Sony World Photography Awards

Status
Not open for further replies.


Healthy collection of peasants doing peasanty stuff :)

I love that spider. Though I wouldn't have it on the wall (shudder)

The dragon dance looks nice, but obviously summat weird going on in the computer :neutral:
 
I like the geezer in the animal rug :cool:

The dragon dance one is just weird.

Couple of them seem more exercises in post production work rather than photography.
 
Last edited:
peachbum said:
Always good to see award winning photos; thanks for the link.

Now I'm going to be peachbum critical :p . On photo 3 you can see reflections (including the photographer?)in the picture on the wall.
Click to expand...

Was just going to say this myself - isn't that breaking one of the golden rules of photography? ;)
 
But can you see what links most of those images?

I've only looked at them on my phone, but I'd say its very clever use of colour.
For me, the picture needs to look different from reality. That sounds dreadful but let me explain. There are so many people with cameras who think they are photographers, it doesn't take long to get to grips with composition, and most rules are meant to be broken anyway! But my point is the best pictures should be ones that these guys could never take. Unfortunately that usually means post production work, but it doesn't have to be huge amounts. Just by having a play with 3 things in photoshop should start elevating your pictures.
First a quick look at the contrast. Decide how punchy you want the image.
Second a quick look at the colour balance overall.
Thirdly go through each colour on the hue and saturation section.
I think most of these can be done in Lightroom or capture one but I always like a little fiddle in photoshop.
This is obviously a very quick thing and bringing layers into would be the next level. But those fine tweaks of hue and saturation should make your image look slightly different from the norm. It should get people commenting about the specific red of a berry, or the blue of a dress. Colour is an art form and this is a good way to elevate your pictures.
Make sure that the changes you make sit we'll within the whole picture, as obviously you can make a right balls up of your pictures as well by doing this!
 
Second last is best with the lass looking out the window.

The second from start.. well... :lol::lol::lol:

I mean do you like them for the documentary aspect or artistic?
 
Jonny said:
But can you see what links most of those images?

I've only looked at them on my phone, but I'd say its very clever use of colour.
For me, the picture needs to look different from reality. That sounds dreadful but let me explain. There are so many people with cameras who think they are photographers, it doesn't take long to get to grips with composition, and most rules are meant to be broken anyway! But my point is the best pictures should be ones that these guys could never take. Unfortunately that usually means post production work, but it doesn't have to be huge amounts. Just by having a play with 3 things in photoshop should start elevating your pictures.
First a quick look at the contrast. Decide how punchy you want the image.
Second a quick look at the colour balance overall.
Thirdly go through each colour on the hue and saturation section.
I think most of these can be done in Lightroom or capture one but I always like a little fiddle in photoshop.
This is obviously a very quick thing and bringing layers into would be the next level. But those fine tweaks of hue and saturation should make your image look slightly different from the norm. It should get people commenting about the specific red of a berry, or the blue of a dress. Colour is an art form and this is a good way to elevate your pictures.
Make sure that the changes you make sit we'll within the whole picture, as obviously you can make a right balls up of your pictures as well by doing this!
Click to expand...

So they could take the pictures.....but not do the post production?

Amateurs are clearly capable of taking pictures as good as pros of course...happens consistently in many areas of photography, if not sports and fashion where they are denied the best subject matter. These are mostly amateurs here?

smoker said:
What manner of cliched foreground interest do you think he should have included?:lol:
Click to expand...

A bungalow ;)
 
Icarebecauseyoudo said:
So they could take the pictures.....but not do the post production?

Amateurs are clearly capable of taking pictures as good as pros of course...happens consistently in many areas of photography, if not sports and fashion where they are denied the best subject matter. These are mostly amateurs here?
Click to expand...

I didn't mention pros or amateurs. I am talking about a finished piece of work. The main difference between a pro and an amateur is going to be consistency and speed.
My main point is for people to try and elevate their photography from the norm.
These guys are obviously photographers, thinking about the image that they produce, be it in camera or using post.
Some guys pick up a camera and put it on auto. Not thinking about the final image they take.

I'll admit that my post was a little condescending, but I usually just try and offer advice to the board in general.
A lot of people seem to want their images to look as they see it with their eyes, but usually, a subtle colour shift will help elevate that image above what somebody takes.

Photography now is not just about what you can achieve in camera (If it ever really was). Get it as best as you can in camera obviously and then tweak the images, to try and perfect it. All images are obviously subjective though.

Anyway, sorry for going off on one again.

My favourite is the spider!

Also i'm pointing out how simple post is and the basics can be learned as quickly as the basics of pressing the camera button.
I suppose i'm talking about making the work an art form, and thinking about how colour can be used. Adding more blues and magentas to skin tones, rather than making them look natural. Giving an image a feel, a look, that isn't run of the mill.
Making people think I couldn't do that, maybe not a photographer but your average joe who may be going to pay you for your work. Obviously natural has its place but as i said try and elevate the work in some way.

Its always easier to write this stuff, than do it in real life of course!
 
Jonny said:
I didn't mention pros or amateurs. I am talking about a finished piece of work. The main difference between a pro and an amateur is going to be consistency and speed.
My main point is for people to try and elevate their photography from the norm.
These guys are obviously photographers, thinking about the image that they produce, be it in camera or using post.
Some guys pick up a camera and put it on auto. Not thinking about the final image they take.

I'll admit that my post was a little condescending, but I usually just try and offer advice to the board in general.
A lot of people seem to want their images to look as they see it with their eyes, but usually, a subtle colour shift will help elevate that image above what somebody takes.

Photography now is not just about what you can achieve in camera (If it ever really was). Get it as best as you can in camera obviously and then tweak the images, to try and perfect it. All images are obviously subjective though.

Anyway, sorry for going off on one again.

My favourite is the spider!

Also i'm pointing out how simple post is and the basics can be learned as quickly as the basics of pressing the camera button.
I suppose i'm talking about making the work an art form, and thinking about how colour can be used. Adding more blues and magentas to skin tones, rather than making them look natural. Giving an image a feel, a look, that isn't run of the mill.
Making people think I couldn't do that, maybe not a photographer but your average joe who may be going to pay you for your work. Obviously natural has its place but as i said try and elevate the work in some way.

Its always easier to write this stuff, than do it in real life of course!
Click to expand...

We've been here before, of course, we approach this from very different angles. I try very hard not to adjust colours in my work, or return them to their natural state. I think most landscapers use some amounts of enhancement, but it becomes 'too much' very quickly. A difficult balancing act

In the studio it's a totally different game I agree. My most successful still life efforts are very much down to use of colour

The spider is a wonderful shot, I agree, should win. Not too impressed with the general standard tbh

edit, maybe that's harsh, I like most of the portraits

I think we would disagree on the dragon dance. For me it's departed too far towards your art, and is ceasing to be photography

Nicely composed shot that may well have looked great with far less work on it
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Icarebecauseyoudo said:
We've been here before, of course, we approach this from very different angles. I try very hard not to adjust colours in my work, or return them to their natural state. I think most landscapers use some amounts of enhancement, but it becomes 'too much' very quickly. A difficult balancing act

In the studio it's a totally different game I agree. My most successful still life efforts are very much down to use of colour

The spider is a wonderful shot, I agree, should win. Not too impressed with the general standard tbh

edit, maybe that's harsh, I like most of the portraits

I think we would disagree on the dragon dance. For me it's departed too far towards your art, and is ceasing to be photography

Nicely composed shot that may well have looked great with far less work on it
Click to expand...

No I don't think we disagree as much as you think. Perhaps I come across as hardlined and overbearing!

The dragon one is over worked. The fact that it has no shadows on the body of the people because of either HDR or playing with the curve compared to the very contrasty top of the image makes it look odd.

It has to be believable. It has to 'fool' the majority of the people that no post has taken place. In landscapes a slight tweak of a green to another green or adding a touch of blue to a rock will make it look different but still natural. From what I've read I think you use a lot of filters on camera, so you are already thinking of the final image.

Different photography requires different approaches, but I'm certainly not advocating turning grass purple because its a bit arty!
 
Re Jonny's post (not quoting as long)
Click to expand...

To me photography is taking a picture with a camera using your knowledge re light, depth of field, framing, focusing etc and the end result is your photograph.

Altered end result photographs are a total different thing. Post production is a computer skill. I think it can be excellent on occasion especially if you want an "arty" picture. But it isn't really photography is it?
 
Jonny said:
No I don't think we disagree as much as you think. Perhaps I come across as hardlined and overbearing!

The dragon one is over worked. The fact that it has no shadows on the body of the people because of either HDR or playing with the curve compared to the very contrasty top of the image makes it look odd.

It has to be believable. It has to 'fool' the majority of the people that no post has taken place. In landscapes a slight tweak of a green to another green or adding a touch of blue to a rock will make it look different but still natural. From what I've read I think you use a lot of filters on camera, so you are already thinking of the final image.

Different photography requires different approaches, but I'm certainly not advocating turning grass purple because its a bit arty!
Click to expand...

Dragon dance cannot be HDR, it's just thoroughly messed with innit

Smoker will advise ... the proliferation of milky way shots around just now with landscapes included (sick of them already ;)) is it advances in the sensors? They are surely pretty short exposures to avoid star trails....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top