Posted Wed Jan 23, 2013 1:27PM
This was the second time when these three images have been rejeced for thesame reason:
We found the overall composition of this file's lighting could be improved. Some of the technical aspects that can all limit the usefulness of a file are:
-Direct on-camera flash and/or flash fall-off (bright subject, dark background)
-Harsh lighting with blown-out highlights that lack details and/or distracting shadows
- Distracting lens flares
-Incorrect white balance
Please anyone who can help me improving my images quality just answer!
The images are the following:
(Edited on 2013-01-23 13:40:11 by kelvinjay)
Posted Wed Jan 23, 2013 1:37PM
They look pretty flat and dull / underexposed, but it's hard to tell from thumbnails. That's why the sticky thread at the top of the forum states that we need to see the full size files, if you want a meaningful critique and not just a guess based on a tiny image.
| > PLEASE take 5 minutes to READ THIS FIRST before starting your first Critique thread < |
Read that thread, then come back with some larger images for us to look at if you'd like a proper critique.
ETA: The histogram is not a completely reliable way to assess exposure, but in this case it does show a big gap on the right, which is the brighter end of the scale.
I think you need to aim for something a little closer to the side I've edited here:
(Edited on 2013-01-23 14:06:16 by kelvinjay)
Posted Wed Jan 23, 2013 1:43PM
(From the thumbnails)... Those are way dark, and there is no lighting providing highlights. The kind of thing that makes food look appetizing, and not like a sculpture.