition. The simple rule being DONT SPLIT YOUR IMAGE WITH THE HORIZON. Either focus on the sky or ground as your subject. There now, you know too.

And why not? If a photo looks good (which is totally subjective) why do some arbitrary rules about composition matter? That's a load of crap. Anyone who gives you strict rules for composing a piece of art isn't worth listening to.

OP, I really liked you first picture. Can't look at your flickr thing because I don't have a Yahoo account.

Learn ONE or TWO things about photography. The point is that you dont want a "divisive eye." Composing a photograph involves the viewer. Do you want to draw the eye to the ground or sky? What is the SUBJECT of your photograph? If you cant figure this out then so be it, youre a "cliker" not a photographer.

Isn't your eye drawn to the sunset? I mean the sun was my focus.

Clicky click.

Wow, way to come off as a jerk.

Composition "rules" are not really rules to me...more guidelines. Sometimes an excellent photo will break every "rule."

I don't always use the "rule of thirds" though it can be a helpful guideline for some compositions.

To the OP - don't listen to this jerk. Although I don't think that your photo is all that wonderful, at least you are out there working at it. It's the only way you will get better.

Hey n00b, learn the definition of constructive criticism. This clicky is crappy. Care to post any "excellent photos" that break every "rule?" Yea, i didnt think so...

Since you are an expert photographer, let's see some of your pics? I think the picture isn't the best that I have seen, but I see no problem with "splitting the horizon" in this case. The flare is a bit much, however.

I NEVER made the claim that im an "expert photographer." Sh!t, im not even a photographer (the best camera i own is part of my SDA), but i do understand GENERAL principles. I also know the difference between clicky, click and a photograph that took some time to frame. What dont you understand here? This is VERY basic stuff.

 

[FilmCamera]

Hey Homercles why don't you put up some of your award-winning follow-all-the-rules photos?

 

[FilmCamera]

Originally posted by: homercles337
I NEVER made the claim that im an "expert photographer." Sh!t, im not even a photographer (the best camera i own is part of my SDA), but i do understand GENERAL principles. I also know the difference between clicky, click and a photograph that took some time to frame. What dont you understand here? This is VERY basic stuff.

If you don't even consider yourself a photographer, then you shouldn't even be commenting because you don't have any idea of what you speak. You may have "book knowledge" regarding compositional rules and such, but you have absolutely no practical experience in the field so you ought not to be acting as if you do.

 

[homercles337]

Originally posted by: FilmCamera
Hey Homercles why don't you put up some of your award-winning follow-all-the-rules photos?

Hey n00b, why dont you read the thread before posting?

With a username like FilmCamera you are awfully dense about SIMPLE rules of composition. Many of the pics in your links above actually apply these simple rules, the others just suck.

 

[FilmCamera]

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: FilmCamera
Hey Homercles why don't you put up some of your award-winning follow-all-the-rules photos?

Hey n00b, why dont you read the thread before posting?

With a username like FilmCamera you are awfully dense about SIMPLE rules of composition. Many of the pics in your links above actually apply these simple rules, the others just suck.

Perhaps you should try reading.

I actually posted that comment before your other post was listed.

I know that those photos are not the greatest photos in the world, but no they do not follow all the "rules" and you should read the satire one as it has photos from some quite famous photogs.

 

[YOyoYOhowsDAjello]

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: FilmCamera
Hey Homercles why don't you put up some of your award-winning follow-all-the-rules photos?

Hey n00b, why dont you read the thread before posting?

With a username like FilmCamera you are awfully dense about SIMPLE rules of composition. Many of the pics in your links above actually apply these simple rules, the others just suck.

Hey, why don't you read the thread and respond to the response FilmCamera gave you earlier to your challenge?

Originally posted by: FilmCamera

Originally posted by: homercles337
Hey n00b, learn the definition of constructive criticism. This clicky is crappy. Care to post any "excellent photos" that break every "rule?" Yea, i didnt think so...

noob? lol whatever man. There's a difference between constructive criticism and being a jerk. You're obviously the latter.

http://photoinf.com/General/Gloria_Hopk..._Articles_-_Breaking_all_the_Rules.htm

http://www.pbase.com/reddishtiger/image/68448512

http://www.pbase.com/nordic/image/68435326

http://www.pbase.com/nickythurgar/image/68441314/medium%5B/img%5D

http://www.pbase.com/jswaters/image/68445083

(NSFW slight nudity in the following link)

http://www.theonlinephotographer.blogsp...6/great-photographers-on-internet.html

http://www.pbase.com/image/68432604

*Note that not all of these are superb awesome photos. I have seen plenty of them in galleries though...but I can't exaclty go take a photo of them and put them online now can I?

 

[PHiuR]

a photo for your eyes and mind.

stop arguing...just post some photos and have everyone discuss...if you get a critique (or attack?) defend yourself or try to understand why the person said what they said...

OP, flares are usually bad news...but it kind of works in your photo....however it's not very interesting to me...

 

[homercles337]

Originally posted by: FilmCamera

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: FilmCamera
Hey Homercles why don't you put up some of your award-winning follow-all-the-rules photos?

Hey n00b, why dont you read the thread before posting?

With a username like FilmCamera you are awfully dense about SIMPLE rules of composition. Many of the pics in your links above actually apply these simple rules, the others just suck.

Perhaps you should try reading.

I actually posted that comment before your other post was listed.

I know that those photos are not the greatest photos in the world, but no they do not follow all the "rules" and you should read the satire one as it has photos from some quite famous photogs.

Hey n00b, you dont get it do you? The OP posted a sh!tty clicky, click masquerading as a quality photo that could have been signifcantly improved by following the simpliest rules. That is my tenent and has been since post #1. Can the simple rules be broken, of course you dope (however based on your links i doubt you even understand the BASICS). Should the rules have been broken with the OPs sh!tty clicky, click? No. There is a reason that rules are used 99% of the time. So n00b, how about some links to your astonishing clicky, clicks where you break the simple rules?

 

[bucwylde23]

It looks like we have a case of someone who reads books and thinks that they know everything. Honestly it's pointless arguing with someone like this.

 

[homercles337]

Originally posted by: YOyoYOhowsDAjello
Hey, why don't you read the thread and respond to the response FilmCamera gave you earlier to your challenge?

I did and i have. If you follow those links MANY of them apply the same rules of which im speaking. The others are just sh!tty cliky, clicks. To me, this is a clear indication that FilmCamera doesnt even understand the basics. Can the rules be broken? Yes, but they are applied 99% of the time for a reason.

 

[PHiuR]

Originally posted by: chrisg22
It looks like we have a case of someone who reads books and thinks that they know everything. Honestly it's pointless arguing with someone like this.

A person who claims to not even be a photographer calls FilmCamera a noob regarding photography, who has actually posted photographs that he has taken, which are pretty good.

you guys don't understand...TOO MANY people are claiming to be photographers!!!

homercles337, i know why you claimed not to be a photographer because so many noobs who just got a new digital camera CLAIM to be a photographer...they don't know what it means to BE a photographer.

 

[FilmCamera]

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: FilmCamera

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: FilmCamera
Hey Homercles why don't you put up some of your award-winning follow-all-the-rules photos?

Hey n00b, why dont you read the thread before posting?

With a username like FilmCamera you are awfully dense about SIMPLE rules of composition. Many of the pics in your links above actually apply these simple rules, the others just suck.

Perhaps you should try reading.

I actually posted that comment before your other post was listed.

I know that those photos are not the greatest photos in the world, but no they do not follow all the "rules" and you should read the satire one as it has photos from some quite famous photogs.

Hey n00b, you dont get it do you? The OP posted a sh!tty clicky, click masquerading as a quality photo that could have been signifcantly improved by following the simpliest rules. That is my tenent and has been since post #1. Can the simple rules be broken, of course you dope (however based on your links i doubt you even understand the BASICS). Should the rules have been broken with the OPs sh!tty clicky, click? No. There is a reason that rules are used 99% of the time. So n00b, how about some links to your astonishing clicky, clicks where you break the simple rules?

My whole point was that you are a freaking jerk. I think you've made that quite clear yourself.

When I shoot landscapes I don't even give any rules any consideration. I shoot solely based off of what I think looks good. Sure they can fit rules but I don't actively think about it when shooting. Here's an example of one of my photos:

http://picsorban.com/upload/yosemitefalls.jpg

 

[homercles337]

Originally posted by: chrisg22
It looks like we have a case of someone who reads books and thinks that they know everything. Honestly it's pointless arguing with someone like this.

Uh, yea dem buks be bad. :roll:

Jebus, im talking about things that a child can understand for christs sake! Discussing such issues with a person like you means you dont even have the comprehension of a child. Yea for stupidity! :thumbsup: