Brutal evaluations sought!

[JHemdal]

All,

Each year, the national zoo and aquarium association holds a photo contest. Each year I enter it and have *never* won, or even placed. Roughly 25 images get selected each year. I've tried mostly technical images in the past, so this year, I tried something more artistic - still it bombed.

So - please take a look at this image and tell me what's wrong with it:

Thanks,

Jay

 

[Financial Panth]

Its kind of blurry and uninteresting.

Its a nice picture but not anything that I would give an award to.

Of course that's MO.

 

[Misled]

I agree, it's not extreamly sharp. The backround bothers me. Having the blue and black, then some of the coral out of focus seems very distracting.

 

[Recty]

It's a decent close up macro shot, but the entire picture seems a little out of focus and just not sharp.

The background needs to either be all black or all blue, it's distracting. And the blue looks low quality, if that's possible Too much grain in it, it makes it look like a low quality image.

There needs to be something in the photo your eye is immediately drawn to, something that stands out a little from the rest... and that photo doesnt have anything like that.

 

[Jacob D]

It looks like a heavy crop from a larger image, i.e. pixelated, soft, blotchy

 

[BlueCorn]

The comments are right on. It's not in focus and there's nothing interesting about the composition.

I judged a show last weekend and I can tell you first hand, that's something that people struggle with.

 

[JHemdal]

Hmmm, Personally, I don't like the three out-of-focus polyps in the upper right, but I chose the image for the blue contrasting with the black. I shot this through a 1.5" acrylic panel then through 24" off water to the colony of Xenia on the back wall - so in my own mind, that fully accounts for the lack of sharpness(grin). My eye is drawn to the two lower polyps, which is about right in terms of composition - but that may be from having looked at the image so long, thus my wanting a fresh perspective.

Jay

 

[JHemdal]

Here is something funny - I had submitted a half a dozen images to the senior staff here at the zoo including a professional photographer and our artistic director. They all picked this shot, (so the others were worse than this!) here is what the art director said:

"Jay-wow, way cool---the xenia strikes me as the best composition-I don't know a xenia from a zinnia, so I can't attest to color, but the comp is nice and the blue is striking- V"

Soooo, with "art" there is lots of room for opinion I guess (grin).


Jay

 

[BlueCorn]

Soooo, with "art" there is lots of room for opinion I guess (grin).

Oh absolutely, and judging is very subjective.

That said, I can tell you how I approach judging when there are a ton of entries. Step one is to reject images with obvious technical flaws. Sharpness and exposure are the first things that I look at. Any image that has blown highlights or is obviously not sharp gets culled on my first pass. If there are basic technical flaws, it doesn't matter what the composition is.

Everyone is different, as you say, but you got a pretty consistent message from the folks here.

 

[JHemdal]

Doug,

Yes, but the input here didn't jibe with my staff's at the zoo, so there is that. Maybe the zoo staff picked my *worst* photo, just to set me up to fail - they all hate me (grin).

Regarding sharpness, like I said, I went with "artsy" this time because the technical shots didn't work before...and there simply is no required level of sharpness in an artistic piece.

JacobD hit the nail on the head, this was an extreme crop...

Thanks all for the input!


Jay

 

[BlueCorn]

The point that I was really trying to make is that what someone, personally, is looking for in an image may not align with what a judge in a juried show is looking at. At the step that I'd reject an image like that, whether the image is pleasing artistically doesn't even come into play.

Cheers

 

[xtm]

Hey Jay,
It's not too bad of a photo, but on the technical side I also agree w/ others that it fell short on sharpness and being out-of-focus. The image is also a bit noisy and the stalks have strong CA. As far as composition, my #1 personal rule is your image HAS to tell a story. When you take a photo, ask yourself.. what is this photo about? What is it trying to tell? That image tells me that there are Xenias and the owner simply took photos of them (not trying to be funny). It lacks punch. It lacks detail. It draws your eyes' attention to so many things in the frame... the strong blue background, the multiple stalks of Xenia..among many others. Lastly, the perspective is unnatural but not unique. When you look at your tank, do you see the exact rendition?

I hope I'm making sense.. it's kinda hard to explain. I'll use this as an example.. I took a quick snapshot.. but tell me, what is the subject of this picture and what is it telling you?

Right away you know that the fish is the subject.. the fish is in focus, and the setting is "at the crowded reef". A shallow DOF is used to isolate the subject and separate it from the background, which helps direct the eye away from the distraction. I also slightly vignetted the background to further emphasize the subject. (learned this from beerguy in one of his Yosemite shots) Another technique I use is I slightly de-saturate the background, leaving just the subject to be saturated. Anything to direct the viewer's eye to the subject and away from distraction helps!

Sorry for the lengthy pseudo workshop, but that's my take. Hope it helped

 

[BlueCorn]

XTM's post is excellent, but I did want to address this comment in your post (that I missed earlier)

and there simply is no required level of sharpness in an artistic piece

I understand where you're coming from here and I largely agree with it. The problem is that for an artistic image to be successful it must convey your intent to the viewer.

A very clearly out of focus object looks intentional, a very slightly out of focus object looks like a mistake. I follow the same rational when dealing with something that crosses the edge of the frame.

 

[swjim]

I agree with the previous suggestions regarding sharpness, subject isolation and background distractions. I would also add that the color looks washed out and the lighting unnatural most likely due to the use of direct flash.

Using XTM's shot as a positive example, the lighting looks natural because it is coming from overhead: the top of the fish is highlighted while the bottom is shadowed which is the way we are accustomed to seeing fish and corals lit by the sun (or our lighting systems). The colors are vibrant but very natural. If you compare your shot to this you can see that the polyps in the front are throwing shadows on the polyps to the rear while what we would expect is the tops of the polyps to be highlighted and the bottoms more shadowed. Since it's not a top down shot it will cause most people to think there is something that is a bit off, even if they don't initially pay attention to the shadows.

 

[africangrey]

the low light from the tank and pulsing nature of the xenia don't help to capture ultra sharp image that you sought after. A flash to freeze the image in a must.

 

[JHemdal]

xtm,

You wrote - "what is the subject of this picture and what is it telling you?"

Well, your picture is telling me that you have an anthias that most likely has a sub-acute infection of Mycobacterium marinum (a bit skinny with slight exopthalmia and roughed-up scales). It will probably live for some time, but upon necropsy, it will likely have nodules in its liver which if cultured would turn out to be slow-growing acid fast bacteria. See - every picture does tell a story!

Thanks for the input! No - the image looks NOTHING like the tank. The Xenia is growing on the back of a 1500 gallon pale blue fiberglas exhibit. I didn't even turn off the pumps for this shot - because I'm notorius for getting carried away with what I'm doing and then walking off and leaving the pumps off!

One final thing - I obviously have the advantage of having seen the winning shots. Some of them were very good, but many could have been titled, "Snapshots I took at the zoo today".

Jay

 

[boodlefish]

xtm - "what is the subject of this picture and what is it telling you?"

Well, your picture is telling me that you have an anthias that most likely has a sub-acute infection of Mycobacterium marinum (a bit skinny with slight exopthalmia and roughed-up scales). It will probably live for some time, but upon necropsy, it will likely have nodules in its liver which if cultured would turn out to be slow-growing acid fast bacteria. See - every picture does tell a story!

Hey Jay, perhaps when expecting a little leeway with technical aspects of your photo by calling it "artsy" then you should extend the same courtesy regarding others in this case xtm's subject.

you may see a grim scientific analysis of somebody's fish, or maybe an excuse to down play somebody's helpful suggestions because you mistakenly titled your thread "Brutal evaluations sought!" and didn't get the evaluations you were expecting.

FWIW~ what I see in xtm's photo is a far cry from what you described. I see a brave little soul facing something bigger then themselves, someone (figuratively speaking, we are being "artsy") who is venturing back into an arena where they have faced trouble before. I see a little trepidation and a lot of courage. I see beautiful fish in a well cared for aquarium. etc...

As Ansel Adams so eloquently put it. "In my mind's eye, I visualize how a particular... sight and feeling will appear on a print. If it excites me, there is a good chance it will make a good photograph. It is an intuitive sense, an ability that comes from a lot of practice."

Did your photo excite you?

 

[JHemdal]

Tucker,

Sorry, xtm said he/she took a "quick snapshot", so I wasn't looking critically at the photograph itself. I mean, otherwise, was xtm's point, "I just took a quick snapshot and its better than the shot you slaved over"? I didn't take the comment that way, but I noticed that the fish has issues, so that is what it was "telling me". The point I was trying to make is that everyone has a different perspective. I read xtm's information, will try to learn from it, and thanked him/her.

Personally, with xtm's anthias image, I see a tack sharp fish in a rather plain setting. A good snapshot. I would use something like that (after cropping to remove the two white specks below the fish's caudal fin) for the ID signs in my building. Here is an anthias shot I took. I didn't submit it to the photo contest because the upper fish was too far cropped out IMO. But, it does tell a story:

If the whole frame had been moved up and to the right a bit, I would have been much happier. It seems underexposed, but this fish is a temperate water Japanese fish, so the tank is dark. This is the essence of my photography - I'm not very artistic, have to struggle with the technical aspects of my D300, but I sell a fair number of photos because I have access to subject matter that few other people have.
However, there is a distressing trend going on since around 2007. I used to write an article or a book, add photos and sell the whole package. Now, I'm starting to get feedback where my text is accepted for publication, but they are going to use stock services for the images! So in reaction to that, I'm going to have to really work on my photography skills, thus prompting my initial posting....


Jay

 

[boodlefish]

Tucker,
Sorry, xtm said he/she took a "quick snapshot", so I wasn't looking critically at the photograph itself. I mean, otherwise, was xtm's point, "I just took a quick snapshot and its better than the shot you slaved over"? I didn't take the comment that way, but I noticed that the fish has issues, so that is what it was "telling me". The point I was trying to make is that everyone has a different perspective. I read xtm's information, will try to learn from it, and thanked him/her.

first off Jay i agree and i think everyone here agrees that every viewer has a different perspective.
secondly i dont think xtm's intention had anything to do with "i just took a quick snapshot and its better then a shot you slaved over" i have gotten a lot of extremely helpful info from xtm here in the past and have yet to see them post in a "i'm a better photographer then you" fashion, even though they are probably a better photographer then me and many others too.
third you say you didnt take the the comment that way but your post really seems like you may have. you didnt say its a lovely snapshot i would use to id a fish in my aquarium you found a possible weakness and exploited it.

i like the directional comp of your new photo better it draws the eye and if the cropt fish was in frame i'm guessing that would be the focus or subject of the shot.

 

[Jacob D]

Hey Jay, please try not to take this the wrong way... photography requires much more skill than many people realize. There are professional photogs out there for a reason of course. I wouldn't imagine (and I may be wrong) that many authors, photojournalists aside, provide/sell photography for their articles unless of course the subject matter is so specialized that nobody else would have access. I think you should consider yourself lucky to have been able to do that, but don't be disturbed that people who make their living at photography are edging into your territory; if anything you were firmly planted in their territory first Now, if photogs start publishing articles to accompany their photographs...

Also, it doesn't seem very fair of you to call out some of the other finalists entries as 'snapshots' when you have never been a finalist; it comes across a little mean spirited.

Do you by any chance have a link you can share (if it's online) for this contest?