Sliding

[aam1234]

What do you think.

[KABeach]

An interesting shot - I think the boat, positioned where it is, is a bit distracting... I also prefer to see a face... I think with all that water surrounding the boarder, it might be more effective cropped a bit tighter.

Cheers,
Ken

[cyclohexane]

I'm going to sound like I'm repeating what Ken said, except... wait, I am repeating what he said.

Face. Usually, getting the face in the shot is key. Also, the boat's kind of distracting.

Good timing though, I like the airborne water. A different angle probably would have helped this shot.

[aam1234]

There is a face, no

[Mr. Pickles]

I agree with them other guys. At least your posting.....

[aam1234]

Don't know about others, but this is more like a "good capture" kind of photo. I like the splash of water against the skier's skin. I like the monotony of the whole scene, just to be broken by the skier body. I don't know.

Maybe I've posted it in the wrong section.

[Mr. Pickles]

No ya didn't. It is a good "captured the moment" kind of shot. But that only works on so many or goes so far. I think what everybody is saying is that the guy should have turned around for you and gotten farther from the boat, and maybe let go just a tick earlier.

Either that or you were on the wrong side.

The thing with sports/action is that you can NOT be everywhere. You can't cover the whole thing. Like baseball. Where you gonna stand? 1st base side? You'll never get the 1st baseman's face this way on a throw to put out the batter, so move to the 3rd base side. Now you wont get a tag at 3rd. If along 1st base, you won't get a good shot of a left handed batter, and at 3rd base, it is the right handers that will cause you grief. Same with the pitchers. Never mind that moving from one side to the other will move the sun too.

You got a decent shot here. A second earlier or a second later and all things change. Studio portraits are hard to master, just like sports/action, but for two different reasons.

You have better shots in your portfolio. I know you do.

[Paul Shields]

I quite like the structure of this. The guy on the skis seems to be posing towards the guy on the boat holding the camcorder. It certainly helps in telling a narrative.

[KABeach]

I hope you don't take my comments wrong - personally I feel almost all shots (including all of my own) could be improved in some way or another. The only way we can learn is for us to help each other and try an figure out ways which could improve a shot the next time out.

Sometimes we agree with those opinions, sometimes not.

One of the hard things is posting on sports we have little experience in, a good example for me would be equestrian - I can comment on major technical flaws, such as exposure and focus - but I know there are many small details that are important to horse people that I just don't see... On the other hand, I've shot enough volleyball to know when the timing of the image is off by a small fraction of a second...

As Mr. Pickles said, it's a decent shot - but there are some things that could take it to the next level - and I expect you will consider these the next time out.

Keep shooting and keep posting!

Cheers,
Ken

[aam1234]

Thank you very much guys. Not only the comments are appreciated but one can learn from them too.

What I meant by the earlier comment is that maybe it's not a strictly a sports shot. Don't know how to explain it but let me give you an example. If you notice from some of Martin Scorsese films he maybe showing, say, a violent scene, yet his use of the camera and music is telling us something totally different.
Hope that makes sense, and sorry to put my photo with Martin's work in the same sentence

Thanks again guys.

[aam1234]

Another example of what I call the "Martin Scorsese effect". Here, my little nephew is busy playing in the background yet the subject seems to be the flower. Two totally different events happening at the same time. Hope that makes sense

[psurrette]

I understand what you are saying but I still can't get away from the angle. Even the second photo you posted had a major focal point to look at, I do not see that in the skier photo. I am bias as I do quite a bit of watersports photography. I like to see the face of the person who is the focal point.

[aam1234]

Hi psurrette, your photo helps explain what I'm trying to explain, thanks. And it's an excellent shot.

My photo is not about the skier or skiing.

[KABeach]

Originally Posted by aam1234

Hi psurrette, your photo helps explain what I'm trying to explain, thanks. And it's an excellent shot.

My photo is not about the skier or skiing.

Well, we can discuss it as an "Art" image instead of a "Sports" image.

My first question is, what is the center of interest?

Is it the skier? I really don't see enough of the skier to really feel it is the center of interest.
Is it the photographer? He/She is almost out of the frame - just not strong enough to feel that is the center of interest.
Is it the "tension" between the photographer and the skier? Well, I could see that if it was cropped tigher to get rid of the dead area on the left - but even still, the photographer is almout out of the frame.
Is it the water? IMO, the shutter speed would need to be either a lot faster, and freeze the water droplets or a lot slower to create a nice soft water... plus I would think that backlighting would work better, giving the water some definition.

Unfortunately, the way it is cropped and PP'd now, I'm confused about the center of interest.. the frame is divided in half creating an image that isn't as visually interesting as it could be.

Cheers,
Ken

[aam1234]

Originally Posted by Squirrel

Unfortunately, the way it is cropped and PP'd now, I'm confused about the center of interest.. the frame is divided in half creating an image that isn't as visually interesting as it could be.
Cheers,
Ken

Totally agree with you Ken. And honestly, I'm confused about it too.

But there is something I like about this photo. Maybe if there wasn't a boat in the frame, just the skier and the splashing water. I would've loved that.

[Paul Shields]

I think it's an interesting thing here. Quite often I'll take a shot that I think tells a tale or has some impact but which will mean nothing to any other viewer. Usually it will be pointed out why it didn't work, and more often than not they'll be right. 2nd and 3rd opinions are a real eye opener in things like this. At the back of my mind though, I'll still feel the same way and in the end that's the important thing. If something you've created gives you the pleasure and satisfaction then really everything else is bunk (unless you're doing stock or selling in some other way ).

[aam1234]

Really like that last part, Paul.

I like the mono colors that was broken by the skier's body. It's like a splash. Boom. Good contrast imo.

[KABeach]

PaulS: Well said.

aam:

Sometimes I do work for myself, and sometimes I do work for others.. when I'm doing work for others, I think in terms of what is marketable and base all my decisions on that. In sports, faces and ball the majority of what is marketable.

However, when I do work for myself, then I can experiment. Some of it works, some of it doesn't... most of it never sees the light of the day - I have over 100,000 negatives in my darkroom nobody but me has ever seen - even my wife has only seen a hundred or so from that group... that doesn't bother me, I made them for me and they pleased me at the time I made them...

There is nothing wrong with making images just for yourself... however, when you have an image that you like, but isn't popular with anybody else, it is important for you to analyze what you like about it. Use it as a learning tool. Use it to develop your eye and your photography vocabulary.

Cheers!
Ken

[Paul Shields]

Yes, I'd second Ken's points there. The self-analysis can be very important.

[aam1234]

Excellent point(s) there Ken.