Old Time Jewelrey
Jan 16, 2019 13:06:23 #
Which of either do you prefer, and why. It's always good to get other people thoughts and ideas on an image. Thanks
Jan 16, 2019 13:24:24 #
Arranging things in a line isn't optimal. Neither is having the box square on. But the choice of objects is good. They are interesting individually and together.
Jan 16, 2019 13:31:23 #
R.G. wrote:
Arranging things in a line isn't optimal. Neither is having the box square on. But the choice of objects is good. They are interesting individually and together.
Thanks RG for chiming in much appreciated. I will keep your suggestions in mind for my next venture.
Jan 16, 2019 13:35:35 #
Depends on your intent. If you want lots of color, the first works fine, rich and varied. If you want to show the jewelry, neither work, because the pieces are upstaged by the background. Very, very colorful!
Jan 16, 2019 13:36:36 #
In my opinion, the second is much more interesting due to the composition. However, the area of the image that is overexposed is a hindrance. 
Jan 16, 2019 13:49:05 #
artBob wrote:
Depends on your intent. If you want lots of color, the first works fine, rich and varied. If you want to show the jewelry, neither work, because the pieces are upstaged by the background. Very, very colorful!
Thanks Bob for taking the time to respond. On the first one I used a red gel sheet. I wanted to give it a little pop of color and in addition to help reflect the jewelry. The second one was to make the light a little more dramatic and to show the mother of pearl box. Not just the front of the box to use as the background as shown in the first shot.
Jan 16, 2019 13:51:06 #
Bmac wrote:
In my opinion, the second is much more interesting due to the composition. However, the area of the image that is overexposed is a hindrance.
Thanks for your thoughts. I do have to agree with you about the pin being overexposed. I debated about whether to o something about that or leave it for a little dramatic effect. I guess you can figure out whih way I decided to go.
Jan 16, 2019 14:22:09 #
#2 appeals to me more because the organization does not appear random. I guess it is my OCD speaking.
Jan 16, 2019 14:37:39 #
[quote=UTMike]#2 appeals to me more because the organization does not appear random. I guess it is my OCD speaking.[/quote
Thanks Mike, OCD can sometimes come in handy. LOL. I for one certainly don't fall into that catagory. You should see my desk.
Thanks Mike, OCD can sometimes come in handy. LOL. I for one certainly don't fall into that catagory. You should see my desk.
Jan 18, 2019 13:38:55 #
When I looked at the first picture, I spent more time trying to figure out why the upper half was blue and the lower half red than I did looking at the jewelry. Normally I would say go in close, but in this case the first picture was so close we lost the context.
Jan 18, 2019 13:53:27 #
htbrown wrote:
When I looked at the first picture, I spent more time trying to figure out why the upper half was blue and the lower half red than I did looking at the jewelry. Normally I would say go in close, but in this case the first picture was so close we lost the context.
Thanks for stopping by and commenting. I don't see it that way. But that maybe due to the fact I am familiar with the elements and setup in this shot. I can see a clear demarcation between the red and the blue. But I completely understand. Different people different eyes, and different frame of reference.
For me that is what makes photography. A group of people can all look at the same image and come up with something completely different in how they view it.
I would worry if everyone was in agreement.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.