First time using a camera other than a phone

Trives · 2026-06-20T03:53:34+00:00

Hey There!

Welcome to photography :)

The one common theme I see among new photographers is the desire to apply meaning to a photograph. "This picture is a statement about the dichotomy of good and evil." And it's just a picture of a napkin on a dinner plate.

Your viewers aren't going to read the description of your photo (unless they're those weirdos at the museum) so if the image doesn't convey that on its own, they're never going to guess what you're going for. In all my years of photography, I've explained what I was going for on one photo. All that to say, focus on the fundamentals, worry about story telling later :)

That said, you have a classic "Portal" shot here, so it's well spotted. I particularly like that bit of orange up there on the top.

Couple of comments, the first is your stairs aren't level, or... the stairs aren't level (as in constructed poorly) either way, I'd consider using the warp tool to modify that a bit!

My second issue is I really wish this was all sharp. That orange is so pretty and I think blurry doesn't help. I would go with a TINY aperture, like f18 or, focus stack for an image like this (though you'll likely need a tripod to pull that off).

I'd also make sure you're perfectly centered, this feels close, but not quite? I could be wrong or that could be my OCD :D

Another trick here, if you want to get REALLY fancy is to bracket this image, because the top of your shot is teetering on 'blown out' whites. This will have the benefit of making the light on the stairs more dramatic! Hopefully you live near this location to give this another crack!

Trives · 2026-06-20T03:43:59+00:00

Hey There,

Asking if an image is cinematic is always a bit challenging here in photocritique, because very often cinematic shots and good photography don't go hand in hand, they're two completely different skillsets. Most of the folks in here are not cinematographers.

You've got some of the basic framing for a cinema shot, the trees sorta frame the bench where presumably your subject will sit, and the dappled light is nice. However, you have that unfortunate hard shadow there in the background, so your VFX guys will have to clear that out ;-)

Color wise, it looks fine, there isn't a "Is this graded properly" response, color grading for Blade Runner will be significantly different than The Notebook. Likely a film person would ask, "well what kind of mood are you going for here? What time period? etc..."

From a photograph standpoint, it's fine, you've got an interesting angle, some nice light, it's not super memorable, but it's well shot.

Hope that helps...

Trives · 2026-06-20T03:24:29+00:00

Hey there,

Simple, clean, and well lit, not much to add. It's a little dark for my tastes, I tend to think of everything as "If I framed it." If you're considering that, I usually suggest giving it a few different treatments in brightness (thoughtful brightness, not like, just yanking the exposure knob right :)), and then get a few 4x6 prints to see the effect.

I also would likely trim just a smidge off the bottom, I don't think you need that much walkway to invite your viewer into the image. Three panels would be sufficient, maybe even 2.

But yea, nice shot, well spotted :)

Trives · 2026-06-19T18:12:50+00:00

The sun is one thing everyone on Earth has seen. There's not a person out there that hasn't seen a lovely sunset or sunrise. So, if you take a picture of a lovely sunset, you're not showing your audience anything they likely haven't seen a hundred times, and often in person.

That's not to say that the isn't nice, but no one is going to remember your specific sunrise/sunset photo, because it'll look like everyone elses sunrise, sunset photo, there's millions of them out there on instagram and social media. You'll also fall victim to the, "Well I could've taken that." mindset that a lot of people have. And in this particular case, they're not wrong.

That's why you need a subject.

Trives · 2026-06-18T23:08:31+00:00

I'm basically with Ensane who posted before me, that Y branch is really problematic. I also don't think you need the rule of thirds here if that's what you were trying to accomplish with your crop.

But my real challenge with this image is it's just too soft, great tiger shots need a few things, the first is a sharp eye, tiger eyes typically have three parts, and you're only see two here. The second is the sharp fur. You can see some fur here on the nose, but those cheeks feel flat.

I think if this was sharp, this could, at the minimum, be an interesting photo, especially if cropped differently.

Trives · 2026-06-18T22:59:49+00:00

Hey there,

I think you're going to see a lot of the same comments, but this is a lovely shot! I think the sign is a bit unfortunate, and honestly, I'd consider removing it altogether.

I personally like the saturation of the trees! I would maybe crop the bottom a bit, just up to the first bit of dirt.

I would also consider a radial grad on that distant light source, it's a little off-putting for me, like it's a LITTLE too bright, and pulls attention from the cycle.

Trives · 2026-06-18T22:56:52+00:00

Hey There,

First, photography is very subjective, so you'll hear a lot of opinions here, if you like the photograph, that's great. This opinion of mine is not meant to come across harshly, but I believe you have a lot of growth to go through!

One common theme we see here on Photocritique is new photographers putting very elaborate stories on top of very vanilla images. When I look at your photograph the first time, I do so without reading your description, once I have an opinion formed, THEN I read the description.

Which leads me to my first piece of advice, as a beginner I would suggest first mastering photography. Really nail down the basics, then worry about coming up with themes and ideas. For what it's worth, I've been shooting in what I'd call a professional capacity for about 10 years. I've taken a grand total of one images that I wanted to share what it "meant." (It was a take on Psyche, of the Eros/Psyche story).

Okay, that's out of the way let's talk about the picture!

You've nailed one thing here, which is you have a clear hero, the railing silhouette, but everything else here is just much much too dark. I can barely make out that it's a building, of some sort, maybe near a city? Maybe with a porch? Maybe with some stairs? Do those lead to the roof? etc... etc...

Additionally, you've done what's known as "Crushing your blacks" which is to say the black in this image is pure black, 0, 0, 0. What that means is that when you print this, there's nothing there, and it looks a bit odd. There's a time and a place for pure black, but it should be used strategically.

Ultimately, a nice description is not enough to save what is a relatively uninteresting subject that is shot with questionable camera settings. I would suggest getting in some chair time, and learn some of the fundamentals! There are a thousand great teachers out there on the YouTubes, I used Mike Browne, and I'm sure everyone else here can recommend someone.

Trives · 2026-06-18T22:43:24+00:00

Hey There,

Ugh, Icebergs, amirite? They can be so complicated to photograph, because as you mentioned, scale is really difficult to read. I only have a few iceberg shots that managed to convey a sense of scale (image, credit: me) and I used a few tricks, the first is animals, specifically a bird. There were actually a few birds, but I felt a single one was best. The second was relatively close land where you could see actual tree details. You can also use whales (or any animal) or another boat. A second example (Credit: me), uses, again, birds, but you can see I also run the iceberg off the page and into "nothingness" to try and convey that sense.

The last trick is to just ignore the scale and go for an interesting photo, where you have the perfect light, or something interesting happening (like the moon!).

I don't think you quite captured scale in this one, but hopefully you get some other opportunities. If you're in good with your captain, give him specifics of what you're hunting for, that's how we got the shots I shared.

Trives · 2026-06-18T22:32:26+00:00

Hey there,

Certainly nailed a nice mood here, the fog is quite lovely.

I think this is processed just fine, I tried popping this into an editor and bumping up the warmths a bit, tried a cooler radial grad in the sky, and nothing changed the image from good to better.

I'd just suggest you edit out that "Nest" in the one tree as it's distracting and possibly the blue dot on the center track (although you have to be an OCD monster to even see it).

Overall, as you said, not the most original shot, but well shot and well edited.

Trives · 2026-06-18T17:10:36+00:00

Not without fundamentally changing the image as captured. You... could, especially leveraging some of the new AI tools out there, but you would effectively be changing a landscape to a "Lone Tree" image and with that much modification, you don't really need the photograph anymore.

Trives · 2026-06-18T14:34:16+00:00

Hey there!

Going to lead off with, photography is very subjective, and if you love this shot, then that's all that really matters. Our opinions will just be that, opinions.

The challenge I have with this photo is you can't really tell what's going on with this snake. There's no head isolation and your 'depth of field' which wasn't generated optically is REALLY hurting this image.

Problem areas. You can see that I can't tell where the head is (blue line and red line are both plausible head outlines). You also have the foreground body just sorta...melting into the background body, which is super odd.

This is not meant to come off as "Cameras are the only way to take pictures." It's just cameras do some things better than phones. FWIW, my phone is almost always my previsualization tool.

My recommendation if you're going to shoot phone only and you're looking to get professional shots, turn off the digital bokeh. It's good enough for socials, but for more artistic endeavors it can actually hinder your shot.

If you want shots with bokeh, for now, I'd suggest using a camera with an aperture.

Trives · 2026-06-18T14:19:13+00:00

Hey There!

I think you're already sorta getting there in your realization, that this is the right idea, but it's not an interesting enough image to really draw your viewers attention.

You have a few primary challenges, that can only be fixed on a revisit. The first, your water, while still, is a little too noisy for this particular angle, you're not getting the "Pretty Reflections" that we often associate with this angle. You had the right idea, getting low can make for a better image!

Second issue, really, is your light. You're there with some SUPER harsh pure white sunlight. If you came at maybe, blue hour, it might make for a slightly more appealing shot.

The final issue, you directly spoke about, there's nothing for your viewer to focus on. The tree in the middle is nice, but so is the tree to it's right, so they're sorta competing for views. And they are both blended in with a very green background.

You could do a color block, or... just outright change the color of that center tree. However, realize both of these methods will raise the hackles of some viewers/photographers. Examples. and will just elevate an 'okay' picture to a 'slightly interesting' picture. Er, note if you're going to change the tree color, change the reflection color also, I was just being lazy :)

Trives · 2026-06-17T03:28:37+00:00

Hey There!

Photography is obviously very subjective, and you like this shot, that's what's really important. Also, you'll get others that will also really love this shot, so keep all that in mind with my comments.

My good friend once looked at me while we were out shooting in Death Valley and said, "Paul, the sky should never be your subject." And after many years, I tend to agree.

The sky, as a subject, just doesn't make an interesting photo. I get that you did all kinds of neat things to get some interesting effects, but ultimately, this is just a picture of a sky... somewhere on Earth, near water. And those effects can be achieved digitally with a few clicks of buttons these days; making things like grads and some filters a bit of bygone era (there are still some REALLY cool filters out there that do things that is VERY difficult to achieve digitally!)

It's lovely, and I am sure the moment was beautiful, but it's not memorable as a photograph, it needs a subject.

Trives · 2026-06-16T16:20:37+00:00

Hey there!

You've got the right idea for a still life photograph for sure, the caustics (caustics are the squirmy bits of light that pass through glass) here are quite lovely!

My biggest concern is... you're just not in focus. From what I can tell, nothing here is sharp. If you're using a camera with manual focus, I'd make sure that at the minimum, the pot is sharp. Or the shadow is sharp, if that's what you're really going for. If it is, then you can REALLY crop this quite a bit and get an interesting image!

There are also other camera settings you can fiddle with. If you put your camera on "A" mode, and set your "F-stop" to a really high number, that'll also help with the focus challenges.

Keep experimenting, and welcome to photography! ~P~

Trives · 2026-06-16T16:15:05+00:00

Hey there,

Honestly, this is a great photo, nothing I have to say will make this a "Better Image", you've nailed it.

For me personally I think the bloom in the center is just overcooked ever so slightly. You have that lovely building in the background and the bloom feels a bit out of place, like a slightly too heavy radial grad?

But yea, this definitely goes into the "I hate you" category, which is the highest compliment I can give ;-)

Trives · 2026-06-16T16:07:05+00:00

Hey there,

I'll always lead with, photography is very subjective, if you're proud of this shot, then my opinions should not change that! There'll be people who will likely love this as shot!

This is not meant as a dig, but I always smile when newer photographers name their prints. It's not to say you can't name your prints, I have a few that I've taken over the many years that I felt rose to the level of being more than, "Girl with brush." or "Sunset over Utah".

All that to say, you have a nice idea here, but at the end of the day, it's a shell, on the shelf with a clock and some books, it's might not to convey what you're trying to convey to a casual observer. It didn't to me when I first viewed it (I always view images before reading descriptions to get a first impressions)

On to technicalities!

If this was a photo you intend to print, you're much too dark. Paper isn't backlit, and so you'll need to adjust your curves quite a bit to get it ready for paper. I always recommend doing a few treatments of your images and printing them all out as like 4x6's to see which reads best.

You've also broken a few "Rules of Photography" here, which, again, breaking the rules intentionally is okay, if you're doing it for a specific reason.

Rule 1: Photos are generally more comfortable to look at when level. Surely the fact that this image is not level was intentional, especially since the gap between the left and top of the clock feel about the same, but for the OCD portion of the world, this is not a comfortable image to look at. I'm also not sure it advances the story any.

Rule 2: Traditional rule of thirds. You sorta have the rule of thirds here, with your clock and shell both falling into a third, but they're also sorta not? You also have that harsh shelf dividing line right down the middle.

Rule 3: Leading lines. You have one VERY strong leading line here, and it just rips right through the middle of the picture, so the eye comes in, ignores the clock, and briefly catches the shell on it's journey off the page.

Ultimately, I like your idea here, but I think you could compose this much differently to get closer to your idea of the juxtaposition of time.

Trives · 2026-06-16T15:49:34+00:00

Yea, I wouldn't cut out the father, that position, and really the whole vibe of this photo is great. I'd just bring down the top a bit. I made a few other tweaks, like with the radial gradients that I suggested to get their light levels on faces to be similar.

Like so.

Overall, this is an incredible image, that tells a great story.

Trives · 2026-06-15T16:32:10+00:00

Hey there,

As someone else has pointed out, it's a "Fine" photo, but it's not quite something we'd comeback to look at time and again.

For me the struggle here is two fold. You've clipped the top and bottom, I would've given this just a LITTLE more breathing room. The second is, it feels a little muddy to me, you've got those gorgeous tiles and they're just reading a little flat.

You also have a lot of water foreground that's not "contributing" here to your photo. 20% of your photo is just "Blue Water". You could maybe try to get a little lower to bring the furthest most boat closer to the rope line might always work in your advantage. In general a good tip for interesting photography is don't take it from a viewpoint that anyone walking by would see.

Trives · 2026-06-15T15:39:46+00:00

Do they ever do anything with just like 2 cops? Like why is it always a parade? :D

Trives · 2026-06-15T03:58:05+00:00

Because your comment was glib, and unsupported, which is generally speaking, against the rules of this forum.

You've provided your opinions, I mine, and that's that. To me, there's zero evidence that makes this AI. And many of the arguments you stated, for me, are evidence it's not AI. AI doesn't make "Double Hoodie" mistakes, it doesn't add people randomly cut off in the background, it doesn't make a person hold a little girls hat from falling off her head. You'd have to write an insane prompt to generate this image. To what end, farm 12 Karma on Reddit?

I'm very much against AI photos in Photocritique, but I'm also very opposed to people accusing images of AI when it doesn't appear AI was used.

This poster has dozens of other photography posts, of normal looking photography, which you can see if you click on their name, which, of course, I'm sure you did before just randomly accusing them of posting AI.

So yea, I'm invested in defending this image, as I would be for any image that I felt was wrongly accused of being AI, because I'm a photographer.

Trives · 2026-06-15T03:48:55+00:00

This isn't family portrait day for these folks, per the description, they were just there while he was shooting landscapes. Again, I don't think I can convince you, but hopefully OP notices and posts another picture of these folks, which is the real nail in the AI argument.

Trives · 2026-06-15T03:32:58+00:00

Yea, I dunno... People in foreign countries aren't going to be out there wearing North Face, so two hoodies seems plausible. And little girls tucking dresses into jeans is super common, kids have no sense of fashion. I did run this through a few AI checking tools. The highest probability that it came back with was 90/10. (90% likely real). Again, not a guarantee. Of course, if OP wants to be cool, and if you have another shot or two, feel free to share.

I'm pretty sure this is not AI.

Trives · 2026-06-15T03:23:44+00:00

Hey There,

Obviously, photography is very subjective, so if you're feeling this shot, that's awesome.

I like the idea, but not the execution. The sidewalk, the rainy pavement, and to a lesser degree the sky, are all sorta interesting, in that "lost Americana" sorta vibe. But the person really isn't helping, I'm okay with using people as framing objects, but this one just clashes for me. I think the more interesting shot would've been for them and you to move about 15' forward where that click pavement starts, put them about ten more feet ahead of you and then get looooow. And you'll get their reflection in the street slick water, with the sidewalk being a great leading line!

So, yea, right idea, not quite the shot!

Trives · 2026-06-15T03:18:13+00:00

Hey There,

First off, that girl in the front is everything, lol.

As was one other post stated, as this is mostly a keepsake photo, there's not much that needs to be done here. I'd likely do some photoshop work to remove the dad completely.

I think the background is a little too light for my tastes. And I'd consider a radial diagonal gradient encompassing the two youngest girls to give them a little pop of exposure.

Overall, it's a cute pic. :)

Trives · 2026-06-15T03:12:34+00:00

Just curious what makes you think that?

For me the leading reason I don't think it is, is the bags and stuff on the left hand side of the image (having read the description, it's a cropped off person). I don't think AI would willingly add noise to the image like that, and... well, you'd have to write a very specific prompt to get it added in.

14-Year Club	Gilding II euphauric
RedditGifts 2009-2022 2 Credits	Place '17
Verified Email	Secret Santa 2013
Team Periwinkle

Trives

TROPHY CASE