52-week photoproject – Week 5


Canon EOS 500D, 28-105 mm, 1/125 at f/7,1, 0 EV, 105 mm, ISO 200


  1. Hi Petra, I think that as it was the statue that you were concentrating on I would have opened up the aperture to the widest your lens would go (f4.5 at105mm) and you could have cropped the image so that there is less background above the statue. (I am being hypercritical here though) {:))

    1. Roy, thanks for sharing your point of view. You’re right, that was the statue I was focusing on and your remarks are absolutely relevant, I understand them. The funny thing is that I have the photo you speak about, taken with the other lens, where the background is more blurred and the image is cropped more so the statue looks more prominent there. I even had it prepared for the post but eventually went back and used this photo which includes more of the background. I like it more but as I can see, it might have been a wrong choice… Good to know what others can or can’t see in the photo.

  2. I tend do agree with the above comment. If it is the statue you want to focus on, I would also have used a bit more contrast (or clarity if you use Lightroom) and a slight, dark vignette.

    1. Rune, thanks for your feedback. As you agree with the above comment, please read my answer there. As for the contrast, I added both contrast and light to the original photo and the result looks much better than the original but as there isn’t the original here to be compared with and thus see the change, it’s suddenly a bit different. You’re right, the photo may look a bit dull. It surely is important to realise that the end result of an image must be judged not only in comparison with the original but as it is.

    1. Linda, thank you. I came across this statue in a cemetery where it decorated a headstone. The title is mine and it suited the place but when you can’t see the surroundings, I realise that another one might have been more apt, such as sadness for example.

  3. My thoughts before I read the comments were that you lined the subject up well and even though it's focused on the figure, the solo colour needs an extra lift. Not sure how far your aperture settings allow you to go with that lens but my first priority would be to push the aperture to it's widest to reduce the depth of field. The second thing I would be doing to lift it would be a hint of saturation afterwards in processing. Having said that, the contrast of colours between the subject and the background work well.
    After reading the comments, I suppose the distant trees in the background give the image more depth which is probably not what you want here … but I regularly miss points like that too. It would be difficult to know how much to crop & keeping it in the same format, as the bush to the right enhances the picture & is in itself a very important feature in my opinion. I don't think there is much leeway in cropping the picture to the left of the plinth either.

    1. J, thank you for sharing your perspective, it’s interesting to compare and total the before and after impression. After reading all the comments, including yours, I’ve come to the conclusion that I should have used the other (70-300 mm) lens, step a few metres back and set the widest aperture. That would enable me to have a crop like this with significantly more blurred background. Than in the processing I should have added more light and colour to the statue. The result could have been much more impressive, I guess.

      As for the format, I like to keep my photos in the format which is taken by my camera, which is 2:3. I don’t feel comfortable when cutting it unproportionally so I avoid that kind of cutting. That might be a mistake and I’m not sure about that, sometimes it really is difficult to stick to the format and have the best composition…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *