Jump to content

Photo Examples of Good Rule or Technique Application, Help for the New Contributor


Recommended Posts

On 4/11/2021 at 2:33 AM, oleschwander said:

Right. But I don’t think Rudy is talking (only) about microstock.

Oh my mistake, I thought it was a Microstock site and Microstock forum, for people who were trying to sell stock photos.

"Photo Examples of Good Rule or Technique Application, Help for the New Contributor"

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 410
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Most of us that have been here a while have done our share of critiquing the portfolios of our many newcomers, often a bit more harshly than we intended or possibly should have.  While I realize

After 13 pages, I have no idea if it came up already or not, but just to be sure, sometimes it is good to ignore typical composition rules and leave some space for the buyer for copy or  cropping.

My apologies to those of you who are getting tired of seeing this thread but in reviewing my portfolio images I noticed how often I have used an "S" curve in the composition of my images.  While I lik

Posted Images

On 4/12/2021 at 9:05 AM, HodagMedia said:

Oh my mistake, I thought it was a Microstock site and Microstock forum, for people who were trying to sell stock photos.

"Photo Examples of Good Rule or Technique Application, Help for the New Contributor"

 

 

I post something for everyone that comes here. If it doesn't apply to somebody, it might apply to somebody else.

But since you seem to like to shut me down (as usual frankly and without even reading my posts), you have the chair Pete. 

 

Sorry Steve, but I suddenly remember why I don't post that much anymore

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Rudy Umans said:

I post something for everyone that comes here. If it doesn't apply to somebody, it might apply to somebody else.

But since you seem to like to shut me down (as usual frankly and without even reading my posts), you have the chair Pete. 

 

Sorry Steve, but I suddenly remember why I don't post that much anymore

Wasn't about you, but you always make it personal?

At least we agree most of the rest of the time. (see below)

  

On 12/26/2020 at 7:17 AM, Rudy Umans said:

Boycotts have been tried, unions have been tried (The last seven months and a number of times prior) Not just here on these forums, but also on MSG and social media. Everything under the sun has been tried, but as long as there are hundreds of thousands of contributors (Whatever the number is) and only a handful are here on the forums or on social media and as long as the vast majority doesn't care what the payout is ("It's just a hobby and something is better than nothing") nothing will happen and all mutinies to overthrow the crown will be in vain.

If you would have paid attention since June 2020, you would have known all this

Btw, I am not a newbie.  I joined SS in 2008 and regardless what my number of posts says today, I do have over 16000 posts over the years. Just saying, I have seen a thing or two. Back in June I deleted a good chunk of my portfolio.  Nevertheless my port was always small because my believe was and is (as I said many times here on these forums) stock photography was doomed the moment the subscription model was introduced. ( guess by who) 

The way I see it, you have two choices; You take it like a man or woman and make the best of it, like some did,  or you look for greener pastures.

 

Why do new people read here and keep joining Microstock agencies, thinking they will be different from everyone else?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Clupeidae said:

Rudy could start his topic, Photo Examples of Good Rule or Technique Application, Help for the Advanced Contributor

There was nothing advanced about my posts frankly.

My 16 bit recommendation could prevent problems that would need to be corrected otherwise, which would become, in turn, a lot more advanced actually than going to: image>mode>16bit

Correcting banding or halos for example is a lot more advanced than not getting them in the first place and images with banding or bad halos would be rejected here (yes, even for $0.10), so in that regards, my posts were very appropriate

The only disadvantage could be that some plug-ins don't work in 16 bit. Other than that, not sure what the big deal is. It doesn't cost anything, it doesn't hurt and working in 16 bit has a lot of advantages.

The same with the curve tool I mentioned. Basic tool that everybody should know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I appreciate Rudy's knowledge and comments and I'm sure others did as well.  Let's not spit hairs here.  The intent is to help each other, inexperienced and experienced. Lets keep this thread as free from all the normal forum bickering as we can.  I think that is something we all would appreciate.    

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Steve Bower said:

I appreciate Rudy's knowledge and comments and I'm sure others did as well.  Let's not spit hairs here.  The intent is to help each other, inexperienced and experienced. Lets keep this thread as free from all the normal forum bickering as we can.  I think that is something we all would appreciate.    

There was a time that microstock actually contributed to the craft of photography for beginners and experienced contributors alike. Many contributors' photography actually improved thanks to microstock and Shutterstock was at the forefront of that phenomena for a long time. 

Today It just makes me sad that it seems to be the complete opposite and microstock seems detrimental to the craft, which is a shame. Software and computer technology don't help either, but those are things that make the craft different, not worse.  Nevertheless, it would be sad if basic photoshop techniques are called advanced now.

On the other hand, back in the mid 19th century the Arts and Crafts movement started as a counter balance of the Industrial revolution at the time. Today something similar, especially among college students, is going on concerning photography. A movement if you like,  that I am part of (at least, I like to think I am) and that apparently does not always rhymes with the train of thoughts of many current contributors. The Arts and Crafts movement still exists 175 years later. Stronger than ever actually. 

anyway, others would call me just an old fa..t  lol.

As I said when I revitalized this thread a few pages ago, microstock as we knew it, is coming to and end and I am hoping that at  least some will or remain to see  photography as an art and as a craft regardless.  That's why I post what I post in threads like this.

It is great that concerned people like Steve start threads like this. As you might figure by now, I highly appreciate it. There is a lot more value in threads like this than initially meets the eye. So thank you Steve!

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Rudy Umans said:

As I said when I revitalized this thread a few pages ago, microstock as we knew it, is coming to and end and I am hoping that at  least some will or remain to see  photography as an art and as a craft regardless.  That's why I post what I post in threads like this.

You’re so right Rudy. Thanks for your always interesting posts. Years ago the Shutterstock forum was really great to read and I think it was a good asset for SS. Lots of interesting tips and discussions. A goldmine for new contributors (including myself). Then came the posts about anything can sell and at the same time SS boosted their collection with anything can go and a bit later the 10 cent policy (I know SS didn’t start the decline in payments). The forum was dead and now there’s almost nothing worth reading and the number of posts are of course decreasing (as far as I can see).

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/9/2021 at 8:05 AM, HodagMedia said:

I don't shoot RAW, but that's a whole different topic and not worth the endless debate. It's a personal choice, speed, size, what I do. Not saying there's something wrong with anyone else's personal choice.

But... what Rudy said is correct. I sometimes open a file, make it a TIF and use that for editing. That way I have a master image, that I can open and save and correct and change, which is not compressed, so no loss. Then I save a final version as a JPG.

Image > Mode > 16 Bits/Channel or 32 bits is also a choice?

I'm experimenting with Affinity Photo and the interesting first thing I noticed is, you don't save as a JPG or TIF or anything else, you save afphoto which is like a PSD. When done with all the editing you can export as what you want, but you still have the working file, if you want to go back. Lossless!

I picked it up for image stacking.

Good kick re-start @Rudy Umans 👍

Tell me how this works. I convert my photo from RAW to a TIF and edit in 16 bit then when I'm done save as a 8 bit JPG. What happens to all those RAW and 16Bit colors and shade when I save to JPG? Aren't they lost or don't they degrade to what I'd have if I just shot JPG and edited that? How do I know what colors they will be when I drop the tones 16 to 8 bit?

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Clupeidae said:

Tell me how this works. I convert my photo from RAW to a TIF and edit in 16 bit then when I'm done save as a 8 bit JPG. What happens to all those RAW and 16Bit colors and shade when I save to JPG? Aren't they lost or don't they degrade to what I'd have if I just shot JPG and edited that? How do I know what colors they will be when I drop the tones 16 to 8 bit?

Yes - in my view shooting and editing in RAW is overrated. Especially for ‘ordinary’ stock photos. But for ‘fine art’ and some commercial purposes it may have some advantages. In Photoshop you can also process JPEG files in RAW. I guess some highly skilled photographers can see some subtle differences ...

Link to post
Share on other sites

BALANCE in an image.  While we alluded to certain aspects of "photographic balance" in some of the past pages we never explained exactly what it is and how to accomplish it.  The following is an attempt to summarize this topic.  

The most obvious and easiest way to create a balanced photo is to place the subject right in the middle of the image.  We see an awful lot of photographers that consistently do this, especially beginners and myself.  However, you can create balance in a photo without placing the subject in the center of the image, ways that most people find much more appealing. 

Placing the subject in the center of a photo is like placing it on the fulcrum of the image.  Moving the subject to either side of that fulcrum creates a visual imbalance much like moving from the center of a teeter totter to one side or the other .   In order to balances the image, another element must be added to the other side of the image to create "visual balance.   Just like you would balance a teeter totter, the subject and the introduce element must be similar distance from the center of the photo.  Balancing a photo, however, require balancing the "visual weight" (of each element) not it's physical weight.  So the question is, "What is "visual weight" or simply what attracts the viewer's eye and creates interest".

While not a complete list, the following include some of the many elements that attracts a viewer's eye and can be used in a photograph to balance an off center subject.  1. Areas of high contrast.  2. Items in focus.  3. Bright spots or areas.  4. Saturated items.  5. Warm colors, i.e. red etc.  6. Large items.  7. People and Animals.  8. Darker objects.  9. Direction of the Subject's gaze. 

Both the photo subject and the "balancing element" must create the same (or similar) level of attention from the viewer in order to provide the desired balance within the image.  The above list is not an attempt to rank the visual weight of each element as that is subjective and could vary widely with different subject matter but it should provide some guidance in identifying possible balancing elements . 

Not surprisingly, there are many different types of "balance" within photography.  Again, this is not an all inclusive list.

1.  Symmetrical Balance or what is often referred to as Formal Balance.  As you might expect, both sides (or top and bottom) have equal visual weight and is often depicted using a reflected image (see first attached image). This type of balance tends to create a peaceful or calm image. 

2.  Asymmetrical Balance or Informal balance is created when the subject is off center and an additional element is included in the image to create visual balance.  These images tend to feel more dramatic than a symmetrically balanced image (Examples are images 2 & 3 attached).

3. Tonal Balance  Is based upon Color Theory and the use of complimentary colors (those colors opposite each other on the color wheel) to emphasis the impact of the other color.  Images taken between the golden hour and the blue hour often use this technique due to the presence of both orange and blue, which are complementary colors.  The 4th image utilizes Tonal Balance. 

4. Ideal Balance  To me this form of balance is a bit nebulous but the experts (not me, I googled it) describe it as follows: When the subject's message is so clear and strong that it renders the empty parts of the frame interesting.  Image #5 was taken in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean on an incredibly calm day.  I felt this image, while rather unimaginative, screams peacefulness and calm and would fit into this category.  You may disagree and have images that might better fit, "Ideal Balance".

5. Imbalance   An imbalanced image is most often used to evoke a dramatic feeling or emotion such as solitude, emptiness, instability or tension through it's lack of balance.   Image #6, while not a perfect example, was my attempt to show how isolated or alone this Great Blue Heron appeared on the foggy beach.  Again you may have images that better illustrate a powerful emotion through an Imbalanced image. 

The compositional balance you chose dictates the feeling or message you want to create through your image, make a conscious decision when you choose the balance of your image.  A well composed and balanced image will make the viewer feel exactly the way the you want them to feel.  Make Photographic Balance work for you!     

 

                      

           

Glacier Pano # 6  adj  more.jpg

P4306929  adj .jpg

_MG_0340.jpg

_MG_0155.jpg

P4101285.jpg

_MG_0130.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...