Kevin-P5

Ambiguous Space

Kevin Mobbs The Snapshots Back to list Self Evaluation

For the ambiguous space assignment, I wanted to experiment with reflection and light. To do this, I started looking for areas around the place that were reflective. The pool and a small pond were obvious. Picture 1 below is in full daylight and the reflection off the pool water. Still, I wanted to have something more interesting.

Of all the unlikely places, I found an oil can which had remaining oil on top. After the recent rain, this oil mixed with the water. There were many perspectives with which I experimented including position of myself with flash and no flash. All in all, the location of the oil can was not the most conducive to really nice reflections. I tried to move the can to get more reflective variety but ended up disturbing (and spilling) the oil/water mix. This movement resulted in a more interesting mix of colors but with little reflection (picture 2).

My final photo shows the interesting mix of the oil/water along with a shadowy reflection of my hand. The impression I was seeking when choosing to use my hand as a reflection was that of another universe with a God, “do we really know what’s out there” type of twist. I used a flash for this picture which was necessary to gain the proper color and reflection. However, I did not like the brightness and adjusted it in Photoshop. I learned a lot about light, shadows, and reflection with these pictures. This photo shows the importance of reflection/light in pictures. By the way, this picture was taken with the shadowy hand. Photoshop was not used to create an overlay. I was concerned with dropping my camera into the oil/water mix.

Picture 1

Picture 2



Submitted Picture:

Title: Hand of God

Tags: reflection, hand, universe, oil, water, mix, brown, shadow

Self Evaluation (45-50 pts.) || 80 – 89% (40 - 44 pts.) || <80% (<40 pts.) || Critique Comments:
 * Category || Strong || Adequate || Weak ||
 * Concept || Does an outstanding job of communicating the concept. || Does an adequate job communicating the concept. || Does a poor job communicating the concept. ||
 * Composition || Photograph uses composition principles very effectively. || Photograph does a good job using composition principles. || Photograph does a poor job using composition principles. ||
 * Focus || Focus is a perfect match with the concept of the shot. || Focus is an adequate match with the concept of the shot. || Focus is a poor match with the concept of the shot. ||
 * Technical Aspects || Shutter speed and aperture were perfectly chosen to match concept. || Shutter speed and aperture were adequately chosen to match concept. || Shutter speed and aperture were poorly chosen and do not match the concept. ||
 * Depth of Field || Excellent use of depth-of-field. || Adequate use of depth-of-field. || Poor use of depth-of-field. ||
 * Title/tags || Title and tags were perfectly chosen and written to express the content and concept. Spelling and word choice are excellent with no mistakes. || Title and tags were adequately chosen and written to express the content and concept. Spelling and word choice are good with only minor errors. || Title and tags were poorly chosen and written to express the content and concept. Contains multiple spelling errors or wrong word choices. ||
 * ** Instructor evaluates this section ** ||
 * Self Critique || Excellent self-assessment. Written comments meet or exceed requirements. || Adequate self-assessment. Written comments meet requirements. || Poor self-assessment. Written comments do not meet requirements. ||
 * Peer Critique || Excellent peer assessment. Written comments meet or exceed requirements. || Adequate peer assessment. Written comments meet requirements. || Poor peer assessment. Written comments do not meet requirements. ||
 * Peer Comments || Peer comments exceed expectations. || Peer comments meet expectations. One or two comments might be missing. || Three or more peer comments were missing, incomplete or poorly written. ||
 * Total Points || >89%
 * Total Points || >89%

 Peer Critique Name: Mike (45-50 pts.) || <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 12pt;">80 – 89% (40 - 44 pts.) || <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 12pt;"><80% (<40 pts.) || <span style="background-color: #ffffff; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 12pt;">Critique Comments:
 * Category || Strong || Adequate || Weak ||
 * Concept || <span style="background-color: #00ffff; font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 8pt;">Does an outstanding job of communicating the concept. || Does an adequate job communicating the concept. || Does a poor job communicating the concept. ||
 * Composition || <span style="background-color: #00ffff; font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 8pt;">Photograph uses composition principles very effectively. || Photograph does a good job using composition principles. || Photograph does a poor job using composition principles. ||
 * Focus || Focus is a perfect match with the concept of the shot. || <span style="background-color: #00ffff; font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 8pt;">Focus is an adequate match with the concept of the shot. || Focus is a poor match with the concept of the shot. ||
 * Technical Aspects || Shutter speed and aperture were perfectly chosen to match concept. || <span style="background-color: #00ffff; font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 8pt;">Shutter speed and aperture were adequately chosen to match concept. || Shutter speed and aperture were poorly chosen and do not match the concept. ||
 * Depth of Field || <span style="background-color: #00ffff; font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 8pt;">Excellent use of depth-of-field. || Adequate use of depth-of-field. || Poor use of depth-of-field. ||
 * Title/tags || <span style="background-color: #00ffff; font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 8pt;">Title and tags were perfectly chosen and written to express the content and concept. Spelling and word choice are excellent with no mistakes. || Title and tags were adequately chosen and written to express the content and concept. Spelling and word choice are good with only minor errors. || Title and tags were poorly chosen and written to express the content and concept. Contains multiple spelling errors or wrong word choices. ||
 * <span style="color: #ff0000; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 12pt;">** Instructor evaluates this section ** ||
 * Self Critique || Excellent self-assessment. Written comments meet or exceed requirements. || Adequate self-assessment. Written comments meet requirements. || Poor self-assessment. Written comments do not meet requirements. ||
 * Peer Critique || Excellent peer assessment. Written comments meet or exceed requirements. || Adequate peer assessment. Written comments meet requirements. || Poor peer assessment. Written comments do not meet requirements. ||
 * Peer Comments || Peer comments exceed expectations. || Peer comments meet expectations. One or two comments might be missing. || Three or more peer comments were missing, incomplete or poorly written. ||
 * Total Points || <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 12pt;">>89%
 * Total Points || <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 12pt;">>89%

Mike - Kevin, you always have such cool photos. It is awesome that you can find such interesting photos in locations where you might not normally look. Your photo reminds me of the song //He's Got The Whole World In His Hands.// It also brings to mind the **Allstate Insurance** commercials. The center also reminds me of an ovum. You did an excellent job of bringing your image to life. I don't know how you could have improved on the image by alterning your aperture or shutter speed. I gues it might be possible to brighten it somewhat, just so you don't change the fact the the center of the image remains brighter. You might also use some type of color filter to modify the colors, but I personally like it as is. Your image was composed excellently. I know that I am supposed to offer suggestions to help you improve your photo, but I have none to give. I do echo your concern with damaging the camera. I live in fear of knocking over my tripod and, I know from experience, that cameras do not bounce well. Super job!!

Emily- Kevin, this is a wonderful shot. My favorite part of the ambiguousness is the shadow of your hand. It really does look like "God's hand." This oil and water mix has such an odd color to it. It reminds me of scenes from some of the novels that I have been reading where supernatural characters have been injured or killed and their blood splatters everywhere. I think your photo adheres to the rule of thirds, and I am glad that you didn't drop your camera into the mixture. I think your photo has excellent composition, and I hardly have any suggestions for you. Maybe you could try the shot from a different angle or try the lake reflection shot from a different angle to include the reflection as well as what is being reflected. Overall, well done.

Jacki - Kevin, wow! This is such a great shot! I love your title and think it is just amazing! It almost looks like an ultrasound picture of a baby with "God's Hand" protecting it. When I first looked at it before reading your analysis, I thought it was a double exposure, but I love the fact that it is a shadow. It is really hard to come up with a suggestion for this photo. The only thing that I can come up with is to darken up the picture a bit in the bottom right hand corner so that the focus of the viewers' eyes are on the center. But that is a stretch.... Great job!

Donna- Kevin, you certainly have an eye for the unusual. I actually thought that the final picture was a microscopic image (perhaps of a fertilized egg:), an image that would go well with your title, too. I like the amber hues very much. Suggestion: Perhaps emphasize the hand a bit more by spreading out the fingers slightly.