April 16, 2009 at 8:55 pm #17698CarolineParticipant
squirrel in tree and sky
P.S. I live in the middle of nowhere so had to order filters online and they will be delivered in about a week. will go back and do that assignment asap after they arrive. thanks for the feedback. 🙂April 20, 2009 at 10:54 pm #19122Duncan RawlinsonKeymaster
You’ve done a great job with this assignment. The assignment asked that you take a photograph that showcased your ability to organize color and think in terms of a color pallete while taking into consideration color theory. You’ve done a great job with this assignment both technically and artistically.
Let me start to discussing your first image of the squirrel. From a composition standpoint I like how you’ve used the tree to help minimize the negative space on the left by using a simple object but also an object that is highly textured (i.e. the tree).
This obviously helps you split the photograph up according to the rule of thirds. You’ve also isolated your main object by using a shallow depth of field. The main issue I want to be aware of in this image is that because your lighting source is very direct and bright, you’ve lost some detail in the squirrels fur just above it’s foot on the bottom left side of the photograph. It’s called overexposure, but it’s most commonly referred to as being “blown out” or “burnt out”. It’s when your camera can’t handle the variance of light and needs to make a compromise. It does this by burning out white areas of the photograph. The information is completely gone in these areas. You can’t recover this information.
We’ve written a blog post regarding the issue with a few more examples for you to consider here:
It’s very important you read the above information because it’s a very common issue with digital photography. IN your instance, the consequence is very small and I would even say “acceptable”, but it’s still worth being aware of for future photographs.
The second image is also very strong in its color control. The only issue to be aware of here is that you’ve amputated (cut off) the second lantern with your photograph’s left wall. While it is true that a shallow depth of field helps make this less noticeable and acceptable, it’s not far enough back to be less noticeable. Therefore, I found this part distracting from a composition standpoint.
Can’t wait to see what you do next!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.