Critiche

joseelias (0) 2007-08-16 5:54

This is an interesting graphical image. The matching neutral tones drawing the lines and the textured white wall work great. The question is, you could turn this interesting image into a “very interesting” image. Increasing the brightness and contrast would boost the white of the wall and create a more appealing image. Even if some detail in the wall could be lost, you would greatly gain in impact (which this image is all about). If you don’t mind about these issues you could even clone out the tablet to get a cleaner image. The way it is, the image is nice but a bit dull and somewhat a missed chance. The good news is that you can improve it A LOT, with minimal effort.

joseelias (0) 2007-08-07 5:48

Dolmens, or Antas as we call them in Portugal, are something that really fascinates me. There’s a real elegance and harmony in their shape that heavily contrast with the roughness and primitiveness of the structure. And, of course there’s always the mystic around them. Not to mention they are beautiful photographic motifs… I just found out that one of the Portuguese dolmens I have in my personal site is among the oldest of the world, which surprised me as I found out that the megalithic culture may have started in south Portugal and Spain, and later on spread to the rest of Europe. I always thought it had started in Ireland, UK or France as the most known examples of this culture are from there. Regarding the image I really enjoy the framing, and the light and colors are beautiful. Zooming out to show more of the landscape keeping the dolmen ion the bottom right would also work great as it would give a feeling of the place it is located.

joseelias (0) 2007-08-07 5:33

Personally I find the play between light and shadow a very positive element in this image, because the darker part in the left side forces us to look into the background of the image, thus creating a “reading” of the picture and bringing depth to it, which is a good thing. In fact the dark part could even be a little bit darker, but this may be from the monitor I’m using at the moment that may not be calibrated correctly. On the improvement side I think that the image could benefit from a correction of some geometric distortion seen in the right part. There also seems to be some lack of sharpness which blur the details. Personally I would prefer a colored version, or a brownish (warmer) duotone instead of this cold blue/grey.

joseelias (0) 2007-08-07 5:19

Comparing both photos I must say that I prefer this one, not only because I really enjoy vertical framings of landscapes (big sense of depth), but because the composition is better handled. There are several elements that help out eyes focusing in the house which “grabbing” our attention, and let us discover the rest of the picture in a second moment. Not only the orange roof calls the attention to it in the middle of so many cold tones, but there’s a subtle guideline in the rocks in the foreground “pointing” to it and giving dynamic to the composition. Excellent colors and clarity. On a personal note I also enjoy a lot looking at good European landscapes because they are so rare compared to other continents. We are “bombarded” daily with (beautiful) images from other continents and seem to forget the we also have marvelous places. These places are in fact becoming the exotic ones, and make me dream on how I would love to ride my MTB on them.

joseelias (0) 2007-08-07 4:56

On a first note I must say that this is not the Bom Jesus Sanctuary, but the Sameiro Sanctuary. The POV works well to show the place and the placement of the church between the two statues was a nice option. Personally, I would have preferred the colored version because the white of the church against the blue sky would have made a good image. But I understand that these conversions are a personal option, just I also make sometimes. A note is always welcome.

  joseelias (0) 2007-04-17 7:57

Well, I don’t want to enter into an ideological/religious debate but you’re mixing several concepts, and misinterpreting others, being the most notorious one the concept of democracy. Yes, in fact the Portuguese Communist Party has been elected by the population for the governance of the municipality since the democratic revolution, BUT, that does no mean that Seixal is a communist state. So, when in a democracy a party is elected it must follow its own principles and electoral program, but also govern for ALL people. It is in this sense that the so called “contradiction” may occur. The communist movements don’t have an easy relationship with the Catholic church and religious movement in general, but when someone is democratic he respects others beliefs and convictions. Besides the values of Christianity are not far from many values of communism, and many communists are also devoted Catholics, so I don’t see much of a contradiction or a non-sense in this decision. I agree that the church and state are separated in the constitution, but it is also said that people beliefs must be respected, and as the vast majority of the population is catholic, even if not practicing I don’t see it as completely wrong for the state to support these works as they function as service to the population. I would see it wrong if support for other religions would be denied, though. Regarding, the architecture of the church I think you should know that the original project was probably the most beautiful modern church I’ve seen (I know it closely), but it seems that due to financial problems, the church could not build it, and came up with this one. In fact, this church was to be built in another space and already several years ago. I know there is a lack of leisure places, but a building cannot be built in the air… So it must be put somewhere, near the population preferably…

joseelias (0) 2007-02-27 9:22

The following critique was written when originally the photo was posted without any note. Just an image of a dead rabbit. I think death should be treated with respect, no matter being of a human or animal, so when someone presents an image of it, it should be respectfull and at least write some words about it, not making the death of a living being into a freak exhibitionist fair. Original critique (I think it says all): "This is the first time I use this smiley in over a year participating. The reason? I find this photo of very bad taste and offensive. The objective of this site is learn something of the world through photography and this does not teach me anything. I know rabbits die and bleed. Everybody knows that so this photo add no value. I would accept if in the note this there was a vegetarian manifest, ideas defending the hunt, or even a proposal on how to cook rabbits, but not this way. This is a disgusting and offensive image. But you know what? Not offensive to us! Offensive to the rabbit which is a living creature and thus deserve respect. Would you like to see a pet you love exposed this way? Or someone you love? Yes, because in the end we are all the same. Simple living creatures. No more no less. More, even as a photo it's very bad! One of the worst in the whole site!"

joseelias (0) 2007-02-09 12:14

Bem, esta "cena" do futebol persegue-nos por todo o lado... ;-) E estou a ver que as ofertas de camisolas do C. Ronaldo pelo Sócrates na viagem à China não foi de todo disparatada... Apesar de achar que Portugal deveria de ter mais do que apenas jogadores da bola para promover o nosso país... Mas isso é outra conversa. Quanto à foto tenho pena que o vendedor não esteja a olhar para nós, e concordo com as observações feitas relativamente à cores já que embora goste das cores fortes acho o vermelho um pouco forte demais. Com um tempo de exposição tão lento tiveste que te apoiar em algo não?

joseelias (0) 2007-02-06 7:22

This is without any doubt one of the most creative framings of churches I’ve seen! The idea is spectacular and I like the way the structure of the church almost look a whale skeleton, because of the organic feeling the distortion created with all those curved lines. Very good exposure too. Still, in terms of image definition there are some problems here, as the sharpness and clarity of the details could be better. The lines “drawing” the details seem to be blurred and suffering from artefacts. Maybe this could be from the photo stitching. I don’t know which program you used to stitch the photos, but you could try “Autopano Pro” which generally presents excellent results.

joseelias (0) 2007-02-02 8:24

Yes, there are a lot of photos of this place, but to your benefit there are a couple of things: 1- It’s always a magnificent view, no matter how many times we see it 2- You’ve got a very nice image of it To tell the truth I think this is a slightly better perspective than most of the photos I’ve seen because you are closer to the ruins allowing us to have a great view on them and all the details of the stone work. I particularly like the wall starting from the bottom left which creates a discrete guideline and also fills that area with a “minimalist” detail, forcing us to look into the main area of the photo. Except for the need of a little bit more contrast, the clarity of the image is superb as well the colours. But the most interesting effect is the 3D feeling we get when we look at the nearby hills in relation with the background ones. It’s an amazing effect, especially in the one at the left.