Rings

[jeffenstein]

I saw this while I was out this weekend, and liked the way the light was falling on it. It turned out ok (background a bit busy), but would like another opinion on what I could have done differently.

[Got Toast?]

I think you could have included more of the "ring" subject in you photo. just to get a look at what the whole thing looks like.

[rhiannon]

I like how the whole thing isn't in the photo - very cool sculpture though. The only thing I might have done differently is increased (or is it decreased? I'm still new at this) the DOF so the background was a bit more blurred, bringing more attention to the foreground object.

Looks great though!

[pooks]

I love the shot. I would have used off camera flash (if you have one) off to the side of the rings to highlight the back side of them. I love the composition and dont find it busy back there, in my opinion, the subject is large enough and very clear that you dont notice the background.

[wulf]

How many shots did you take? I have to say that this one does not particularly grab me. The subject seems underexposed especially in contrast to the blown highlights in the background. However, as you note, the light was quite golden and I wonder if a different angle and different framing may have yielded a stronger result?

For example, what about if you got closer and used one of the holes in the subject to frame something else in the distance? If possible, it is always worth taking several alternative shots and trying a few different ideas, giving you more to select from when you return home.

Wulf

[jeffenstein]

Thanks to everybody for the critiques.

Got Toast: It was intentional to cut off part of the ring, to make it feel closer. Attached is a photo of the entire sculpture.

Rhiannon: I was trying to blur the background more, but couldn't quite pull it off

Pooks: I do have a flash, but didn't think to use it here. Next time, I'll have to give it a try...

Wulf: I only took a few shots from this side, because the other side was in the shadows; the only other choice was more building and less tree. But you're right, I should have tried anyway, even just to have some more practice at different compositions. Your comment about the photo grabbing you is what I'm struggling with right now. It's only very seldom that I take a photo that makes me say 'wow', and those are all family pics, so I may be biased Maybe I just need more practice; probably lots more practice.

Thanks again for all the feedback. I think next time I'll try to get there later in the day, and try to get some more shots when the sun is not so bright on the buildings behind, and play around a bit more.

[wulf]

If it is near you then definitely take more visits. Another idea might be to look on somewhere like Flickr and see if anyone else has taken shots of the same sculpture. You don't want to copy them but they might spark some ideas.

Also, get creative with your angles - I suspect you might be able to get a fresh view by squatting down and looking up at the sculpture rather than keeping the camera at eye height (even more if your lens lets you take a wide-angle perspective on things).

Wulf

[Got Toast?]

Now that I've seen the whole sculpture you took the right shot at it by leaving some of it out!

[jiminyClickit]

jeffenstein, Welcome

As a sculptor, I would appreciate that you found my work interesting enough to photograph. But if they put all that effort into making it, the least you can do is show all the sculptor's work. Or photograph something else. Make your own art through manipulation of light, as sculptors manipulate their medium. Or respect their work.

[wulf]

I'm not a sculptor but I think there is a place for shots that only show part of a work. However, because sculpture is 3 dimensional, the best way of respecting it is to look for not just one 2D representation but to take a range of shots, exploring it from different angles and under different lighting conditions (and perhaps the artfulness or otherwise of how it fits with its surroundings).

Wulf