Thanks very much for this guys! I got a lot of very valuable takeaways, which I'll share here! - Eliminate empty spaces: fill them or compose/crop them out of the frame. - If you’re going to have cars in the frame, go all the way and add light trails, people, bicycles, etc. Don’t be in the middle. All out, or all in. - Make it very clear what the subject of the photos is. The viewer shouldn’t wonder “what is this? what am I looking at?” - Show floor and ceiling of an interior so you can understand the space. If there are chairs & cushions, pose them similarly. - Make sure exposure is balanced. Don’t have blown out lights and a very dark night sky. Avoid big ‘aircraft carriers’ in the foreground. - Tricks in post won’t help if your composition isn’t good. Focus on a great composition. - Don’t cut off important elements. Don’t draw interest to parts of the image that aren’t the focus or that could distract the viewer. Be careful not to over-light. - Keep saturation in check. - Match your exposure: sky, interior, grass / foreground. Show restraint. - Verticals must be vertical. No exceptions. - Don’t look directly at chair fronts / back. Turn them at an angle. - Keep foreground elements minimal. The viewer should be able to travel through the frame, not get stuck on what’s on the foreground. - If you’re going to have people, make sure it’s intentional and a feature of the image. - Don’t light from the direction of the camera. - Don’t block an amazing view. - Crop out excessive floors / ceilings - Understand the subject and play to its strengths. - Give the subject depth, which may involve moving closer and cutting off or removing some elements. - Restrain lighting so preserve the feeling that best accentuates the subject. - Safe compositions can be boring. Don’t afraid to be bold and creative. - Great lighting does not compensate for poor composition. Composition is by far the most important thing to improve.
This series is just great! I never learned so much from just two guys sitting there and talking. It seems really natural, like your just two friends hangig out, yet there is so much information in it.
Thanks again Lee & Mike. I really appreciate these video critiques you do, they definitely help. Its nice to get the perspective from others of what they like or don't like. Also thank you for reviewing 3 of my images @25:04 , @33:59 & @41:51, that was great to get the critiques on each of them. I always say you never stop learning or growing and having these videos you make help me and i'm sure others become better at their craft. Thank again!!! Looking forward to Mikes next tutorial.
47:09 probably the photo is not bw. Notice the glass has that greenish look and there's also chromatic aberration next to the top left cabinet. Best photo of the episode though!
This is awesome! Thank you so much for sharing your knowledge and perspectives with us. It is so helpful to hear the thought processes that go on as you both consider each photo's strengths and weaknesses. I will definitely be purchasing all Mike Kelley tutorials!
Thanks guys for critique - mine was the 3rd one. This was shot exactly one year ago - and yes, now that I look at it again & hear your opinion, I should've got closer and higher on the shot & maybe more detail shots, but the client desire was to see all the place in one shot - so I worked around that. Anyway - now I know where to improve & big thanks for that!
I love these critique-videos! You can learn so much, especially with such a competent co-host like Mike Kelley. He really knows his stuff and can explain everything he talks about in a great way. I'm really excited to see the full tutorial (or the BTS of it, since I can't afford one of your serieses atm as as student :/ )
Great video guys, really interesting. I think this is a form of photography that is underrated, maybe it's because I don't know much about it but it intrigues and fascinates me. Ebjoyed hearing your opinions and views, cheers.
Hey, Great content as always. I was just wondering when you will be releasing the new Mike Kelley's course, so I can keep up with it on time. Thanks. +Fstoppers
I was thinking the same thing at first. But the image worked far better after the crop. There was just too much negative space that added nothing to the shot...
The one with the skylight is the Smith College Campus Center in Northampton Mass. It's not my photo, but I do live in Northampton, so I know the building.
@45:23 I am guessing that is some city in India. Unfortunately a lot of mid to high rise architecture in India is rather boring. The building on the bottom left is most likely meant for changing rooms, toilets and maybe a ping pong or snooker room. I have seen thousands of such buildings to guess what might be in that building.
I also really , like REAALLY, liked the photographer critique, he was AMASING and right on point. I just want to go check his portfolio like NOW. Amasing job with this episode. Too bad i'm from portugal, i would totally go to one of your workshops. Even if i was pro, which i still ain't ^.^
Great episode with good constructive comments. So I'll give one constructive comment to Lee: Before revealing your rating, you very often say "Ok, I'm going to be nice" or "Ok, I'm going to be a bit rough". That pretty much reveals what your rating is going to be. And isn't the whole point of the "3-2-1"-rating system to avoid revealing your rating in advance? But other than that I love these "Critique the Community". Honest and very entertaining... :-)
FWIW (and 2 years late), those sweet reflections on the floor in the foreground, of the ceiling drape/swag thingos, are my favorite part of that photo (and what would make me what to book that venue).
You guys got trolled at 20:38 That is definitely, 100%, a 3d render. I made a couple of similar ones, can spot the difference in a microsecond ^^ Otherwise, I work as a photographer/post process, so..
What makes you think it's rendered? The EXIF says D810 with a 16mm lens at 2.5 seconds. If you look at the top left roof line you can see where the masking of the sky wasn't done well. What makes it 100% fake?
Exif can easily be altered. Also, in rendering software, you usually handle the same settings as in camera (focal length, iso, Fstop, exp time...). It's like virtual photography. Sky: it's possible to render it, sure, but I would definitely replace it in post. Less work while rendering and better control over contents (positioning of the clouds, etc.) What makes it seem like a render to me, are flat textures (on the white walls, and even more so on the gray fence.. I know, it's cloudy, but still, too flat...while gutter is shining shamelessly..), color tone of foliage (different green everywhere, seems like separate blocks. most apparent on the palm trees by the pool). Softness of artificial exterior lightning (those palms on the right side of the frame.. really, no contrast, no shadows cast by the light?). And lightning dynamics.. it should be shadow under the trees (left side), those leaves are toobright. Again, no »blacks« (at all!) in the foliage of those palms by the pool (where there are leaves, there is contrast). Also, wind effect is kinda weird, inconsistent. And grass looks like typical rendered grass (that argument is kinda invalid). .... While writing this, I also noticed some stuff, that wouldn't happen while rendering. Like burnt out highlights on the right side (could be part of orig. sky photo). And CA on the left column. So I might be wrong, not 100% anymore. Should have seen 100% crop at proper resolution.. could as well be some form of tasteless one shot hdr...
Wow I don't know why I even watch these anymore, the ratings are so off and waver so much even from photo to photo. 0% chance that the photo at 15:45 is losing work because of it. That photo is at minimum a solid 3 if not a mid to high 4. That is about 60% quality of Mike's photos (which are like a 6 of 5) so this should be a 3+.
Thanks very much for this guys! I got a lot of very valuable takeaways, which I'll share here!
- Eliminate empty spaces: fill them or compose/crop them out of the frame.
- If you’re going to have cars in the frame, go all the way and add light trails, people, bicycles, etc. Don’t be in the middle. All out, or all in.
- Make it very clear what the subject of the photos is. The viewer shouldn’t wonder “what is this? what am I looking at?”
- Show floor and ceiling of an interior so you can understand the space. If there are chairs & cushions, pose them similarly.
- Make sure exposure is balanced. Don’t have blown out lights and a very dark night sky. Avoid big ‘aircraft carriers’ in the foreground.
- Tricks in post won’t help if your composition isn’t good. Focus on a great composition.
- Don’t cut off important elements. Don’t draw interest to parts of the image that aren’t the focus or that could distract the viewer. Be careful not to over-light.
- Keep saturation in check.
- Match your exposure: sky, interior, grass / foreground. Show restraint.
- Verticals must be vertical. No exceptions.
- Don’t look directly at chair fronts / back. Turn them at an angle.
- Keep foreground elements minimal. The viewer should be able to travel through the frame, not get stuck on what’s on the foreground.
- If you’re going to have people, make sure it’s intentional and a feature of the image.
- Don’t light from the direction of the camera.
- Don’t block an amazing view.
- Crop out excessive floors / ceilings
- Understand the subject and play to its strengths.
- Give the subject depth, which may involve moving closer and cutting off or removing some elements.
- Restrain lighting so preserve the feeling that best accentuates the subject.
- Safe compositions can be boring. Don’t afraid to be bold and creative.
- Great lighting does not compensate for poor composition. Composition is by far the most important thing to improve.
Yo man! thanks a ton...this is like Scott Kelby's checklist.
This series is just great! I never learned so much from just two guys sitting there and talking.
It seems really natural, like your just two friends hangig out, yet there is so much information in it.
Thanks again Lee & Mike. I really appreciate these video critiques you do, they definitely help. Its nice to get the perspective from others of what they like or don't like. Also thank you for reviewing 3 of my images @25:04 , @33:59 & @41:51, that was great to get the critiques on each of them. I always say you never stop learning or growing and having these videos you make help me and i'm sure others become better at their craft. Thank again!!! Looking forward to Mikes next tutorial.
47:09 probably the photo is not bw. Notice the glass has that greenish look and there's also chromatic aberration next to the top left cabinet. Best photo of the episode though!
This is awesome! Thank you so much for sharing your knowledge and perspectives with us. It is so helpful to hear the thought processes that go on as you both consider each photo's strengths and weaknesses. I will definitely be purchasing all Mike Kelley tutorials!
Thanks for the critique guys (at 45:00) Really helpful and I'm glad I submitted my work!
Thanks guys for critique - mine was the 3rd one. This was shot exactly one year ago - and yes, now that I look at it again & hear your opinion, I should've got closer and higher on the shot & maybe more detail shots, but the client desire was to see all the place in one shot - so I worked around that.
Anyway - now I know where to improve & big thanks for that!
I love these critique-videos! You can learn so much, especially with such a competent co-host like Mike Kelley. He really knows his stuff and can explain everything he talks about in a great way.
I'm really excited to see the full tutorial (or the BTS of it, since I can't afford one of your serieses atm as as student :/ )
excited for the new tutorial by Mike Kelly! bought the old one a few months ago.
@ 21:03 it looks like you guys are sitting in the front yard... pretty funny.
Somewhat unrelated but this is getting me excited for Mike's next F-Stoppers video!
the last one was amasing. Also liked the famous building one.
Haha, was just waiting for Turning Torso. Such a cool building!
Great video guys, really interesting. I think this is a form of photography that is underrated, maybe it's because I don't know much about it but it intrigues and fascinates me. Ebjoyed hearing your opinions and views, cheers.
Hey, Great content as always. I was just wondering when you will be releasing the new Mike Kelley's course, so I can keep up with it on time. Thanks. +Fstoppers
Great video! Where do I go to check out the the early access/discount for the next tutorial?
+Rob Crawshaw if you have bought any previous tutorials then I think they give you a discount anyway.
The post is now live on Fstoppers.
Awesome, thanks 😊
Cant wait for this tutorial!
Was the final shot actually black and white? I think I see a bit of green safety film tinting the glass.
no it wasn't, they got tricked
Did you guys not see the reflection in the first image?
I was thinking the same thing at first. But the image worked far better after the crop. There was just too much negative space that added nothing to the shot...
I agree but I can see what the photographer was going for and they didn't mention it.
True..
The one with the skylight is the Smith College Campus Center in Northampton Mass. It's not my photo, but I do live in Northampton, so I know the building.
@45:23 I am guessing that is some city in India. Unfortunately a lot of mid to high rise architecture in India is rather boring. The building on the bottom left is most likely meant for changing rooms, toilets and maybe a ping pong or snooker room. I have seen thousands of such buildings to guess what might be in that building.
I also really , like REAALLY, liked the photographer critique, he was AMASING and right on point. I just want to go check his portfolio like NOW. Amasing job with this episode. Too bad i'm from portugal, i would totally go to one of your workshops. Even if i was pro, which i still ain't ^.^
When are you releasing the tutorial?
Studio portrait?
What's the building at 42 mins called the super weird one
+Tyler Barney It is the University of California San Diego Library
was that pic that they did at around 19 mins even real?
Great episode with good constructive comments. So I'll give one constructive comment to Lee: Before revealing your rating, you very often say "Ok, I'm going to be nice" or "Ok, I'm going to be a bit rough". That pretty much reveals what your rating is going to be. And isn't the whole point of the "3-2-1"-rating system to avoid revealing your rating in advance? But other than that I love these "Critique the Community". Honest and very entertaining... :-)
My photo was first! Check out my Instagram. instagram.com/jeffmccolloughphotography
FWIW (and 2 years late), those sweet reflections on the floor in the foreground, of the ceiling drape/swag thingos, are my favorite part of that photo (and what would make me what to book that venue).
A “nice” critique is never good for anyone. My instructors used to rip my images apart but it only made me better.
The Final shot is not black and white. I see a lot of colour fringing that distracts me..
First photo looks looks like a ghostly 1800s photo when the film ASA was like 0.5
You guys got trolled at 20:38
That is definitely, 100%, a 3d render. I made a couple of similar ones, can spot the difference in a microsecond ^^
Otherwise, I work as a photographer/post process, so..
What makes you think it's rendered? The EXIF says D810 with a 16mm lens at 2.5 seconds. If you look at the top left roof line you can see where the masking of the sky wasn't done well. What makes it 100% fake?
Exif can easily be altered. Also, in rendering software, you usually handle the same settings as in camera (focal length, iso, Fstop, exp time...). It's like virtual photography.
Sky: it's possible to render it, sure, but I would definitely replace it in post. Less work while rendering and better control over contents (positioning of the clouds, etc.)
What makes it seem like a render to me, are flat textures (on the white walls, and even more so on the gray fence.. I know, it's cloudy, but still, too flat...while gutter is shining shamelessly..), color tone of foliage (different green everywhere, seems like separate blocks. most apparent on the palm trees by the pool). Softness of artificial exterior lightning (those palms on the right side of the frame.. really, no contrast, no shadows cast by the light?). And lightning dynamics.. it should be shadow under the trees (left side), those leaves are toobright. Again, no »blacks« (at all!) in the foliage of those palms by the pool (where there are leaves, there is contrast).
Also, wind effect is kinda weird, inconsistent. And grass looks like typical rendered grass (that argument is kinda invalid).
....
While writing this, I also noticed some stuff, that wouldn't happen while rendering.
Like burnt out highlights on the right side (could be part of orig. sky photo). And CA on the left column. So I might be wrong, not 100% anymore. Should have seen 100% crop at proper resolution.. could as well be some form of tasteless one shot hdr...
Boardgame table was a 1 imo
Great
Kylo Ren critiques photos
nice
The shot at 24:00 would be so much better if you removed the stuff from the table. The board games and vase are so out of place.
First. Just kidding I hate those comments. But first.
these images look fake, like they were made in AutoCAD and rendered
From what I've seen around me, architectural photography is like that. It always makes you wonder if it's a photograph or a computer generated image.
+Steven Nagy, I'm agree with you some of the images looks CGI with a lot of photoshop work.
the last shot looks like anyone could have done it with an IPhone
boring, either you Guys are inconsistent, or I'm missing something.
Wow I don't know why I even watch these anymore, the ratings are so off and waver so much even from photo to photo. 0% chance that the photo at 15:45 is losing work because of it. That photo is at minimum a solid 3 if not a mid to high 4. That is about 60% quality of Mike's photos (which are like a 6 of 5) so this should be a 3+.