Feedback on Composition

[head zoo keeper]

Well, I guess it's about time... I've only been doing photography for about 2 years now and if I'm going to improve, I gotta get critiques on my efforts.  Although this forum is [almost?] at 100 users and I don't know all of you, the ones that I do know and have seen on That Other Forum, I really repect your work and figured this is a good place to be judged, from all of you -- all 100 of you -- on my efforts.

Before I link the images here on the post, I think I'm looking for compositional critique, although please don't hold back on any technical or other feedback. These two shots are from a digital P&S -- I set the thing on auto-foucs, auto-exposure so I could concentrate on compostion only. The digital capture was cropped two different ways and it will be obvious that I used Photoshop to adjust the tonality. I used Curves to make one crop have a warm tone and the other a cooler tone. I also sharpened both images to bring out the digital noise in an attempt to mimic film.

So, there it is... a nubie looking for feedback. Thanks in advance!

[Jim Evans]

In terms of composition, I think I like the 2nd image the best.   Actually, overall I like the 2nd image the best.  The slight warm tone really brings out the highlights and makes the metal look metal.  If that makes sense.   But back to composition.   I like the closer feel of the 2nd image better but they both are good images in terms of composition.  I just like the 2nd better.    Maybe the only thing I could suggest to improve the 2nd would be to either eliminate the "MA" from the frame or included more of it.   With the full "Mamiya" visible, this would make a great ad shot.   Other than that, I can't really think of anything to improve it.   Man, I love Mamiya lenses.   They just look so.....so....  Beefy and mechanical.   Not to mention their performance.

Jim

[head zoo keeper]

Thanks, Jim, for sharing your thoughts! Very interesting as I kinda thought the colder-toned image products a more metal feel to the lens.

Good point also, about either cropping the "Ma" or getting the entire name in the frame. It's these little details I need to pay more attention to.

And yeah, them Mamiya lens are beefy. And heavy, heavy, heavy.

[Jim Evans]

Very interesting as I kinda thought the colder-toned image products a more metal feel to the lens.

Your right.   I would normally prefer a colder image to give a more metal look and feel.  I think maybe why I think the 2nd image looks more metal to me is due to the highlights on the lens.    Just seems to look more metalic.  

I love shooting metal.   I love the way it looks when light hits it in an otherwise dim setting.  

Jim

[Benny Stevens]

I think I prefer the tone of the first picture and the composition of the second pic. Great images - just right for a glossy Mamiya brochure. Nice photos that would convince me to buy a Mamiya. But then I noticed that you're a graphic designer... Available light I suppose?

[connealy]

I think the first one is a bit dark in the shadows and the silvery part at the lower right is a little hard to relate to for someone like me who has no familiarity with the camera or lens.  The other one is sufficiently close so that it is graphically interesting without concerns about functional relationships.  You did a nice job of keeping everything in focus.  Could you say a few words about the camera and lens?  I wasn't aware that Mamiya had produced something with that f-stop range.

[head zoo keeper]

Thanks, guys, for all your thoughts. It's so great to hear these comments and to have additional eyeballs on an image other than mine to spot details and perspectives that I would never have thought of.

Available light? Actually, since it was shot indoors, I used my trusty old Vivitar 283 flashgun, mounted it on the digi's hotshoe and bounced the light off a wall. Wish I could get some studio lighting...

Because this digi has a whopping f2.8 - f8 aperture range, it's little hard to control the amount of light. So, I fired-off a shot and then immediately shot another one while the Vivitar was recycling which produced a dimmer flash. Still, I think you are right, connealy, the silvery highlights are still pretty blown-out.

The subject is a Mamiya RB with an 180mm (non-C) lens. I believe the longer telephoto Mamiya lens -- the f4.5 180, f4.5 250, and f6.3 360 -- all stop down to f45 and the 180 at least, has 1/2 stop settings.

[connealy]

Thanks for the RB info; looks like a neat system.  I basically did no photography between 1970 and 2000; it appears I missed a few developments during that period.  Just visited Karen Nakamura's page on the RB to get caught up a bit.

[head zoo keeper]

Yeah, the Mamiya is my current favorite camera. But, as any RB owner will tell ya, it's a monster. It's big and heavy but it's a workhorse!

[nelsonfoto]

I've been busier than a 1-armed wallpaper-hanger with the hives... I just have to time here to chime in and say "You said a mouthful!"

While in ABQ this July past, I stopped in at Camera & Darkroom for my yearly visit - saw my first RB there in the cases - THAT sumbitch was a monster. I'm a big man and usually laugh "but it's too big to handhold" comments off... the RB humbled me. A giant camera.

[sandeha]

I think you've got the sharpness down pat, the lighting, and the depth of field, in both shots.  The variation of tone is interesting because the first, cooler shot has a technical flavour, while the second is warmer and comes across as a more user-friendly machine - both good.

However, the composition bothers me more than a little.  I'm reading these as potential product shots and, without any further visual clues (other shots in a series) I wouldn't recognise what it is.  I can guess from the text style that it's a Mamiya, but "M.." doesn't suggest enough to confirm the name - including "Mam" or "Mamiy"  might have done that better.  Then I wonder what specific information the detail should give me ... the first shot tells me about the speed and aperture scales and that info is put across very clearly.   The second shot tells me about the PC socket, but not much else.

I hope that's easy to understand ... I'm trying to imagine the shot as a 'seller' that highlights the qualities, and while the first shot shows off the quality of engineering and a few key features, the second shot leaves me little wiser as to what the object is.

I reckon the RB67 is about the same shape and weight as a hydraulic car jack, only with a shorter lever.  

[head zoo keeper]

Craig, did you buy it while you were there?

I hear there's a speed bracket you can attach to the RB which makes hand-holding the beast a little easier. Whatever, though... mine stays on the tripod.

sandeha, great feedback, thanks! I think this is what others were suggesting, too. More information needed to be shown or I need to convey a better sense of what I was trying to do.

My new mantra is: details details details. Gotta pay attention to the little things!