Photo Critique

Friday Photo Critique #13

Friday Photo Critique is our weekly community project, where we publish a photograph submitted by one of our wonderful readers, then ask you all to offer constructive feedback on the image.

After a few days, I’ll update the post to feature the most helpful and insightful comments. You will also be credited with a link to your website or portfolio, so be sure to enter it correctly when submitting a comment!

Quick Ground Rules

  1. Play nice! We’ve deliberately chosen photographs that aren’t perfect, so please be constructive with any criticism.
  2. Feel free to offer any type of advice – composition, lighting, post-processing etc.
  3. You can also link to photographs that you feel offer a great example of this type of image shot exceptionally well.

Without further ado, here is this week’s candidate for Friday Photo Critique!

The Photograph

Photo Critique

Photographer: TJ Grant

Please let us know what you think in the comments – how would you have approached the scene or taken the photo differently? A massive thank you to everyone who commented last week. The post will shortly be updated with some of the most insightful comments.

The most constructive and helpful comments will be featured on the site, and you’ll also be given priority to feature your own work in a future Friday Photo Critique!.

David Appleyard is davidappleyard on Themeforest
  • http://smashingwebs.com SmashingWebs.com

    Nice….

  • http://www.gregveit.com Greg Goodale

    With over 7 million images of the grand canyon showing with a Google search, I sometimes wonder what we hope to achieve by photographing it again. I suppose it shows what a magnet its natural beauty is to photographers, even though as a viewer I sometimes wish American photographers would look for beauty elsewhere.
    I think that this image is a good deal busier than those I am used to seeing, so would recommend cropping out most of the bottom half, leaving the impressive rock and sky. If you really wanted to put the time in, you could strengthen the dynamics further on the rocks with dodge and burn, again using curve layers.
    The contrast in the image needs a boost and I would also boost vibrance and use separate curve layers to deepen the sky and rock colour and to bring out the clouds.
    Photoshop enhancements like this will only go so far when there are photographers who are prepared to camp out in these areas waiting for the perfect light for days on end, but they will help to get the best out of your capture.

    • Ryan

      I am not so sure that is the Grand Canyon…it looks like the Monument Valley area.

      • Sam

        No, this is in Sedona, AZ

  • Kevin

    I’ll suggest two changes:

    Composition. To me the focus here is the rock formations. The dead trees – both fallen & still standing, in the lower right, distract me. I’d try to remove as many irrelevant items from this foreground. Maybe even, a “portrait” aspect ratio instead of landscape?

    Polarizer. Would punch up those skies (and all else) in the lens. Little more contrast would aid this image, I feel.

  • http://www.flickr.com/photos/kgelster Kurt

    This image has a great DoF and composition. I just think it’s overexposed due to the bright sky which washes out the colors. In camera, exposing for the brightest part (right middle) would’ve taken care of it. A graduated neutral density filter would’ve been nice to darken the sky, and a polarizing filter would’ve added a some definition to this image. Fortunately, curves adjustments can fix the colors and the GND filter and polarizer can be simulated. :D
    I did it here – http://cmd-p.com/temp/phototuts.jpg

    • http://www.cashbackprinting.com Tom

      Very nice. I love the contract on what you did!

    • http://codsteeth.com Philip P.

      Ah yes! :D Just editing the curves really makes this image come together. That version really makes the image go from “meh” to “yes!”

  • http://photographyforsoul.com Can Berkol

    The placement of the mountain is not bad. However there are too many distractions on the bottom of the frame. This is a landscape so you can’t just go and change the setting, yet you can try to change your angle of view or at least your crop.

    First of all you could have included more of the sky and less of the ground. For example crop the grass and only include the upper bodies of the trees in the frame you’ll see the change.

    The other thing is that needs to be improved is the color or at least the contrast. I think you have taken this shot under bright sun during noon. You may play with the histogram and decrease the highlights a bit. Or you can enhances the shadows – the darker areas just a bit.

    Right now, the mountain looks big. But I’m still saying “soo what!?.” To dramatize the feeling. Contrast & cropping will definetely help.

    Of course you can also the opposite of what I’ve said for cropping. Having a wider angle lens would also help but I’m just commenting based on your current image.

    If you have chance to go back to the area try either to have a little more distance from the mountain or get a wider lens such 14mm or so.. Let the mountain show its huge body and let the viewer to compare the size of the mountain to the little trees. Right now I see some tree branches places almost as hight as the mountain. And that creates the feeling that the mountain is not high enough.

  • http://photographyforsoul.com Can Berkol

    for some reason I can’t see my comment and honestly I can’t write so much stuff again. to sum up if you can’t go to the same place try cropping the bottom so that no grass will be shown just the upper bodies of the trees and the mountain. Add a bit contrast and there it is a more dramatized photo.

    If you can go back to the same place, try to take the same shot from a further distance or get a wider lens such as 14mm. Right now I see some branches placed almost as high as the mountain. Therefore it looks like that the mountain is not as huge. You need to make the mountain look like a giant.

  • http://www.flickr.com/photos/zbuechler Zach Buechler

    First I’d like to say you have obviously fully embraced the rule of thirds. Sky: 1/3rd, Mountain: 1/3rd, Grassy foreground: 1/3rd. Excellent composition if you’re into the rule of thirds. :)

    I personally think the image is a little flat. My personal style would have me increase the contrast on the mountains and the sky. Mask it off in Shop and do the sky section separate from the rest to exaggerate the blue sky. Then maybe accentuate the reds in the mountains. I felt inspired this morning and went ahead and did these here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/zbuechler/4234448112/

    Hope you enjoy :)

  • http://ta4tv.com Karl Sonnenberg

    I try not to shoot at angles that are at eye level height. I generally like subject material to be off center. So as an idea I would have gone to the left of the subject matter and perhaps shot from a lower angle.

    I enjoy shooting at dusk or at night for more play with ambient light, giving the piece more depth. If you shot this at dusk or just after and at a lower angle, you probably could have some stars mixed in with the clouds.

  • Bryan

    It seems to me the photographer was trying to go for an HDR type of effect – but in this case it seems too washed out.

    I think I would increase contrast and saturation – in order to make the image ‘pop’ more.

    • Dee Boesen

      I would have liked to see the photo taken in the early morning or late evening. Given that he/she was unable to, a polarizer might have helped.

    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/joshsemans Josh Semans

      yeah, thats exactly what I’d say :)

  • Alex C

    I’m not sure about the HDR effect but I do agree with increased contrast and saturation. If original file is RAW I would try to bring back some detail in the blue sky.

    Composition is nice, definitely not a bad picture by any means. Nice work.

  • Kevin

    Composition: The focus, seems to me, to be the rock formations. So get rid of the dead trees, standing and otherwise, in the lower right. Walk left?

    Polarizer. Punch up the skies (and all else.) Could use more contrast.

  • http://www.troybphotos.com Troy Breidenbach

    I agree with Bryan. I think the photographer could’ve under exposed by a bit to increase the saturation. I also might have cropped it differently…there is a lot of distraction in the foreground. Although, quite a bit could be done in Photoshop to make it be the picture he might be after. I played with it a little and came up with this: http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2665/4235078502_9951d2a367_b.jpg

  • af

    Nice image,
    a few tipps:
    - saturation especially the blues from the sky maybe can be increased
    - maybe the mountain-peaks can be moved a little bit out of the center to add more tension to the image

  • Alex Y

    I would have taken it has an hdr to dramatize the colors. I would apply the “s-curve” in Photoshop.

  • Alex Y

    I would do some post-processing such as an s-curve and take the image as raw or hdr. I hope I’m not posting duplicate comments :s

  • Alex Russell

    Agreed, it looks like HDR but the levels aren’t right. There are no blacks/shadows in the picture so it looks all washed out.

    I can only assume that the photographer has fallen into the same trap that quite a few people (including myself) can get trapped in – you have the source photos which won’t look overly great for HDR and then you combine them and suddenly you see how well it suddenly works, with detail in the shadows, no blown-out highlights, etc. So the new picture is suddenly the best in your head (comparatively) and as such you don’t realise that there are some bad points you haven’t thought about.

    In this case the final picture maybe just needs to be reviewed on its own a few days after the original HDR mixing to work out its particular faults, which in this case is a general washed-out feeling.

    Otherwise, the composition looks nice, and looks like it’s trying to follow the rule of thirds, particularly in the vertical plane, but in the horizontal plane, while the two peaks look like they probably do follow the rule, it actually makes the whole feature look centred, which isn’t necessarily the best. I’m not sure really, maybe I’m reading too much into it and this kind of thing wouldn’t be picked up by someone not trying to critique a picture.

  • Kevin

    A circular polarizer would help to keep the sky from getting washed out. I agree with Bryan, more contrast and saturation would really make the image pop.

    Also, moving away from the dead brush/trees would help the viewer focus more on the subject (the mountain)… every time I look at this photo, my eye keeps being drawn towards the dead brush.

  • http://www.gregveit.com Greg Goodale

    I might recommend cropping out the trees as they make the image too busy, while the greass is not properly exposed.

  • BVBeckman

    I added some hue and contrast and that is now one snappy picture

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/24518155@N02/4235077051/

    • jink

      much better!!!

  • Dee Boesen

    The photo would have more depth if it were taken early morning or late evening. Given that he could not do so, he might also used a polarizer.

  • http://www.luminouscanvas.com/ Otto Astorga

    It’s easier to see someone else’s mistakes then our own. So here it goes. The foreground is too busy, or too empty. I find it distracting. I probably would have found a different spot with a feature that added perspective to the shot.

    I also have added some layers to increase saturation on the photograph and give it more punch. See here: http://www.luminouscanvas.com/1/post/2010/01/friday-photo-critique-from-twitter.html

    Others may have better ways of doing this but this was a quick way to change the image.

  • Dee Boesen

    The photo could have been taken in the early morning or late evening to achieve more depth and shadows. Given that he was unable to do so a polarizer might have helped. Also it was not shot quite in the thirds range.

  • http://www.woodsphotodesign.com Brendon

    I would sharpen, crop and make black & white.

  • http://www.cpdigitaldarkroom.com CP

    I disagree and agree with Bryan. I don’t think the photographer was going for an HDR photo because it would have looked totally different. I do think the picture needs more contrast. All the colors are the same so the washed out look makes it look dull.

    I also think that the picture is the top 2/3 of the image. Up to the top of the fallen tree on the bottom right I think can be removed. Perhaps the angle at which the picture was taken it should have been taken more into consideration. Judging from the long shadows that are somewhat visible it looks like it was late or perhaps early in the day. Having the sun right behind the mountains would have been killer. Especially if the photographers intentions were to get an HDR photo {which I dont think}

  • http://www.flickr.com/photos/nikon0/ Robert

    1. I like the photo a lot but it is washed out and the contrast and saturation need to be played with and maybe even bring down the brightness a little
    2. how do one go about getting there photos on here for the Friday Photo Critique

  • Phil

    First, I would have used the rule of thirds and positioned the left butte in the upper left quadrant bisect, moving everything a little to the left in the frame. Horizontally, I think the ground/sky would have been a nice balance except for the amount of dead grass. I would probably moved in closer to minimize that negative aspect.

    The time off day is not ideal for this photo. Early morning or late afternoon would have given it more detail, consequently it is over exposed and washed out. A polarizing filter would have given the sky more color and cloud definition.
    I would have taken the deadwood out of the foreground by moving to the left and possible using one of the fence posts as my foreground anchor.

  • http://www.jennieroutley.co.uk Jennie Routley

    This is a nice pic and does not need too much adjustments to really bring it out.
    I had a fiddle here – http://www.flickr.com/photos/42909962@N04/4237322570/

    I did not want to go OTT and make it look obviously amended so just tweaked the saturdation, levels and finally the shadows and hilights to bring the sky up a bit more.

    I actually like the framing of it, but for something different you could make a nice ‘widescreen’ version by cropping off the top and bottom, that would make quite a nice effect.

    Jen

    • http://www.woodsphotodesign.com Brendon

      I like what you have done. Those would have been my suggestions.

  • Jared

    The histogram is a shocker! :P Always check your histogram on the camera after you shoot. It shows you everything you need to know and if you took the time to make adjustments based around it the exposure and saturation would be fine and white-outs or flat colours wouldn’t exist (the sky).

    This is what I did with a bit of exaggeration to the effects so it’s more obvious as I point them out. Granted this is digital too and obviously the sky can’t be helped being an overexposed 8-bit JPG pulled from thenet. But keep in mind that most of this could have been done on the click with some minor Lightroom adjustments.

    http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v237/saltesc/temp-1.jpg

    On click:
    1. Polarising filter – Cuts down the glare off the sky and clouds evening out the overall exposure of the image. It also shows up richer blues in the sky.
    2. Infa-Red filter – Reduces the saturation of the green plants and boosts the saturation of the cliff itself, getting rid of that ‘distraction’ in the foreground everyone’s talking about. It also obviously darkens that blown out blue sky even more.

    In Lightroom:
    1. Slight adjustments to colour levels; luminance, saturation, vibrance etc. This is, again, done in accordance with keeping the overall image even in exposure over each other while emphasising the canyon, but not without completely nulling that foreground foliage or creating distraction with the now far more detailed sky.
    2. Curve adjustments to enhance contrast, shadows, etc to your liking.
    3. Could go into details of emphasising the light cast on the rockface, I did a little with one pass of a large fuzzy brush on a brightness mask, but it depends on your style. Everything depends on your style :)

  • Richard Browne

    Having only read some of the comments, I apologise if I recover old ground.

    I quite like this photo. I think the composure is pleasnt and, unlike some, I quite like the added colour and content of trees in the foreground. To my mind it adds an element of depth and scale to the photo – mountains looming out over – rather than being just a clean, picturesque shot.

    Either a polarizer or a grad ND filter would add some nice contrast and pick up the colours – the photo seems a little desaturated and it would be nicer to get the full range of oranges and reds against blues – while also picking up the mountain as the really vivid subject while leaving the foreground that drab set of greens and grays.

    Catching it at golden hour would certainly bring out the the hues but, depending on where the sun rises/sets it may be too shadowy to be of use.

    Also,

  • http://www.membrana.co.nz Dan

    I would reframe so the trees aren’t in there at the bottom, probably bring the frame down a bit so there is less sky unless your going to make a feature of the sky. Pump up the contrast, saturation, and lower the exposure only on the rocks, and maybe grass… Maybe make the grass more golden. Maybe change the sky to a more dramatic one… Like a dark cloudy one if your going to show so much sky in the image.

  • http://mcclanegames.com ev149

    The composition is fairly nice, however I have too major problems.

    Firstly, there are too many distractions from the main subject (the mountain), especially in the bottom-right corner. The trees could add to the photo, but are overpowering in this case.

    The image also lacks contrast, and seems to be under-exposed. A neutral density filter would probably fix this.