Swan head study

Pentax k100 D Kit lens 18/55

Strange, although no up to your standard, look what I took this morning.

Very nice but a little over-sharpened and dark for my taste.

Ken

When I saw the title of the thread, I kinda groaned and thought, 'here we go, another lame shot in a park', but actually this is a really nicely composed shot, very pleasant to look at and worth the effort.
I agree about the sharpening and I notice your camera (or something) is set to hard sharpening.
Maybe a more selective (post process) sharpening around things like eyes and water droplets but avoiding the neck line and definitely keeping well away from the blurred areas will help. There should be negligible noise in a 200 ISO image in daylight.
I only say this 'cos it's a good shot and well worth getting just right.

BTW, for those who are interested, selective sharpening doesn't involve the sharpen tool! it means sensitive use of unsharp mask or similar thru a mask or using the history brush to carefully regain the soft areas after sharpening.

I've given up admitting to thoughts like this, now that I realise that living in a glass house as I do, throwing stones is unwise.

As I suggested elsewhere the other day, if we all felt inhibited from taking 'another lame shot in a park' for fear of people looking down on our dreadful lack of creativity, a lot of learning would dry up over night.

BTW, for those who are interested, selective sharpening doesn't involve the sharpen tool! it means sensitive use of unsharp mask or similar thru a mask or using the history brush to carefully regain the soft areas after sharpening

Can see what you meen but Im not used to the programe just yet but thank you for the help and advice.

My comments certainly look harsh when taken out of context.
Just for the record, I wasn't suggesting that the sharpen tool was used here. I have been using PS since 92 so I feel qualified to help out occasionally. When I leave instructions they are for interested parties reading the thread not necessarily for the OP.

I think my comments were not only balanced and properly constructive, but very favourable towards the image itself. I call a spade a spade so that people can take my comments seriously. Quite often when I post an image it is because I suspect it is lacking something and I wouldn't want a load of sycophantic guff, I would want someone to tell me where I was going wrong and how to fix it.

I think philstaff took it the way it was meant.
chrisA, you're right of course, I wouldn't dream of stopping people filling this forum with pictures of ducks and there's plenty to be learned from it, but if I have to be less than honest about my thoughts then I think I will just go somewhere else where you are allowed to think bad things

I never said anything about what you can think. Further, if you read anything I write here, it shouldn't take you long to realise that I abhor and despise sycophantic guff, as you eloquently refer to it, at least as much as you do - possibly more, in fact.

However, I would be very disappointed if the culture here started to change in such a way that people felt inhibited from posting pictures for critique, for fear of getting ill-thought-out and lazily expressed outcries of 'that's lame'.

Now I do know that's not what you said about any specific picture (although it was clearly your expectation, as you said), but my point is this:

Critique should be honest, not sycophantic, but it should also be specific.

"Nice shot" is exactly the sort of sycophantic guff that I (and, I imagine, you) dislike. Fortunately there's not too much of it here yet. But although not sycophantic, "Doesn't work for me" is just as bad. Translated, it means:

"I don't like it, and I can't be bothered to think about or articulate my reasons why not".

"Lame" is in the same sort of category, so I think it should be avoided.

I might post, for instance, a very clichéd picture that was, for me, very difficult to achieve, hoping for some help in improving the composition next time.

If all I got was a chorus of derision for my lack of originality, I probably wouldn't bother next time.

Christopher, what you say is generally valid, but, with respect, Darkmunk didn't say it was a lame shot, he only told us about his expectations BEFORE seeing it. You cannot conclude that HAD the shot been lame, he would have said so in that way. He would, I am sure, have said why he didn't like it.

Personally, I do sometimes say "Nice shot" without further explanation, but I don't tend to say "Nasty shot". If I don't like it, I will either keep quiet, or explain why.

As for Darkmonk, there is nothing sycophantic about simply saying you like something. Often, there is no need for further explanation. The shot worked.

Furthermore, it can be rather nit-picking to say "I like it, but.....".

But of course, the response to a picture should be conditioned by what the poster says/implies he wants to hear.

G

Absolutely.

I didn't say he said it was a lame shot. I also didn't conclude anything about what he might or might not have said had he found it so. I even said (in the context of lameness), if you remember, 'Now I do know that's not what you said about any specific picture'.

I was just making a more general point. In saying what I like and don't like about certain types of critique, I wasn't making any accusations at all. Likewise my other comments about what would put me off posting photos.

You're reading a bit more into what I wrote than was actually there, I think.

In fact, I suspect we're just agreeing a bit more violently than we need to.

I also sometimes say "nice shot" without saying anything else other than perhaps "No. 2 is my preferred shot".

If anything, when doing this, I should be accused of being lazy (or short of time), rather than being sycophantic.

I agree that it is of more use to the OP if an explanation is given of what is liked about a photograph or disliked.

Fair point. I was probably being a bit too black and white earlier.

I guess it's horses for courses - if someone just posts a pic in the 'your photos' forum, no C&C particularly requested, 'nice shot', being just a positive reaction shared, is perfectly Ok.

I've been a bit sensitised, though, by reading another forum, where even specific requests for critique are met without anything specific or constructive at all. It's so anodyne that I've more or less stopped reading it.

Long may things remain as they are here, where posting up a bad pic and asking for honest opinions results in exactly that

I was under the impression that posting pictures in this forum implied the request for comments, even without explicitly saying so. But I may be wrong.

I also would like to know why a particular picture is good or bad, and what could be done to improve it. After all, I'm keen to learn, and hopefully improve over time.

Ditto.