ray . Posted May 7, 2004 Share Posted May 7, 2004 Photos from my visit to <a href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/ folder?folder_id=394443">NYC</a>, taken between April 6-12th, 2004.<p> Any and all comments welcome.<p> <center><img src="http://chaospress.com/images/Subway.jpg"> </center> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_sidlo Posted May 7, 2004 Share Posted May 7, 2004 Your headliner above is very nice, and my favs also include the 6 to Pelham Bay, Central Park and Self. Nice haul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markskelly Posted May 7, 2004 Share Posted May 7, 2004 Really nice work. There's a real 'push' to these. You seem very comfortable and willing to get the shot. I like the variety of camera positions and compositions. Gutsy stuff. Central Park is my favorite. Regards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas_sullivan Posted May 7, 2004 Share Posted May 7, 2004 very good.....looks good........you must be as tall as me, the only advice I might give is to hip shoot some more..........not so much for the "hipshot" thing, but to get a lower perspective sometimes. If I "viewfinder" everything, then I have to bend down too much......these old bones cant take too much of that crap......so I hipshoot alot also. Not that you dont have lower perspective ones...just think more might be better over all. IMHO cool place to shoot isnt it!? I could spend the rest of my life shooting there.........if I was independently wealthy, that is ;o) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beau 1664876222 Posted May 7, 2004 Share Posted May 7, 2004 New York is like Tri-x -- it has a distinct visual personality, and yet it always displays more than anything the personality of whoever's taking the pictures. Ray's NY is not Drew's NY, or Ed's or Grant's or whomever's... that's what's so cool about it. Ray, my favorites are Central Park, the 6 Train, Alamo, Self, and Ballplayers. My only complaint is that, on my monitor at least, the scans lack some midtones and dynamic range. These images deserve a little more sizzle that way. Anyway, some very high-quality stuff and I'd say you had a successful trip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray . Posted May 7, 2004 Author Share Posted May 7, 2004 Beau, For the most part I shot Tri-X at 600 this time, and kind of like the effect on the pictures. 'Passing' is unfortunately grievously underexposed, and maybe some others give up a little in tonal range, but in general they seemed fine to me. The proof, of course, will be in the printing. Further adjustments should be expected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray . Posted May 7, 2004 Author Share Posted May 7, 2004 ...should say, slight overdevelopment in film process also... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dumpster001 Posted May 7, 2004 Share Posted May 7, 2004 my favs: alamo, ballplayers, passing, look, 6 to pelham, central park, 7th ave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dominic_. Posted May 7, 2004 Share Posted May 7, 2004 All very well done, especially the one above, the one of the ballplayers is excellent as well..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom h. Posted May 8, 2004 Share Posted May 8, 2004 Good stuff outta you, Ray. portrait #2,self,descent,2343940,central park,2343993,7th ave scape, are the ones that I like best. I think you and NYC suit each other... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray . Posted May 8, 2004 Author Share Posted May 8, 2004 ... Some contrast tweaking has taken place since Beau's post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lex_jenkins Posted May 8, 2004 Share Posted May 8, 2004 After having spent several of my formative years near NYC (Mount Vernon) where I began photography, including street shooting in the city, I've lost the sense of infatuation it seems to hold for many folks. I live in Texas now and even after 25 years in the Fort Worth area I still find it presents more interesting photo opportunities. Good shot, tho', Ray. Capturing the two people looking upward really makes this photo work. Good tonal range too, which I know isn't easy in those dimly lighted public transportation areas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew_lee2 Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 Some nice pictures, Ray. My favorites, in this order (actually the first and second are a push): Pelham Bay (guy in the glasses gives the shot a timeless look---this shot will probably age nicely), Central Park (has just a weird, surreal---and again, timeless---quality to it that may not have come across had the shot been in color---monochrome really brings it out), Conversation 6th & 32nd, Shopping, 7th Ave, and Self. Aside from that, I can only tell you what you probably already know, which is to keep revisiting those negs! You may make some surprising discoveries a month from now, two months from now, a year from now---and then you can share those here :> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew_lee2 Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 Good to see that you ventured out to 103 & Lex, a really cool and colorful neighborhood (Spanish Harlem), if not exactly the most hospitable place (is there any?) to shoot. <p> Oh and also, how many rolls did you end up burning? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray . Posted May 10, 2004 Author Share Posted May 10, 2004 I shot about 20 rolls b&w, (maybe 19 or 21, don't remember at the moment). There are maybe 10 or 12 OK shots I haven't posted yet, nothing to write home about. 3 rolls also of color, of which I've got maybe 3 or 4 halfway decent shots to post on NW threads. The order of these in the folder is a bit screwed up at the moment, since I deleted and reposted some. They looked more coherent in the thumbnails before, I'll try to redo. Thanks for your feedback, as always. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas_sullivan Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 Andrew Lee brings up an interesting point...one I have noticed and participate in myself. Street Photography does have this unique thing about it...defitely not so much with nature or other categories of photography that I;ve had an interest in....being that going back over negatives shot months ago almost always have you finding gems. And those gems are not just in my mind's eye, I post them and this site and others praise them. And I never noticed them first time, or even second time thru the batch. Not to hi-jack your thread Ray........but I wonder why this is? I just accept the occurance right now, and take advantage of it, but I really do wonder what is behind this. Is it "getting, time wise, seperated from the original event"? Is it that expectations for that shot were elsewhere, and you didnt notice for a different reason, it was actually a good shot? Could be as simple as that.........but it certainly doesnt happen with the frequency in nature, say, as it does in street. I think there might be something else going on.....probably not though. Any thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grant_. Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 86th st is my fave....good going...nice prints too... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grant_. Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 it could be due to change....everyone changes each day, has new experiences.....right now im heavily into diane arbus, which is having an influence on me and my particular directions and motivations in photographing. it has me questioning.....and searching for answers i dont expect to find....perhaps thats one reason....perhaps not.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray . Posted May 10, 2004 Author Share Posted May 10, 2004 Definitely that you look at things differently from day to day... but for me it's also that I just miss things in my haste get to what else is there. On first or second go around, you usually don't really take the time to look at every single thing you shot, and it takes time to absorb all of what's there. There are usually 'sleepers' on the roll (or card) too. Maybe they're the less obvious ones that seem plain at first, or need a scan or print to reveal what they really have going for them. I've gone through this batch of work pretty carefully though, and figure most of it is a done deal.... I figure just a couple more small surprises is all it may have left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grant_. Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 ok, time to get the 1993 negs out.... :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray . Posted May 11, 2004 Author Share Posted May 11, 2004 Here's full frame... <p><center><img src="http://chaospress.com/images/Subway-full-.jpg"></center> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edmo Posted May 11, 2004 Share Posted May 11, 2004 Ray, for whatever it's worth I think I like the full frame version more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
felix_erazo Posted May 12, 2004 Share Posted May 12, 2004 RAY, Overall,Great pics!!! I really enjoyed viewing them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim_Tardio Posted May 12, 2004 Share Posted May 12, 2004 Ray, I like the full frame version better, too. It isolates the people on the train, and the flag adds a nice touch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now