St3v3M Loc: 35,000 feet

Pixelpixie88 has volunteered their WPC 1409 - Bokeh Landscape entry to the Photo Critique & Analysis Forum* to find out what they could have done to make it better. Be nice, but be honest as this will help everyone with their craft. Thank you Pixelpixie88 and thank you everyone!

From WPC 1409 - Bokeh Landscape RESULTS http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/photo_contest_ratings.jsp?pcnum=106

* If you are new to the Photo Critique & Analysis Forum please read the Section Rules http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-159520-1.html

"Weedful" Things

(Download)

Rongnongno Loc: FL

There is very little to do better here, all the elements needed are present. If one wants to be picky one may want to adjust some of the luminosity but frankly that would be a waste of time it is good as is. (9 blades aperture ring hey?)

Good composition (the off center works), good tones, nothing to change.

On the shot itself, I would have focused slightly differently as the forefront is a bit soft.

THIS should have been the winner.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

As a closeup, this is pretty well executed but there was certainly enough separation from the background for the stem to be included within the DOF. You would still have been left with plenty of bokeh and the entire flower(?) would have been sharper.

How bokeh and landscape ended up getting combined is a mystery to me, but that's not the photographer's fault.

photoninja1 Loc: Tampa Florida

Including the stem in te OOF area makes it look fake. The circular highlights remind me of the doughnuts caused by mirror lenses. Some like 'em, some don't.

abc1234 Loc: Elk Grove Village, Illinois

A few stylistic issues here. Nothing is bad technically but my esthetics lead to a different interpretation. I would crop heavily and compare placing the main subject in the center or off-center. I do not like the light background and would have tried finding a darker one. I would sharpen the flower since it may be out of focus and then increase the brightness and contrast a bit. That will bring out the flower more relative to the background. Finally, a little negative vignetting will help make the flower pop more.

Nightski

Pixelpixie, this is a beautifully done photo. The flower is tack sharp, the bokeh is subtle and creamy. The colors are gorgeous. I love the simple composition, and I think you placed your flower perfectly in the frame. I am so sorry I didn't take a look at this contest, because I would have voted for yours. I was busy running off to Apostle Islands…. Sorry. This is so good.

Pixelpixie88 Loc: Northern Minnesota

Thank you...but I'm glad you got to the ice caves. Were they still beautiful? A few of my photoclub gals and I were going to go...now I'm not sure if we'll make it.

Thanks for taking the time to comment. I appreciate it.

Nightski

I know. It was 40 degrees when I went out for my snowshoe jog at 6:30am. The snow is melting fast, and I would want that ice to be very stable to go out there. I have to admit I was a little nervous about it.

Uuglypher Loc: South Dakota (East River)

hi, St3v3,
I had hoped that the Boke / bokeh Landscape Contest might elicit a cogent discussion of the intersections of "bokeh", the perceived limits of DOF, OOF, and the ...sensitively noted "soft image". Among the entries to the recent contest are, IMO, examples of all the above and I am wondering if I am the only one wondering if my discriminating definitions of "sharp", " focus", "acutance", "circle of confusion", "DOF", "OOF", and "bokeh" are unnecessary, and that the attitude "I can't define "bokeh" but I know it when I see it" has come to prevail. Most of the submissions seem to reflect the idea that "bokeh" is whatever happens outside rather stricly imposed definitional limits of DOF.
After looking at the entries my conclusion is that but a small proportion exhibit degrees of lens effects that I might reasonably lump under the rubric "Bokeh". But then, maybe I'm just being an "unreasonable" semantic "splitter".

Dave in SD

St3v3M Loc: 35,000 feet

There have been numerous discussions.

Nightski

Here is a thread with that discussion..

http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-189812-1.html

St3v3M Loc: 35,000 feet

Thanks. I Unwatched awhile back.