Off-Topic - advice, experiences and examples, for images that will be processed in PhotoLab

[mikemyers]

@Wolfgang

… or get / use binoculars, saving you the effort to post it here. That’s the right tool to watch details in selective view.

You, and @Joanna, and others have been trying to change me from what you explain as “photojournalism”, and you tell me that I’m no longer working as a photojournalist, so I should give up those old habits. Lately, I’ve been asked to create more “artistic” photos. The photos taken over many decades that are posted in my m.smugmug.com photo gallery ought to give anyone a good idea of what kind of photography I’m interested in. Conversely, it ought to be obvious by now that I’m more interested in my kind of photography, than what several of you, yourself included, are pushing me towards. I’m not sure why I went along with that, but I did, and now I’m reading that the photos I’ve taken lately are not as good as what’s posted in that gallery.

The last image I posted wasn’t intended to be posted here - it was for me, and will certainly be posted to my gallery when I get around to updating. As I wrote earlier, I like it just the way it is, and in retrospect I never should have posted the earlier images that I took based on requests (usually from Joanna). My heart wasn’t in them.

You are telling me just now that instead of taking that last photo, I should have just used binoculars. That is wrong as me writing that “still life photos” are worthless, and why not spend the time to make something real?"

For better or worse, I’ve had decades to refine my own photography into what it is now, and many, many others have helped over time, especially editors who were very picky about what would or would not be published. I know they had a big effect on my photography - and if I were to post copies of those pages and articles here now, you and others would tell me how “boring” they were. …but while you might have been right from your point of view, from that of my editors (who wanted to sell magazines) and myself, they were perfect, and I know (and they knew) how much trouble it was to have captured them.

Anyway, that brings us to the present. You posted a photo of two sailboats off in the distance that I thought was boring, and which Joanna loved. Then I just posted a photo of two sailboats that I enjoy, and nobody said much about it. It was processed as best I could in PhotoLab 6, using many of the things I learned here in this forum - actually, only in this forum, as I haven’t watched a PhotoJoseph video in a year or so. Now I rely on feedback here.

In this forum, it has strongly been suggested which camera to use, probably for good reasons that apply to others. I would prefer to select the camera based on what I plan to photograph, and while the D780 might be better for shots with a 300mm lens, the M10 “feels” better to me, and I enjoy using it more than the D780.

I appreciate that you are all trying to “help me”, but, many of you are trying to “change me”. Your photo of the two sailboats had a similar effect on me, as my last photo had on you… and obviously, each of us was “seeing” things based on many years of our photography.

I love the way you describe how you edit photos, and how you achieve your goals. Ditto for Joanna, but I used to enjoy her photos much more when they were of buildings, or machines, or light houses, or boats - probably because I could relate to them better.

This post is getting way too long. The reason I used to post images here, was to find out how I could have used PhotoLab better to process the images for a better end result. This had nothing to do with whether the image was “interesting” or “boring” (and if so, to who?)

…and meanwhile, nobody has suggested any way to process that last image any better than what I did, so maybe there’s no more need for me to post, and I should instead spend my time here viewing and discussing other people’s images?

I like what I did with this image, even if nobody else does. The lighting, the composition, the details, the colors, and so on, are as good as I am capable of achieving. To me at least, it is interesting, much more so than photos I don’t understand… And if anyone seeing this thinks this photo is a waste of space, please DO explain why.

@mikemyers

[Wolfgang ([ Win11, PL9, FP7, VP5, Nik7+3.3 ])]

You write, YOU want to see details, colours, people on the boats and so forth, but that others don’t appreciate these pics. … So, if the latter is important to YOU, either change something (over the past you have got a ton of proposals, from how to with DxO PL right to composition) or YOU don’t, but then please stop complaining and don’t expect others to applaude.

Then also, you have been coming up here with so many ‘mediocre’ pics from the bay & boats, that people are just tired of.

Instead of confusing yourself with constantly interchanging cameras, you were advised to concentrate on one and get to know it inside out, e.g. your latest D780. This is not to keep you back from using your Canon, Fuji, Leica(s) or Nikon DF, if you feel like. While a small / quiet cam might be better suited for unobtrusive shots, what counts in the end is what you bring home …

BTW, you want to take ‘street’, but don’t like portraits? How does that go together with people?

I noticed since long that you tend to see ‘selectively’, which is why at some time I proposed to get the telephoto lens you are using now. Take it when you go to see your brother’s country-side home.

---

about the last pic you didn’t hesitate to re-post

• The boats are shown again one behind the other, while this time with more space in between, the mast of the front boat still ‘crossing’ the other one – not good.

• You cut off both masts and stuffed the object(s) into a square – not good.

It simply is no convincing composition. A vertical framing with the complete masts would be much more favourable.

When you like something (the first step, otherwise you wouldn’t take the pic), but then (absolutely) want it in a certain way, does not automatically guarantee a good pic.

• Which is why, back on your screen, take your time, lean back and put yourself in the viewer’s position, who didn’t take the photo and also doesn’t know your intentions …

[Hisonor (Jeff Grabenstein)]

What a long strange trip it has been

[mikemyers]

@Wolfgang

about the last pic you didn’t hesitate to re-post

• The boats are shown again one behind the other, while this time with more space in between, the mast of the front boat still ‘crossing’ the other one – not good.
• You cut off both masts and stuffed the object(s) into a square – not good.
  It simply is no convincing composition. A vertical framing with the complete masts would be much more favourable.

I’ll respond to your other points later this evening or tomorrow, but maybe you didn’t notice that my latest post of that image was simply a “screen capture” of the image as posted in the forum. There are no changes to the image.

Neither you, nor anyone else commented on my “street scene capture” taken in Madurai. When I say I enjoy street photography (I don’t enjoy taking portraits) this is an example of what I prefer to capture, hopefully with nobody aware of my presence.

As to composition, I often leave out the boring parts of an image. …I’ll try to respond more later tonight. Until now, I had all the free time in the world. That’s no longer the case.

Thank you for your thoughts. …and especially for your explaining how to use PhotoLab masking!!

[Wolfgang ([ Win11, PL9, FP7, VP5, Nik7+3.3 ])]

@mikemyers

As to composition, I often leave out the boring parts of an image.

That’s an example I thought to be funny (in the sense of somewhat interesting / unusual for me),

but not as ‘full zoom’, as you had presented it.

I gave the subject [in the foreground now and close enough to the viewer to be discerned] more space
– and ‘direction’ to hopefully reach & pass safely the buoys. [The viewer doesn’t know there was much more distance to overcome.]

Composition doesn’t follow fixed rules, but you can play with them.

[mikemyers]

Something to consider…

@Wolfgang

…but then please stop complaining and don’t expect others to applaude…Then also, you have been coming up here with so many ‘mediocre’ pics from the bay & boats, that people are just tired of.

Serious question - so what?
I didn’t come here to become a better photographer and compete with others. If you think back three years, then two, then one, the reason I am here IS TO LEARN PHOTOLAB.

Joanna was wonderful with that, telling me what I did wrong, and then showing me examples of how to use the tools.

It’s sort of irrelevant if people are bored with my photos of boats and Biscayne Bay and Miami skyline. What is important is how well I’m using PhotoLab - or not.

Yeah, I made the last photo square, and you feel it would be better with the top not cut away, but for a while now, nobody has been correcting mistakes I made with the editing software.

That you’d all like to help me become a better photographer is great, but that’s not why I’m here. I’m certainly willing to listen, and even to try things, but let’s face it, I’m not capable of “seeing” images the way the rest of you do. From the responses here, your photos have much more of what people here feel is important. Congratulations. Think of my issues as being something like “color blind”, where I don’t get it.

As one example, I like my last boat photo cropped to a square format, and specifically left out more of the (boring?) mast. The same image, with all of the mast, displayed at a similar size, would lose all the detail I considered important… but so what?

Please think of my images from now on as nothing more than experimenting in how to get the most out of PhotoLab. If you also want to tell me the images are “boring” or “photojournalistic”, that’s fine too. If you want to tell me I’m a lousy photographer, who doesn’t have a clue, that’s also OK. But you would be helping me a lot more if you simply corrected mistake in how I’m using PhotoLab.

I think you are posting while I am typing this. I need to go back to getting my bullseye guns and ammo ready for tomorrow. I will catch up on things tomorrow. Maybe I can take a photo at the gun range…

[mikemyers]

@Wolfgang

That’s an example I thought to be funny (in the sense of somewhat interesting / unusual for me),

For what it’s worth, I certainly like your version more. I never even thought to do that. It’s nicer, and has more of a “purpose”. Thank you!!! I >>>will<<< try to remember this for the future.

[mwsilvers (Mark - New Jersey, USA)]

@mikemyers

…the reason I am here IS TO LEARN PHOTOLAB.

After over three years and 2700 posts I think you would now be familiar with virtually every feature and tool in PhotoLab. Getting the most from it should now mostly be a matter of practice. There is nothing like repetition to learn what works and what doesn’t.

Of course, you still may have questions about the more arcane features and the relationships and results of using multiple features together. I haven’t read every post in every one of your threads but I have read many and it seems to me you haven’t really asked much in months with regard to using the many features in PhotoLab. Mostly it seems to be you posting pictures and seeking approval or suggestions for improvement.

I would think at this point, with your decades of professional experience, you would know when a picture succeeds and when it doesn’t; when it pleases you and when it doesn’t. Certainly keep posting. We all can learn from the dialog. But, what are you actually still learning from us about PhotoLab at this point? I assume that after three years of intensive use of PhotoLab you would be at a fairly advanced level, but you still seem to need affirmation on a great many of your finished images. And, unfortunately, most of them are not as interesting, or look as good, as most of your images on SmugMug dating back years earlier So what have you gained, and what do you hope to gain going forward?

Mark

[mwsilvers (Mark - New Jersey, USA)]

I thought I would post something non-nautical. This 19th century house is right off very rural Old Mine Road in north western New Jersey, part of an isolated village of 19th century buildings.

Mark

[mikemyers]

@mwsilvers

Mostly it seems to be you posting pictures and seeking approval or suggestions for improvement.

Yes, three years ago, and two years, and even a year ago, since I post my .dop files, I got lots of feedback about my PhotoLab editing. That has pretty much stopped, so maybe you’re right, I already “know” enough abut PhotoLab that I’m not making so many mistakes in processing.

For a lot of reasons, I’m constantly taking photos, more so to keep me in touch with my camera, than to create a photo I really like. Having not used it in about a month now, I’ll need to do this all over again with my M10.

I haven’t found many photos I really liked for their own sake lately, and some of those (devil-eye-dog) turned out to be impossible to get what I wanted. I expected to get a lot of feedback on my photo of an Indian street scene (which I used what I hoped were acceptable PhotoLab skills), but nobody said anything about my main question when I was finished, if the people in the photo looked OK, or if they were too dark, and whether I should have lightened their skin, but I also realize that would not be realistic.

@mwsilvers

I would think at this point, with your decades of professional experience, you would know when a picture succeeds and when it doesn’t; when it pleases you and when it doesn’t.

Yes and no - photos for my purposes - certainly. I mostly know what I want, and find a way to get it. Photos for other purposes (such as a still life) - no. Just recently, I posted a square photo of two sailboats, that showed what I wanted, but @Wolfgang wanted the masts included - which I left out because to me that would have wasted a lot of boring space.

@mwsilvers

And, unfortunately, most of them are not as interesting, or look as good, as most of your images on SmugMug dating back years earlier

From my point of view, I had access to much nicer subject matter, than boring photos taken around my home, so I agree with you.

@mwsilvers

So what have you gained, and what do you hope to gain going forward?

Simple - if I want to capture interesting photos again, I need to travel to interesting places again, such as Colorado. I still find places around my home that I think would make an interesting photo, but to anyone else, I’ve learned they are boring.

@mwsilvers

This 19th century house is right off very rural Old Mine Road in north western New Jersey, part of an isolated village of 19th century buildings.

THAT is interesting and lovely in so many ways. I’ve seen several photo-ops while traveling to/from my brother’s home in Massachusetts, but never had the right camera gear, and most times we were driving by, and he didn’t want to stop. I like everything about your photo. I can even enjoy thinking I could live like that, instead of in my condo…

[mwsilvers (Mark - New Jersey, USA)]

Here is another one from Grounds for Sculpture. Captured at f/10 per a earlier suggestion from @Joanna. One of my goals was to show only the slightest hint of detail from the deep shadows in the center of the image. I used the Agfa Ultra Color100 film type from FilmPack 6. Any comments would be appreciated.

Mark

[OXiDant (Peter)]

@mwsilvers

comments would be appreciated.

The golden look warms up the otherwise rather one look image. Nice choice.
What i like is the glare of more.
Those blocks in the front and that hint of a structure in the back.
Funny part is if you walk around you would give this maybe 2twice a look and think “that’s old and broken”
As one image not very interesting but as a part of a group, theme very catchy.

[JoJu (Joachim)]

When I first looked at the dark area, I thought it was a wall. Being it an entrance (into darkness?) was only visible when enlarging the picture. I like the very warm (new winters are closer to summers…) colour and I don’t like the sky so much. Sun was shining, sky is grey, no cloud. But that would maybe only add to the chaos of the branches and bushes and trees back there.
I wonder how the picture would look like if you had taken it with camera 1 ½ ft down, but same direction - or did you correct the perspective in post? At the moment the picture tells me only “Adult looking at a house-ruin in winter time, possibly evening. Something going on? No.”

But it made me curious. What would Detective Excire find ou with all its AI? “Contrasty” was the only keyword it came up with, booh, AI. Finding a “similar” picture with yours as example was also more or less disappointing. When do I find a house ruin in evening light with a wintertime naked bush in the foreground? Taken with f/10, which I only accidentally use?

So miraculously I could not find a close enough image so easily.

[mikemyers]

@JoJu

When I first looked at the dark area, I thought it was a wall.

I like the photo, bu I agree with @JoJu - I only enlarged it because of what he wrote, and sure enough, it is a wall… on my screen, at a normal size, it looks like a very underexposed dark brown shape, and the “interesting stuff” within is hidden.

My suggestion - lose part of the not very interesting sky, and if possible, include the base of whatever the structure is at the bottom left. It’s there, and it’s interesting to me, but I would like to see the base.

[mwsilvers (Mark - New Jersey, USA)]

Thank you to all. I appreciate the comments and will review what possible improvements I can make to this image.

Mark

[rrblint (Mark)]

I agree that the bottom of the box should be visible, but I love the golden hour coppery colors.

[mwsilvers (Mark - New Jersey, USA)]

Hi Mark, thanks for your comment. I will be looking at ways to improve this image after reading the comments I have received so far.
.
This structure was buried in a heavily shaded area. The day was clear and sunny with very few clouds but this image was taken on 3:45 pm on December 30th and the sun was already low in the sky. The brightness of the one wall was a result of a shaft of light from the late afternoon sun coming through an opening in the trees.

My goal was to capture the mix of light and shadow across the texture of this stone structure and the other objects nearby while emphasizing the tangled nature of the tree branches to the left. That particular film type was chosen because I liked the way the confusion of branches looked when it was applied.

The various comments are making me rethink the presentation of this image and whether or not I can achieve my goals and at the same time make it more interesting for others.

Mark.

[George]

A more journalistic image. I do like it. Curious what others think of it.

George

[Wolfgang ([ Win11, PL9, FP7, VP5, Nik7+3.3 ])]

@mwsilvers

Any comments …

I like the idea of the golden light (enhanced by this film !) and the strong shadows give some mystery.
Maybe you can reduce the brightness of the sky a bit.

---

Have been looking for something, here in colour

.
( B&W deleted → see … )

[Wolfgang ([ Win11, PL9, FP7, VP5, Nik7+3.3 ])]

Really big vs small, static vs dynamic – all making it interesting.
And the small boat almost disappears in the waves.

The crane at the RHS takes care not to ‘water down’ the strong perspective.