|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 12 |
Apr 23 |
Reply |
The viewer sees things through their own perspective. You never know what someone else will see in your image because of that! |
Apr 30th |
| 12 |
Apr 23 |
Reply |
Until you mentioned purposely raising the back items, I didn't realize how important that was to this image. I'll remember that as a tip for doing still life in the future. |
Apr 30th |
| 12 |
Apr 23 |
Comment |
Truly amazing and unique! I think the reflected element of the one die piece could be considered unnecessary. Without that part of the reflection, the rest of the image looks even more unique! |
Apr 30th |
| 12 |
Apr 23 |
Reply |
How about 3 1/2 flowers? Is that an odd number?! There are 3 full blossoms! The rest of the items are secondary to me. I wasn't thinking there had to be only 3 items in the image, just a batch of an odd number of things with everything else supporting them as the main point of the picture. If I had these flowers at home instead of at the botanical garden, I would've pinched off the extra blooms. Oh, well, I tried. I found rule of odds to be difficult to find such a composition that was purely 3 or 5 objects only, with or without supporting secondary elements. |
Apr 30th |
| 12 |
Apr 23 |
Comment |
5 items is a difficult photo to achieve, and I believe you have found a good way to tie them all together...but sorry you had to get sick to discover it! The size difference for the thermometer adds an element of interest and surprise. The lighting shows off all the items very well. Even with the black cloth foundation, the lighting shows me the upper items are on a higher level. This is a good composition because my eye goes to the text on the middle items. Excellent choice of items. Hope you're feeling much better now. I wonder what other 5 items might represent that! |
Apr 24th |
| 12 |
Apr 23 |
Reply |
When I googled "rule of odds in photography," I learned about using 1, 3, 5, 7, etc., main subjects. Or using 2 secondary objects to support the 1 main object. I discovered it is hard to do the rule of odds! Using 1 is the easiest. Using 3 is the most common. Now I have an added factor to consider when making my future compositions. Hoping to become a less static photographer by incorporating what I'm learning! |
Apr 24th |
| 12 |
Apr 23 |
Reply |
The "odd" refers to an odd number of main subjects. This image has one house in it. It's not a picture of two houses. One is an odd number. So are three and five. So the photo could have contained three houses or five houses. Or the main subject with three items in it could have been one house with two cars in the driveway as long as it was composed to emphasize those three items. |
Apr 24th |
| 12 |
Apr 23 |
Comment |
I see a successful result from a most difficult challenge you gave yourself. Congratulations on a great technical feat! I feel and see a lot of drama from the motion and the colors. Most amazing is the contrast between the motion areas and the absolutely still dice. The white dots in groups of 3 catch my eye the most. I'm spending time looking at the various sections of the picture. I feel as if I am taking the journey along with the dice. |
Apr 24th |
| 12 |
Apr 23 |
Comment |
The 3 coils of ropes scream "rule of odds" so well. Your composition keeps me looking at them. Each one is slightly different. I myself notice their shapes more than their textures. What catches me eye is the middle one. I keep looking at the loop where it is hung over the little pole sticking up. That part of the rope's shape reminds me of the triangular shape of the top of a crochet stitch when I'm crocheting. Just imagine what someone could crochet with that rope! I like the storyline of the couple sailing around the world using that rope! It makes your picture that much more intriguing. |
Apr 24th |
| 12 |
Apr 23 |
Comment |
Welcome to our group, Joan! The rule of odds starts with the number 1. Here we have 1 house. It is very dramatically the center of interest where our eye goes immediately. The strong contrast you put on the house makes its whiteness stand out. The picture would have an entirely different feel if you had given those clouds the same high-contrast treatment. (I know I would be tempted to play with that sky in post editing!) My eye stays in the picture while looking at the telephone poles and tree, but I keep returning to that cute little interesting house, probably due to its brightness. And it does have 3 items (1 door, 2 windows) right smack dab in the middle of its front. The vast sky and the surrounding environment elements give the house a small, lonely look, which to me creates the mood of the image. |
Apr 24th |
| 12 |
Apr 23 |
Comment |
I like the harsh contrast on the most unusual wood stems (branches) of the Harry Lauder walking stick. It emphasizes the curvy graphic nature of the arrangement. The randomness of the wood curves coordinates well for me with the messy-hair look of the magnolia petals. If the flowers had been daisies with uniform petals, the overall vibe would've been entirely different.
As for the suggestion of casting your shadow on the flowers, I use that technique a lot when photographing outdoors. That does result in uniform lighting. But sometimes I prefer seeing some lighting differences on the petals so they look as if they are really outdoors. It can be hard to choose between the snapshot look and the flower catalog look. With this image the main impact for me is the graphic, contrasty, curvy walking stick objects. And I love it! |
Apr 24th |
| 12 |
Apr 23 |
Reply |
Here in Kansas City, we also have the star magnolia in addition to the usual cup-shaped magnolia. They don't look like the same family at all, except they bloom at basically the same time in the spring. |
Apr 24th |
| 12 |
Apr 23 |
Reply |
I apologize, but I do have health issues that occasionally interrupt my continuous monitoring of our group. |
Apr 24th |
| 12 |
Apr 23 |
Reply |
I thought about the "cutting" effect, and then I decided "it" made my image more unique. Maybe gets people to look at the photo longer while they absorb the sharp contrast. Not sure how a non-photographer or artist would react. |
Apr 23rd |
| 12 |
Apr 23 |
Reply |
Why didn't "I" think of removing that right-hand orchid?! That would've been perfect! Thanks for the idea. |
Apr 23rd |
6 comments - 9 replies for Group 12
|
6 comments - 9 replies Total
|
