WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner

Rate my/your watch pictures!

12K views 197 replies 62 participants last post by  spencer17 
#1 ·
So I was just reading a thread about people complaining about their pet peeves about others watch pictures on this forum and I thought I might have posted those pics. With that said , I would like to start this thread with the goal of improving the quality of my pictures, providing feedback on others pictures, offering and receiving feedback on the quality of pictures. So here are my suggested rules:

1st rate your own picture on a scale of 1 to 10.
2nd include the specs of your picture and or the camera you took the picture on. Please include settings and lense type.
3rd include the conditions of the pic so other can understand how lighting effects the pic.

I'll start this off:

Glycine Combat 6
Rating - 6
Olympus OMD EM-5, Olympus M40 mm Lense - ISO 600, F4.0, SS 15, handheld indoor in door lighting conditions with fluorescent lighting.
After processing the image I dropped the size down to 25% so it was not huge in a posting.
Post rpcessing time 15 mins

Watch Analog watch Watch accessory Fashion accessory Brown


First i I took the shot directly out the camera without introducing the pen or the globe in the background. However, my camera had an issue focusing on the watch. Additionally the bezel came out dull and applying additional saturation didn't bring of the bezel as much as it brought out the would grain in the desk.

I then introduced the pen and the pen really gave the watch perspective and introduced the orange into the bezel. However, the pens didn't help the dial and fuzzed out the numbers on the dial. Additionally the pen introduced significantly more glair into the crystal. In an effort to correct these issues I introduced the globe behind the watch at a significant distantance. Bumped up the Apertiure a little higher and put a t-shirt over the fluorescent light.

Overall I rate the picture a 6 for the following reasons overall this one picture took me about 30 minutes which is way to much time. Additionally there is still significant glare in the picture. Although the placement of the glare is relatively appealing. I think that once I chose to introduce the pen I should have the whole pen in frame and loosing the back tip of the pen is poor framing. The shadowing of the picture is relatively poor and I found it difficult to remedy in post production. The blemish on the face between 8 & 9 is distracting and should have been remedied by cleaning the face or correcting in post production. I see the picture and I say not bad but definitely aperture.

Help me take better pictures and show me your prized possessions.

I hope you find this thread entertaining and educational.
 
See less See more
1
#58 · (Edited)
What will I will now term as the O2AFAC67 Method Take 1. Results failure.

So I figured I would try out the O2AFAC67 Method to see if my pics come out nearly as good as Ron's. The results prove that its not the method or the camera. For all those that can't take a good click, let me help you feel better about yourself. So I got my set ready took 10 clicks. Determined 5 were import worthy. Upon import determined that 1 was worth at least posting to disclose my lack of skill.

I rate this on a 2. Oh ya and I spent 1.25 hours on this but feel free to mock me as I am already mocking myself.

Watch Analog watch Watch accessory Black Fashion accessory


Only thing I did differently is use light room instead of Ron's programs.
 
#60 · (Edited)
Hi, CT. Begging your indulgence, I spent a minute on your shot for comparison sake...



And BTW, I often shoot as many as fifty or more pics trying to get just the "right" one to work on with the editing software Picasa. All I did to your pic was click "I'm feeling lucky" (first tab), increase "Fill Light" to about halfway (second tab), "shadows" to about halfway (second tab), decrease "color temperature" just a skosh (second tab) and decrease "saturation" (third tab) to a pleasing level. Give it a try and tell me what you think... :)
Best,
Ron

PS. Heck of a lot better than a "2" doncha' tink?...
 
#61 · (Edited)
Looks so much better. That fill the light trick is really cool. I had to google how to do it in Lightroom. It's called tone curves in Lightroom for jokers like me who might care.

i was having a problem getting the black background dark enough while maintaining the light on the bezel. Solution...tonal curve. Thanks for the schooling.
 
#69 ·
Thanks. I used a macro lens for that Rolex shot. The camera I used was a micro four thirds camera (m4/3) which has a smaller sensor than a DSLR's. The m4/3 will produce a more close up photo due to the crop factor (of the sensor) when compared to a bigger size sensor camera (eg. Nikon D800).
 
#75 · (Edited)
I gotta say, one of my pet peeves about watch photography is use of depth of field.
In portrait photography, you almost never see just the tip of the nose in focus with the rest of the face blurred. Seriously, why would you want to place your subject out of focus?
Depth of field, or bokeh if you will can be a beautiful tool if used correctly (with the right lens), blurring a distracting background to focus on the subject. Irritating if used incorrectly.
My opinion only.
By the way, I'm not talking about any particular image in this thread, just about watch pictures in general.
 
#77 ·
Sometimes the intent is to highlight a certain aspect of the watch. For instance, if you wanted people to focus on the Bezel or Indices or even a reflection in the watch crystal.

That being said, Usually in portraits you're dealing with a larger depth of focus specifically because you're dealing with subjects further away than 0-2ft.
 
#81 · (Edited)
Hi jideta

Not bad "clicks" at all. My (not professional) opinions are:

First one is lacking dof, I like if all of bezel is sharp. 6/10

Second is better, but centered composition is not good. And reflection on crystal... 7/10

Third is the best. Maybe some tweeking for wb. And maybe watch on left side and not so near border... 8+/10

Legu

Lähetetty minun SM-G800F laitteesta Tapatalkilla
 
#82 · (Edited)
you sir are too kind!

I wouldn't rate any of them above 3 or 4 seeing as they are at the very least 'pictures.'
I kinda liked the last one but that was yesterday and today I'm embarrassed to claim ownership.

I think part of getting better is not just seeing the good, but also determining why an image is 'bad.'
There's a lot of bad going on in them pictures!
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top