# Constructive Criticism Please



## Sylvanite

Here are a couple of photos that I submitted in this year's Birthday Bash Pen Marketing Photo Contest.  I consider myself a moderately skilled amateur photographer (certainly not a pro) and think I have the technical basics (exposure, focus, color balance, etc.) covered, but I'm sure my pics could still be improved (in lighting and composition, for example).

Some members indicated that they had professional critiques.  If you are willing, please give me constructive criticism (professional or not).  I'd like to learn.

I decided that I was going to try two approaches - one with pretty wood as a prop, and one without props but with a prominent reflection.  Here is the first one:







This picture gathered more votes, but I suspect that's mainly because of the "wood-porn" appeal.  I think the biggest flaw is that there is insufficient contrast between the pens and the prop.  That is, the edges of the pens get lost in wood behind them.  Some smaller composition problems include:  the quality of the finish doesn't show, the pens are not rotated equally, and the photo does not seem to have a natural point of interest (too many subjects).

Then I have:






Personally, I think this is a better photograph.  I followed the rule-of-thirds in this one, and the pen lower barrel is where my eye is drawn.  It shows good edge definition all around and the "shine line" attests to the barrel straightness and finish.  It doesn't, however prompt any sort of narrative and it is perhaps a bit cold or moody.  I would have liked to have a wider, less glaring reflection, and a bit more light on the underside.  A more even reflection on the finial and other metal parts would be nice too.

If memory serves, I used three lights (strobes) on these pictures.  One high-left diffused through an umbrella, one high-right reflected off an umbrella, and one low-right undiffused to yield the shine.  I put white reflectors around the lens to try to soften the shadows and even out the reflections in the rhodium.  

I'm thinking about getting a softbox for the shine-light, on the theory that a large square light source would yield a wider, less glaring shine on the pen.  Would that work?

Thanks in advance for any help you can give.

Regards,
Eric


----------



## longbeard

I am NOT a photographer, but while i think both are absolutely great looking pics, i did vote for the 2nd one. I like the mirrored effect. Pens in the first photo, i dont think the edges get lost to much, but something contrasting may have worked better, still a great photo i think.


Harry


----------



## toddlajoie

Eric, I've always been a big fan of the black glass work, but it has it's place, and I think the Amboyna photo is not really the right place for it, mainly because the wood block is so large, that it minimizes the amount of it that shows, and with the lighting seeming to come mostly from above, the large shadowed reflection causes the lower part of the photo to be very heavy. As far as positioning, I see your point about the pens not being rotated quite the same, but I think that due to the size difference in the nibs it is not a big difference. What are you using to position the pens. It certainly looks like you have something holding them in place. There is a photo product we used to used called tacky-wax, but the dental wax that some use to plug their tubes would work well in these situation too. It holds pretty well, can be rolled into very small beads and comes off pretty cleanly for the most part (watch out on open pores/grain, other holes). It makes these small tweaks in composition very easy. As you said, the composition on this one is "busy" which makes lighting it difficult. When I work on small shiny things like pens, the placement if my lights are mainly dictated by where I want that highlight reflection to be. In this case I would have liked to have seen a nice clean reflection highlight on the cap on the right side, rather than the partial reflection that shows at the top. Sometimes this reflection can be achieved by a simple reflector, a piece of white paper or tin foil (tho watch out for the wrinkles in the foil, they sometimes show if you don't have enough light to wash it out...) Overall, for me with this composition, you would have benefited from a bit more light coming in from the front to lessen the large dark lower area, or loosing the black glass (you can do the same with any color, if you have a plexi shop around, they often have scraps in many colors that you can buy by the pound, or a small piece of glass, which is less prone to scratching, and a can of spraypaint will do the job...)

The part of this photo that bothers me the most is the clip on the right cap. The reflections on it are a bit of a mish-mash, and I think distract from the elegance of the clip shape. This is where you can get into strategically placed reflectors, just out of the frame, to create the highlights you want. I will often go through 10 sheets of paper, tearing up little pieces, taping them here or there, folding them into little pieces that will stand on their own, etc. and placing them where they will clean up or block these areas to get rid of the distracting shapes.

Your second shot is the much more applicable use of the reflective surface. but I would have loved to have seen more detail in the reflecton, which would only come from a light in the background facing in toward the pen to reflect light up from the underside. One thing I LOVED was the slight gold highlight in the back of the cap's reflecton. I would have loved to have seen that better define the cap centerband, but I'm not sure how or if that could have happened. As for the finial reflection or lightening, that would have been very easy to do with the small paper or foil reflectors mentioned before.

As far as equipment, I think for the most part the advantages of Softboxes are overrated(of course I have many of them, and they do have their place, mostly in controlling stray light in larger setups. I am a much bigger fan of translucent panels, the big fold up frisbie looking things, that I position and shoot my lights through like softboxes. The advantage to these for me is that I can vary the distance from the light to the panel to change the size of the light (which affects the reflections, wrap around, and fall-off) or move it around withing the panel (which helps move those reflections around once the shot is set up). Softboxes can be heavy, easily get off-balanced if you are trying to move them into weird positions, or need boom arms and such, which are just a pain in the butt if you don't have 12 or 20 foot ceilings.

Kinda long winded, and in the end, this is a LOT of opinion, SERIOUS nitpicking on the photos, and my assumptions of your setup based on looking at the photos. In the end, based on your results in the photo contest, I suggest you go out and buy a Polaroid 600 or Kodak Disc camera with the cube flashes and use that instead...:biggrin:


----------



## Sylvanite

Todd,

Thanks for the detailed critique.  I keep switching back and forth between a light tent and no light tent.  I like how the light tent illuminates pen hardware (curved silver surfaces), but I don't like how it leaves the image flat.   The suggestion of hanging sheets of paper as reflectors is a good one.  I used Museum Gel to hold the pens in place.  Unfortunately, it kept softening and the pens would move as I photographed them.  That's why the Jr. Statesman pen nib isn't parallel with the full size Statesman.  I think I should use the wax instead.

I shot these pens on a sheet of black acrylic.  What I like about it is that black acrylic yields a single reflection.  I've tried mirrored acrylic and sheet glass, but had problems with extraneous reflections (as many as 4 extra).  Would using a polarizing filter help get rid of the ghost images?

I have three 32" round 5-in-1 reflectors (the collapsing kind).  Would a strobe through the  white diffuser yield a wider shine line?  

Regards,
Eric


----------



## edstreet

1st photo
top of the amboyna burl block is muddied, 
picture is rotated counter clockwise some and skewed
name/logo on nib is showing (against the rules)
reflections on the blank removes serious detail in the blank
threads and the top cap is over exposed in places.
using a warmer zone III and IV approach on the shadows would yield a deep 3D effect
pens get lost in the background and degrades contrast


2nd photo
reflections on blank degrades detail
name/logo on nib is showing (against the rules)
the reflections have to much zone I and not enough zone III
the only zone IX and X is in the blank and the glare, causing the glare to stand out more than the blank


----------



## Haynie

My unprofessional opinion is this

The block of burl is sexy and by itself might be a nice bit of wood porn but in this image it is distracting.  You addressed the angle of the nib so you know about that.  The cap laying down bothers me.  Don't know why, it just does.

In the second shot, the blown highlight going straight down the barrel is distracting.  I really like the reflection of the gold cap band reflected even if we can't see the actual band.  Nice touch.

When I want still life inspiration, which is what you are doing, I look to Jody Dole.  I wish his website was up.  Amazing stuff.  He has a couple youtube videos I am going to link here that kind of goes through his thinking process.  I think it is helpful.

Light moves by Jody Dole - The Psaltery - SpeedLights (1/5) - YouTube
Light moves by Jody Dole - Psaltery Silhouette - SpeedLights (2/5) - YouTube
Light moves by Jody Dole - Colorful Bottles - Natural Light (3/5) - YouTube
Light moves by Jody Dole - Antique Fire Truck - Natural Light and a Speedlight (4/5) - YouTube
Light moves by Jody Dole - Cupcakes - Natural Light (5/5) - YouTube


----------



## Quality Pen

Beautiful pens. Great pics.

To me, the easiest way to make that first pen go to the next level is figure out a way to centralize the focal point. As you know, a good photograph leads your eye _somewhere_. But in this photo, what are we supposed to view? It is a bit "much" if you don't mind me saying. Where do I look? What do I focus on? The block is beautiful, the pens are, the reflections are crisp and sharp just like the pen. And the cap is nice too! Every area of this photo has stuff that pulls my eyes to it!

Perhaps you like the second photo more simply because you can 'focus".

I should reiterate that these are great photos! As is they are nice and, I believe, could sell a pen in an online environment.


----------



## Sylvanite

edstreet said:


> top of the amboyna burl block is muddied


I agree.  The amboyna block had a thick wax coating that I stripped before taking the picture.  I took a little too much off the top and should have oiled it (to show the grain) before photographing.


> picture is rotated counter clockwise some and skewed


The photo isn't rotated nor skewed - the block is simply thicker on one end than on the other.  I'm not sure if a square block would be more or less interesting.


> reflections on the blank removes serious detail in the blank


How do you get a reflection that shows the finish without the glare?


> threads and the top cap is over exposed in places.


That's from the light that gave me the shine line.  If I can get a good reflection otherwise, that should be fixed.


> using a warmer zone III and IV approach on the shadows would yield a deep 3D effect


I used a black acrylic sheet, which makes it very difficult to bring up the shadow detail.  I could use a silver mirror, but that yields extra reflection(s).  How can I get rid of the ghost images?

Thanks for the feedback,
Eric


----------



## Ambidex

Eric...I may be the worst photographer on this site..because I turn pens and don't care about photography. But your first pic looks too busy and has different reflection points that make the finishes look inconsistent. The second pic I can't find anything not perfect about it...I'm dang sure someone here can..:wink:


----------



## toddlajoie

If you're getting 4 sets of reflections, which can happen when the lower surface of clear materials is reflective, a polarizer may get rid of most of it, but not likely all of it. Polished metal will give you the mirror without the multiple reflections, and if you can keep black acrylic from scratching, you should be able to make polished metal last a while (that's my problem, my stuff gets scratched up quickly...)

The problem I have with tents is not so much the image flatness, you can overcome that by bringing the lights in close and not lighting the entire tent, but the fact that they rarely can be adjusted for size. You can get a larger reflection by either using a larger light source, or bringing the one you have closer. That's what I like about the disks, I can put one JUST outside the frame above the scene, and then by lighting different areas of it, move the highlights to where I want it to be. The farther back I light the disc, the more the reflection would move to the top. Moving it forward will wrap it around the front more. By adjusting the size of the light that hits it, the size of the highlight can be adjusted. A smaller light throws a sharper source, so your highlight will be smaller, and the transition between lit area and shadow area will be sharper and have a greater range from dark to light. A larger source will give you a larger highlight, and less of an exposure range from highlight to shadow. If you get it large enough and close enough, you can maintain detail in your highlight AND your shadow (if that is what you want). 

As a good illustration of this, the photos I submitted in the Intermediate Contest (click here if you want to see it) was lit with one translucent disc and one silver one. The trans one is sitting just out of the photo, above the pen, and is pretty well centered over it (you can see it's reflection in the cap dome) It has 2 lights hitting it, one in the rear to the left side which gives the cap and clip the clean highlight, and one to the right and slightly in front of the pen, which causes the large highlight along the top of the blank. The dark band just below that is caused by the reflectors I have, which have a black edge to them. The hightlight below that is from the silver reflector, which is facing strait in at the pen and is just to the right of the lens. It also filled in the forward part of the bark stand.

The detail shot is a great example of the paper reflectors (seen here). The lighting was exactly the same except I pulled out the silver reflector (it was in the way), I just positioned the pen so that I could frame it with just the fin part. The placed a piece of pain white paper about 1/2 the size of a dollar bill exactly where it would be a direct reflection on the inside of the fin. All the light for that photo is coming from the same 2 strobes hitting the disk above the pen. I also placed a piece of paper below and a bit behind the pen to make the reflection seen along the bottom of the pen. The reflection was already there from the base material (called TwinBoard if anyone is interested), but was inconsistent because of the line pattern of the board. Laying a piece of paper down got rid of the pattern from the reflection

I'm certainly not saying my 2 photos are perfect, I can explain the many things I would have fixed if I had had all morning to work on them, and in my opinion, yours are just as good, if not better. I'm just using them to show you how I use the reflector disks instead of softboxes....


----------



## edman2

Eric,
A different perspective... not on the quality of the photography but on the idea of "marketing".  I voted for the amboyna photo rather than the nice blue and white pen (beautiful by the way) because I thought the wood block would be useful in explaning to a customer..."the block is how the pen started, then I cut, drilled, etc....  Gives opportunity to explain the creative process to those that want to know and helps establish "yes, I really made this."


----------



## mmayo

Eris,

I liked the photos and I liked the workmanship displayed so well.  It may come as no surprise to some that I like reflections like the glass display photo #2.  Yes, the reflections on the barrel should me minimized, but I liked much of the rest.  The first photo seemed grainy or somehow in focus, but diffused.  I am not sure why or how this happened.  The inclusion of the wood blank or slab is important in any setting other than a photo contest where less might be better.  People appreciate it when I produce a blank to show where their pen got started.  If the photo is to be used to sell, the blank might help some people understand how much work it takes to produce such beautiful pens.

Try shooting higher and looking down on an opaque surface like textured writing paper, light it well controlling shadows and reflections and just photograph the pen alone to see what others have been suggesting.  PS I will take their advice too!


----------



## Ted iin Michigan

Hmmmm. I thought I posted a comment here but evidently I didn't. No matter. Only had one real thought: I am of the "wood porn" klan and I like the amboyna pic. The other suggestions on that pic are excellent and valid but I'm thinking the composition could be improved by showing one pen cap on and one pen cap off. And I'm saying this from a marketing perspective.


----------



## Haynie

Double post


----------



## Haynie

Sylvanite said:


> edstreet said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> picture is rotated counter clockwise some and skewed
> 
> 
> 
> The photo isn't rotated nor skewed - the block is simply thicker on one end than on the other.  I'm not sure if a square block would be more or less interesting.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Perception is a funny thing.  Without a defined horizon line our eyes look for a line as reference.  In this case the dominant line of the block is angled.  The right side is angled and leaves the image.  This gives the viewer the perception that the image is tilted whether or not it really is.
> 
> This is one of those areas where still life photography and landscape photography share "rules."  A viewer will want the horizon to be flat, unless there is a clear reason for it not to be.  Of course rules in any artistic endeavor can be broken, but there needs to be a clear reason for it.  If that reason is not readily identifiable by the viewer then the breaking of the rule fails.  Kind of like a joke.  If you have to explain the punch line it was not a well done joke.
Click to expand...


----------



## OLDMAN5050

Too BIG.........


----------



## Sylvanite

Haynie said:


> Perception is a funny thing.  Without a defined horizon line our eyes look for a line as reference.  In this case the dominant line of the block is angled.  The right side is angled and leaves the image.  This gives the viewer the perception that the image is tilted whether or not it really is.


Which line do you consider to be the "dominant line"?  I chose the reflection to be that reference.  The base of the block _is_ horizontal (although none of the other lines in the block are square to it).  The lines of the reflection (of course) mirror  the angles of the block.  The caps of the pens _are_ square (one horizontal, one vertical).  So, my intended "horizon" is level.  It just isn't in the center of the image.  Rather it is approximately 2/5 from the bottom.

I did not want perfect symmetry in the image, as I felt that would be boring.  Unless symmetry is part of the photo theme, asymmetry is more interesting (or so I was taught).  In general, horizons at the mid-line, perfectly centered subjects, and even-numbered groups of objects are less captivating to the eye.  Of course, there are exceptions to that rule, but I didn't feel this was one of them.

If I had used a square block of wood, I probably would have angled it in the photo anyway - just to avoid all horizontal lines.

On the other hand, if you view the front/top edge of the block to be the dominant line, then the photo does indeed look angled.  Given that the photo is rather top-heavy, the eye looks up for reference rather than down.  Perhaps it would have been better to turn the wood to suggest perspective.

Thanks for the comments,
Eric


----------



## PenMan1

I agree with many of the posts here..... That less is more.

The Amboyna IS sexy, but it distracts from the subject and makes the photo look too busy for my liking.

The shot of the swirl resin draws me into the photo and makes it easy for me to see the beautiful artistry of the piece.

I am GUILTY, guilty, guilty of using props. But I have found over the years that pen buyers want to see the pen.

The black glass phot is excellent because it gives the pen a "3D" effect.
Addition by using an "off axis" angle, it keeps the shot from looking flat or "static". This photo SHOULD sell pens.

Respectfully submitted.


----------



## Hendu3270

I vote the second one all the way. Personally I do not like props. I feel they take away from the item actually being photographed. I think it especially true in this case where the prop is the same wood the pens were made from. I'm also partial to the reflection in your second pic, because that's the method I use.


----------



## Sylvanite

Andy,

Thanks for the kind words.  In the "Reflection in Blue" photo, I intentionally arranged the pen to form an acute right triangle.  That is, the pen is at a shallow angle and the reflection is nearly level.  That gives the photo both a horizontal component, and one that bisects two "rule-of-thirds" intersections, with the swirled blank falling on the upper left intersection.

My usual inclination is to pose the pen for a right-handed user (with the nib pointing left), but I decided to do the opposite this time - just to be different (and hopefully a bit more interesting).

I would have preferred to crop the image shorter, but the contest rules required the image to be 600 pixels high.

Regards,
Eric


----------



## Sylvanite

mmayo said:


> The first photo seemed grainy or somehow in focus, but diffused.  I am not sure why or how this happened.


I've been fiddling with my display settings lately, and noticed that the Amboyna Statesmen pic is particularly sensitive to the gamma level.  At higher levels, it becomes washed-out and pixelated.  I don't know why that happens, but this photo degrades before others do.  Your display might be set to a higher gamma than mine.

Does anybody know what causes such sensitivity, and how it might be controlled?

Thanks,
Eric


----------



## Quality Pen

Sylvanite said:


> mmayo said:
> 
> 
> 
> The first photo seemed grainy or somehow in focus, but diffused.  I am not sure why or how this happened.
> 
> 
> 
> I've been fiddling with my display settings lately, and noticed that the Amboyna Statesmen pic is particularly sensitive to the gamma level.  At higher levels, it becomes washed-out and pixelated.  I don't know why that happens, but this photo degrades before others do.  Your display might be set to a higher gamma than mine.
> 
> Does anybody know what causes such sensitivity, and how it might be controlled?
> 
> Thanks,
> Eric
Click to expand...


Low hanging fruit here, but drop the ISO to minimum. 200 max really as a starting point IMO.


----------



## Sylvanite

Quality Pen said:


> Low hanging fruit here, but drop the ISO to minimum. 200 max really as a starting point IMO.


Both images were shot at ISO 100, so I don't think that's it.  The image quality of one (and only one) suffers when viewed at high gamma.  At moderate gamma, it looks fine.


----------



## MikeinSC

Sylvanite said:


> ...
> 
> I'm thinking about getting a softbox for the shine-light, on the theory that a large square light source would yield a wider, less glaring shine on the pen.  Would that work?
> 
> Thanks in advance for any help you can give.
> 
> Regards,
> Eric


 
A bigger light source will give you a softer light. A smaller light source will give you a harsher light. 

If your umbrella has a removeable cover, such as a shoot through umbrella, you can close it down and have a quasi-soft box for free.


----------



## ladycop322

Can you please tell me what blank you used in the second photo?  I'm in love 

Michelle


----------



## Sylvanite

ladycop322 said:


> Can you please tell me what blank you used in the second photo?



It's a home-cast blank made from thickened PR with white, keel blue, and phthalo blue pigments.

Thanks for the compliment,
Eric


----------

