I like the potential this image has. It shows an ability to look at the world around you from the perspective of an artist seeking out form and pattern. You were probably hurt by the technical stuff more than anything. For me, for this type of image to work, there needs to be infinite depth of field, i.e., everything is in sharp focus. Having everything in focus puts all the objects in the photo on the same visual plane which in an abstract type of image works best, in my experience. There is a lack of sharpness due to shallow depth of field and what sharpness there was on the bell seems to have been lost in resizing (I think there is a tutorial somewhere on DPC that tells you how to resize without losing quality). I will add that were this a photo in which we were looking out at a landscape or a human sort of scenario the slightly blurred 'window' that we are looking through can work nicely as a framing device. I think what happened here is that the macro function caused the shallow depth of field.
Thank you for the great critique Macro. I found it most helpful. Believe it or not that was actually taken with a tripod lol. Course I didn't use the timer. I also cropped it so that probably took away some of the clarity too I suppose. Either way thank you for the insight!
I gave this a 4. The main shape to me was the circle, the bell in the middle was of course another shape but not as 'classic' as the circle, and not what I would deem a 'classic bell shape' (if that makes sense). I think if you had incorporated more space around the circle (depending what you had to work with of course), this at 640 (height in this case) and sharper (looks more like 'blur'/shake issues rather than focus, but not sure), would all have made this better in my opinion. Also, minor, but your title draws attention (for those that read it) to the bell, which, although minor, detracts from the 'strongest shape' in this shot.
Add photograph to your favorites
Add photographer to your favorites
Photographer found comment helpful.
