This is an interesting subject and expression. The question is, was the body of the lion needed? My thought is no. The interest and action are in the head and mouth. Also, notice the processing to open up the face and eyes. Compare the side-by-side visual critique. What do you think?
Interesting photograph with a warm feel. See the side-by-side visual critique. The old cliché states, if an image is not good enough-you're not close enough. Did the tighter crop and subtle image processing improve the photographer's statement?
Well done and simply stated image of butterflies mating. See the side-by-side visual critique. Did the processing improve the shot? If not, why?
well-done image with appropriate composition and attractive bokeh. See the side-by-side visual critique. Did the processing and sharpening improve the photographer's statement? If not, why?
Great Pandas are exciting subjects. Unfortunately, we can only photograph them in captivity. I was fortunate to photograph them in the Panda preserve in China, so I understand the draw. See the side-by-side visual critique. Did the tighter crop and processing for contrast improve the shot? If not, why?
Full disclosure, I have seen this image and know who the photographer is. This image received a critique through the South Florida National Parks Camera Club. The photographer looks like he edited for the critique. See the side-by-side visual critique for another option. What do you think? Did the crop and processing add a different dynamic?
Interesting idea with a difficultly lighted subject. I think I know what attracted the photographer to this shot, but it seems it was left lacking with the processing. The camera cannot see what we can. It is up to us to finish our vision with our processing program. I see this as a high-key image. See the side-by-side visual critique. What do you think? Did processing to high-key reinforce the artist's statement? If I missed the mark, tell us why.
While this may be a good action shot, the light was working against you. Notice the muddy shadows and the blown-out areas at the bottom. Also, notice the chromatic aberration near the corners. (see the cropped visual aid, you may need to zoom in to see it)
This is an average photograph that may have benefited from additional post-processing. See the side-by-side visual critique for some ideas. Notice the eye and background. Look for other subtle differences in processing too.
Typical straight on an (almost) portrait. Processing feels a little heavy-handed with saturation. Zoom in tight on the eyes, and you will notice blue and cyan fringing. While some may say this is pixel peeping, it's not. An image should be evaluated for its quality and printability. Those colors will show up in print. The bright background doesn't help this image either. See the side-by-side visual critique. Did converting to monochrome strengthen the image? It did hide the blue and cyan around the eyes.
A tender moment in time. Making time stand still is a photographer's specialty. The image is well composed and exposed. It may have benefited from a little post-processing. Zoom in to the rocks in the upper right and the sea lions back, and you will see fringing. This effect will show up in a print. See the side-by-side visual critique. Did the post-processing to darken the background and open up the eye and face improve the photo?
Strong composition, good exposure, and sharp focus in the right areas. This shot is an excellent example of how rules are allowed to be broken. Rule - Foreground elements should be in focus. Rule: Lines leading out of the frame (like the lizard's back and tail). The fact that the foreground elements are soft helps with the legs and tail leaving the frame by disguising them. That was a lengthy way of saying, well done!See the side-by-side visual critique for some subtle post-processing ideas. What do you think?
Probably one of the best shots I have seen of a squirrel. Not because of the pose, but due to the color palette. The image is sharp in all the right places and is well composed and exposed. See the side-by-side visual critique for alternate processing ideas. Did my post-processing add some punch? Was it even necessary? Also, notice I dealt with the bright spot on the right of the frame behind the tail. Did that attention to detail help the image? See the side-by-side visual critique. Did the processing strengthen the image?
Good specimen shot. You seem to be down at his eye level, and he is sharp in the right places. Birds, or any animal, with black and white tonalities can be challenging under direct light. The camera's meter tends to over-expose in these situations. Underexposing by a stop or more would have preserved the white feathers' details and darkened the legs while still leaving enough exposure latitude to open up the blacks. I tried to emulate this in the visual critique. See the side-by-side comparison and let everyone know what you think.
Well done. Great timing and strong composition. The focus seems a little soft. The beads of water on the back add interest. See the side-by-side visual critique for processing and sharpening ideas.
Good timing and composition. The open mouth of the needlefish seems to be screaming for help. I understand that nature doesn't always give us the light we want or need. The osprey is mostly in shadow, but the needlefish is well lit. I am also noticing some edging around the wings and fish. It seems this could come from replacing the sky or maybe sharpening. Not sure what caused it, but it is there.
Great action shot and the focus seems to be spot on. The image is well composed. See the side-by-side visual critique and let everyone know what you think. Can you see the minor adjustments that I made?
The image is sharp where it needs to be and has a classic profile composition. It seems like the background had some work done. Notice the fall-off or blur transition under the head. See the side-by-side visual critique for processing ideas. Does the processed image have a little more impact? Does it look less flat?
A very challenging subject on more than one level. Dark birds with white feathers tend to lose detail in the whites due to overexposure. Exposing for the whites will still allow opening the darks in an image-editing program. The shape of the subject makes it a compositional challenge too. See the side-by-side visual critique. Did opening up the subject and darkening the background help? Compositionally, what about the square format?
Whales up close are tough to photograph creatively. Not sure they make a lens wide enough. This is a good shot, and the timing is right. I can almost smell his krill breath. See the side-by-side visual critique. I applied a slight color correction to subdue the cool tonality on the whale. I also emphasized the coolness of the water. What are your thoughts?
Let me start by saying this is a well-done image. What follows is my thought process (conversation with myself) when viewing this image. "Wow, that is a pretty shot, why is it pretty? Look at that yellow mat, the grasshopper, and all the important parts are in focus, look at the bokeh, perfect, wait, what's that grey blob between the lower-left petal, does it help the image? Wow, that mat is a beautiful yellow; wait a minute, is the mat the subject?... I can't stop looking at it; it pulls my eye away from the subject; I have an idea, let me try opening up the middle of the flower and the grasshopper's eyes, I like that better, need to deal with that area between the petals, that's better, love the mat, not again with the mat, need to tone it down so the subject can speak louder than the mat, let's add a hint of sharpening for effect, done, now to create the visual critique". Well, now you know what I go through to critique these images. See the side-by-side visual critique and let me know what you think. Did I help or simply disregard your artistic statement?
Well composed and has an artful feel. It looks a little soft, and not sure the mat frame color does anything for this image. The mat, of course, is a personal choice, but for my aesthetic, it takes away from the image. See the side-by-side visual critique for a slight lightening and a mat border color change. Again, these changes are subject to personal taste.
Nice action shot. Look close, and you will see that the eye is soft. Eyes should be tack sharp. You did get the all-critical catch light, though. The bread was extremely bright, and there were other elements that did not add to the image. See the side-by-side visual critique. Notice how I eliminated the unnecessary so the necessary can speak? I also sharpened the image to demonstrate how important the focus is. What do you think?
Fascinating subject. Unfortunately, it's not enough for a subject to be interesting to be worthy of submission to a competition. Notice the blown-out piece of food the gorilla is holding? The entire image seems over-exposed and needs to be color corrected. Under exposing from the meter reading, about two stops would have given a better exposure. Also, a tighter crop would have strengthened the statement. See the side-by-side visual critique. What do you think? And, what is that white line and loop above the ear? I removed it in the visual critique.
Classic composition and image are well exposed and focus on critical areas. See the side-by-side visual critique. Does the subtle processing make a difference?