Keith_A_Howe
09-15-2008, 08:20 PM
For anyone who hasn't read the other thread Mark gave me permission to use his print as an example here. I am going to explain my interpetation on how Mark's image reflects the 12 elements
This is the print Mark entered at PPANE - I believe he said it scored a 77
http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p308/imager410/marktulip.jpg
1) Impact - it's a common subject, nothing about this image or this presentation evokes any particular emotional or intellectual response from me so I would rank it as average in impact.
2) Creativity - again it is a common treatment of a common subject, so I would rank it as average in creativity. The bras and panties print was unique and much more creative.
3) Style - hate to over use the term but once again this is a common style. There is nothing about this image that expresses a particular style. It is something that could be the work of a thousand different photographers. At best the style is generic. So I would rank it below average in style.
4) Composition - defined as the way the maker chooses to arrange the objects in the image. I also think of it as where your eye travels and where it chooses to land. The rule of thirds is a good place to start and so is Bakker saddle but not the only choices. Here is Mark's print with grids
http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p308/imager410/marktulip2.jpg
His composition places the vase of tulips on a third line - side to side but not top to bottom. It's acceptable, however there is no "flow" or no "travel" through the image - it's just there. That can work for certain images but it does not enhance or add to this image. Perhaps if the tulips were araanged so that one or two created leading lines - as was the case with his orchid image shown here . . .
http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p308/imager410/markorchid.jpg
See how the line of the flowers leads you into the print. Anyway I would rank the composition of the tulips as average. The composition doesn't hurt this image but it doesn't help it either.
5) Presentation - Here I am in the below average catergory. The border is distracting and does not relate to the subject matter. Like I say over and over - if it doesn't enhance the image leave it out.
6) Center of interest - It seems obvious what the center of interest was here - the vase of tulips, but when I look at the image, my eye jumps back and forth between the two brightest things, the vase and the white tulips. I really can't tell which I am supposed to look at. The title tells me the pitcher is the important thing - so then I would say the white tulips are distracting.
7) Lighting - I find this lighting confusing. I am not confused as to how it was accomplished but rather it's a confusing end result. The main light is camera right yet the highlight on the left side of the pitcher is stronger than the right. The shadow from the main light is projected back and to the left, yet there is also a shadow projected forward and to the right. The kicker light is flattening out all the drama that was created by the main.
8) Subject matter - I addressed this in impact - common subject - so it neither helped nor hurt this image - again I rank it average. To refer back to the orchid print - it was common subject also but the interesting color of the orchids themsleves made it more unique. Subject matter also refers to appropiate choice of subject used to convey the idea of the image. For example if the idea is elegance and grace - don't use an unattractive female.
9) Color balance - impossible to accurately evaluate color balance from looking at my moniter - too many variables. But it appears fine. Color balance also refers to the colors selected to tell the story. I usually think of red as portraying heat, fire, sensuality, energy etc. Whether those emotional characteristics of red fit this image is something each judge would have to decide for themselves. Also does the color help pull you into the center of interest.
10) Technical excellance - as I mentioned there are issues with the lighting. It is hard to judge this based on a low res file on a moniter - I would have been looking for sharpness in all the flowers - or if a shallower depth of field was chosen and some flowers were out of focus, was it used appropiately to guide the viewers eye where you wanted it. It appears to be exposed properly. I do think the table top could have benefited from some burning. Especially as it contrasts with the vignette on the background.
11) technique - well the scrolly texture overlay was not a good choice IMO. It makes some of the leaves and some of the white tulips look dirty or as if they are damaged. As a judge I would have asked myself does this effect enhance the image? If not then it was a mistake to add it. The maker deliberatly choose that effect. Some things are beyond a makers control and if so I take that into consideration when it effects the overall print. But if the maker can control it, then they need to have done so in a way that helps the print. The vignette on the background creates a keyhole effect. Some of the other issues that effect technique were covered in other elements.
12) storytelling - Story telling is defined as the ability of the print to evoke the viewers imagination. This is a pitcher of flowers setting on a table, I get nothing more or less than that. I have to work too hard to get anymore out of it than that. This is an example where a title could maybe have helped a little - like "Great Grandma's Pitcher" but Molly's Pitcher doesn't say anything other than someone named Molly owns this pitcher. To once again refer to Mark's bra and panties print from earlier this year, it too was a still ife of inanimate objects. But that print told a story which made it much stronger. Maybe Mark will post that image for you guys to see and compare.
Mark, I know it sounds like I am tearing this print apart. I choose this one as it most clearly illustrated things about the 12 elements and I felt it would as such be the best learning example.
Keith
This is the print Mark entered at PPANE - I believe he said it scored a 77
http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p308/imager410/marktulip.jpg
1) Impact - it's a common subject, nothing about this image or this presentation evokes any particular emotional or intellectual response from me so I would rank it as average in impact.
2) Creativity - again it is a common treatment of a common subject, so I would rank it as average in creativity. The bras and panties print was unique and much more creative.
3) Style - hate to over use the term but once again this is a common style. There is nothing about this image that expresses a particular style. It is something that could be the work of a thousand different photographers. At best the style is generic. So I would rank it below average in style.
4) Composition - defined as the way the maker chooses to arrange the objects in the image. I also think of it as where your eye travels and where it chooses to land. The rule of thirds is a good place to start and so is Bakker saddle but not the only choices. Here is Mark's print with grids
http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p308/imager410/marktulip2.jpg
His composition places the vase of tulips on a third line - side to side but not top to bottom. It's acceptable, however there is no "flow" or no "travel" through the image - it's just there. That can work for certain images but it does not enhance or add to this image. Perhaps if the tulips were araanged so that one or two created leading lines - as was the case with his orchid image shown here . . .
http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p308/imager410/markorchid.jpg
See how the line of the flowers leads you into the print. Anyway I would rank the composition of the tulips as average. The composition doesn't hurt this image but it doesn't help it either.
5) Presentation - Here I am in the below average catergory. The border is distracting and does not relate to the subject matter. Like I say over and over - if it doesn't enhance the image leave it out.
6) Center of interest - It seems obvious what the center of interest was here - the vase of tulips, but when I look at the image, my eye jumps back and forth between the two brightest things, the vase and the white tulips. I really can't tell which I am supposed to look at. The title tells me the pitcher is the important thing - so then I would say the white tulips are distracting.
7) Lighting - I find this lighting confusing. I am not confused as to how it was accomplished but rather it's a confusing end result. The main light is camera right yet the highlight on the left side of the pitcher is stronger than the right. The shadow from the main light is projected back and to the left, yet there is also a shadow projected forward and to the right. The kicker light is flattening out all the drama that was created by the main.
8) Subject matter - I addressed this in impact - common subject - so it neither helped nor hurt this image - again I rank it average. To refer back to the orchid print - it was common subject also but the interesting color of the orchids themsleves made it more unique. Subject matter also refers to appropiate choice of subject used to convey the idea of the image. For example if the idea is elegance and grace - don't use an unattractive female.
9) Color balance - impossible to accurately evaluate color balance from looking at my moniter - too many variables. But it appears fine. Color balance also refers to the colors selected to tell the story. I usually think of red as portraying heat, fire, sensuality, energy etc. Whether those emotional characteristics of red fit this image is something each judge would have to decide for themselves. Also does the color help pull you into the center of interest.
10) Technical excellance - as I mentioned there are issues with the lighting. It is hard to judge this based on a low res file on a moniter - I would have been looking for sharpness in all the flowers - or if a shallower depth of field was chosen and some flowers were out of focus, was it used appropiately to guide the viewers eye where you wanted it. It appears to be exposed properly. I do think the table top could have benefited from some burning. Especially as it contrasts with the vignette on the background.
11) technique - well the scrolly texture overlay was not a good choice IMO. It makes some of the leaves and some of the white tulips look dirty or as if they are damaged. As a judge I would have asked myself does this effect enhance the image? If not then it was a mistake to add it. The maker deliberatly choose that effect. Some things are beyond a makers control and if so I take that into consideration when it effects the overall print. But if the maker can control it, then they need to have done so in a way that helps the print. The vignette on the background creates a keyhole effect. Some of the other issues that effect technique were covered in other elements.
12) storytelling - Story telling is defined as the ability of the print to evoke the viewers imagination. This is a pitcher of flowers setting on a table, I get nothing more or less than that. I have to work too hard to get anymore out of it than that. This is an example where a title could maybe have helped a little - like "Great Grandma's Pitcher" but Molly's Pitcher doesn't say anything other than someone named Molly owns this pitcher. To once again refer to Mark's bra and panties print from earlier this year, it too was a still ife of inanimate objects. But that print told a story which made it much stronger. Maybe Mark will post that image for you guys to see and compare.
Mark, I know it sounds like I am tearing this print apart. I choose this one as it most clearly illustrated things about the 12 elements and I felt it would as such be the best learning example.
Keith