my 1st photo here... some moment lost in time... wondering about... strangers lives...

I think this shot is perfect! How badly do I miss a hug like this!

You definitely captured the moment here. They hug and the whole world is moving quickly around them.

Thanks Tony. You wrote most of what I was thinking. But I will reiterate. This is a great moment (with tons of potential) captured reasonably well but not exceptionally. It desperately needs a crop. I suggest a square one to draw in the intimacy without losing the general feeling. The white horizontal top bar should not be the brightest point in the image. The crop includes some slight burning to bring that down. It's subtle but in the world of "photo of the week" that's the type of subtle details that should be considered.

Tony.

Excellent critique.

The idea here is excellent and the photographer was merely seconds and feet away from a masterpiece. Unfortunately, it looks like the frame that's one or two ahead of the shot which really counted. Actually, in the case of most of us (myself included), it's perhaps more aptly described as the best we managed to do in a state of panic. Cruel but true. The only missed goal in history worth celebrating is Pelé's effort (from his own half !!!!!) to lob the Czech goal-keeper in 1970. It's a bloody high standard, but enough people have met it shooting street pics that there can be no excuses for intrusive horizontals, poor framing, distracting shapes behind the principal subject and less-than-imaginative perspective.BTW--I really like the photographer's picture of the three boys on the beach.

The exposure of the train in the back gives framing to the subject. The space at the right gives tention. the railing gives leading lines to the main subject, and because it's in focus, makes this not centered, but instead 2/3rds. The tones of the train and walking people give dimention. The exposure of the main subject is dead on. The pose and attitude of the couple gives emotion. It works for me. It's art, and I dont care if you used Photoshop, a paintbrush or scissors...I only care that when I look at this photo that I can appreciate it for what it is! To me, the only "RULE" is remembering "there are no rules"! Now, lets' see that second photo! and congratulations..... Ray

And another point...

This doesn't look like a Photoshop jobby to me. Amazing how so many automatically expect that any passable picture elements (blur, motion etc.) are "effects" and have to come out of a can.

OF course, if I am wrong and this has been attacked by "Photoshop, paintbrush, or scissors" (as it was put in an earlier post), then it would not be a photograph, would it? No amount of "not caring what has been used" by the noviatiates on these pages will turn cheesy collages full of ersatz kitschy effects into "photograph".

...Plenty of people "don't care" about lots of things, but that doesn't make their opinion valid. Having the freedom to express an opinion is all we're guaranteed (and then only in some enlightened jurisdictions). Being correct is an unrelated issue to freedom of expression....but I digress...

...at least with this picture, we don't have to worry about it being faked. If it had been faked the photographer might as well have made a good job of it and fixed up the composition. Its faults are proof of its honesty.

Specifically on the blurring, Dennis, most of the blurring anomalies you mentioned are due to the transverse movement of the subject elements - train, people - being frozen by the (also) transverse movement of the focal plane shutter. Depending on shutter speed, direction and speed of movement etc, you can get all sorts of haloes, see-through solid objects etc.

The feet are stationary because, well, feet are stationary when they are placed on the ground as you walk. Next time you walk up to the shops try the "feet-standing-still" test yourself.

Point to remember as you check out your feet... until you swing the other leg forward, you will not move any appreciable distance. thisi sreve ngefo rtheo peras ociet ygags

Dennis,

 

Take a careful look at someone walking. Each foot is stationary for a moment even while the body continues forward.

 

Excellent work -- in an environment that in my experience is not the easiest to work in.

nice shot though...

 

i agree with the cropping advice...would be perfect if it was cropped to the left, up to the vent near the guy's boot(in the cap). that'd allow the guard rail to become a nice long leading line... if there's any more of the frame on the hard left that isn't too distracting, i'd print it thataways... don't think it looks good square... a square crop doesn't really match the proportions of the train.

 

good though,

 

me

 

p.s. 11 out of 9

you have to upload more and more and more photos here! i love this really.

that's why we're here! excellent photo, congrats on POW!

Very nice job. To echo comments above, to me it is a very nice shot, but with a few elements that could be tightened up (as could all of our photos). If these are your first photographs the you are carrying through from exposure to development to presentation, then you have a lifetime of terrific shots ahead of you.

 

My nitpicking would be

1. The horizontals are just slightly slanted with the right side slightly higher. Keeping them very flat would add just a bit. One of those dreaded "rules" that just seems to work most of the time.

 

2. There are a few little spots, either on the print or from the scan that can easily be cleaned up in photoshop, there is a spot over the head of the lady in the background, a faint one over the head of the person on the left side and one on the pantleg of the man in the hat. They standout just because of the prominence and significance of the blur.

 

3. I maybe would have tried to move just a tad to the right, or even hold the camera to right if moving that way wasn't possible, just to get the rail out of his back, an armslength probably would have done it. I don't care for the railing much, wish it were a row of chairs or something less intrusive.

 

4. The interraction is natural, but with his face looking away, it seems he is detached. Maybe that's a good thing to keep it from being too sweet. It doesn't give me that sense of obliviousness that the blurred background suggests. Maybe a moment where they are looking at each other would add to that sense. Did you take many exposures?

 

Not sure why 300mm, If you are just getting started, I would recommend using a "normal" view prime lens. You have the knack and sticking with one focal length will yield surprisingly joyous results for you I'm sure.

 

Congratulations. Keep up the good work.

 

There is a terrific shot here on photonet somewhere of some runners whose feet are the only thing visible except for some indistinct blurs for their bodies that illustrates the whole foot not blurry thing, but I've forgotten where it is. Perhaps someone recalls it.

Wanna know the clearest evidence to how you can tell? Welp, take a look at the horizontal pattern lines on the train.. NOW.. take a look between the guy on the right that's in motion. Look right BETWEEN HIS LEGS.. The lines have been photoshopped out.. Also, if the guy on the right is walking forward and his back leg is stationary, that would only mean that his right leg is about to step down. This would suggest that the blur halo should be on the top portion of the shoe. Instead, the halo is on the bottom part of the shoe which could only be logical if he was picking up that feet. So he is abviously stepping down with his right feet. Also check out the top left and right of the train. If something is in motion, then all parts of it will show motion. The top left/right is not consistantly in motion with the closer center portion of the train.

Good story of human emotion. Did one just arrive or about to depart? The rest of the world is, as usual, oblivious

Dear Tony, they really DID fake the moon landing, didn't they know that yet in Australia?

This is wonderful story-telling. I love the feeling of unintrusive intimacy - participating without getting in the way. Excellent eye, well executed. Keep up the good work.

I really like this choice for POW. Not because I think that it is among the best of Photonet's best, but because it has, to my eye, a lot of unfulfilled potential.

I like the concept. It is very romantic and at the same time realistic. Everyone experiences (or wants to experience) moments like this.

 

I like the background figures and think they are essential to the image. Why? Trains always move faster than people. There's nothing interesting about the contrast between a still couple and a blurred train. In addition, the darker figures are visual echoes of the subjects, nicely complementing them both in tone and speed. They are however currently unbalanced in the frame. The dead space on the right, imo, needs to go.

 

I don't like the railing. It's very intrusive, at least in the current crop: It fills almost exactly a quarter of the frame, and it's square-ness kills the photo's energy. As the only thing in the frame other than the lovers that is perfectly still, it distracts from the subject.

 

Finally, this is an extremely horizontal photograph. By that, I mean that the dominant lines are all horizontal, and the photo's overall 'movement' is horizontal: my eye starts at one side and moves to the other. End of story.

 

To address this problem, and that of the intrusive railing, I suggest the attached crop. First I got rid of the dead space to the right. This balances the background people as well as the tones. Then I cropped out the feet of the subjects - they are not important, and doing so 1) elminates a whole lot of dead space and 2) places the one strong diagonal line - that of the down-railing -in the corner of the frame where it leads the eye directly up to the subjects. Because it stops there and doesn't continue past them, the eye stops there. This is good, because you're trying to emphasize stillness. Finally, I did some burning in around the edges to further focus attention on the subjects.

 

That's my take. Whether you agree w/me or not, I hope you find it helpful :)

 

(P.S. - Photoshop? Nah. Why bother when its easier to go into any subway station and catch a tableau repeated over and over many times a day?)

 

Hello All,

First, I'd like to thank you for all your comments. I was able to learn a lot from them. And I never expected that this photo would be elected as Photo of the Week!

Now about this photo and the entire story that is behind it: In first place, Im not a pro; I started a photography course one year ago and this photo was taken while photographing for my first photo project (about railways).

I really did take several photos of this scene, and the most amazing issue is that the photo I showed you was not the photo I was looking for. You can se the photo I was looking for here:

http://www.fotopt.net/so_foto.asp?foto=142457&primeira=147947&tema=-1&tipo=autor&id=6091&num=5">http://www.fotopt.net/so_foto.asp?foto=142457&primeira=147947&tema=-1&tipo=autor&id=6091&num=5

Someone told in his comment that he would prefer the photo with the other people in the background, and this was also what I was thinking about.

The photo I showed first was just taken because I was afraid of loosing this one.Later on, when I looked at the whole sequence I found the photo with people on the background much more interesting than the other. I agree that the scene is not very well balanced, and also this was not the most I could do (it never is), but at that time this sequence of photos made me learn a lot and understand that the best photos are not always the most obvious ones. Its also been a good start for a series of discussions like this and as the time goes on I keep learning more and more with them.

Now, about the tech issues raised in some of the comments:

.The crop I did: The original image that came out of the scanner had just a small trim, not a huge crop, the couple is on the center also in the original (you can see the original photo - before photoshop - in attachment).

.My position in the platform: this station has several platforms; I wasnt in that same platform. I was on the top of a staircase parallel to that one with my elbows supported against the rail.

.The 300mm at 1/20 seconds without a tripod: The lens is a Nikkor 80-400 AF VR (vibration reduction), as you can see in the technical description of the photo, in theory it gives at least 3 stops more than what you would have handholding a simple lens (this would result in the same stillness as if I was shooting at 1/160, if Im not wrong, but this is just tech stuff). And as I told above I had my elbows supported against the rail of a staircase BTW, I use a 50mm most of the time, but in some situations (like this one) I find the 300 or even 400 mm quite handy when I just do not want to intrude, I believe I could never do this with a 50mm, and yes, Im quite shy ;)

.The motion blur: all I can say, and I said it before, is that its real (meaning: not done through digital means). I saw a lot of explanations here on how it was done, and why it would be real or not; all I can say is that the effect of motion is random for most of the effects on the moving train there are hundreds of possible explanations The feet issues have been explained as far Ive seen, and thats the most I can explain, about the lines disappearing from between the legs of the man on the right, maybe the trains surface is not regular and does not always have lines, maybe we are entering science fiction here (Personally I prefer going out and spend a lot of time shooting than caring too much about this)

.Photoshopping: all I did in photoshop was: crop, levels, resize, and unsharp mask... the () means adding a frame around, nothing else. Also I tend to use to much () when I write. I believe we do not need to care about finding rational meanings for everything...

I believe this is all I can say for now, thanks all, its been great to learn with you! (From now on Ill pay more attention to the photo of the week comments!)

All the best,

-Rui Cardoso

A couple of comments to perhaps further discussion...

 

The railing: As a compositional element it may be fair to question its need, though thematically it adds to the concept of "they meet and then time stands still" (if one can be so presumptuous as to assume another photographers intent). The diagonal line leads up to them and then abruptly stops. It also however, serves to slightly unbalance the picture, in my mind. Could it have been eliminated? Well Im not so sure. Given the focal length it may not have been possible to readjust the perspective and still capture the same/similar picture. And certainly from a purely functional perspective it was essential; it literally supports the two central figures and allowed them to remain stationary long enough for the photo to be taken. Without it there most likely would have been motion on their part and there would be no need for this discussion, as the print would have probably ended up in the trash. So again, maybe this really was the best that could have been done given the situation as it unfolded.

 

Motion Blur: No comment on PhotoShop. I choose to accept the photographers word until proven wrong. Besides I also find no contradictory elements. I think many of us assumed that all the motion of the background figures was occurring from the left to right. Where in fact the right hand figure may not have been walking at all. To my eye he may have been standing there, rocking back and forth, hence the blur below the shoe as opposed to above. As for the missing lines between his legs? Well I dont know enough about trains to know if those lines are continuous or interrupted at certain points, by flat panels.

 

As a side note, and possibly off topic; Doisenau's The Kiss (which was faked anyway). Really? I thought it I had read that it was posed, but was it actually claimed to be a candid?

 

As for a proper critique, I could scarcely begin to do better than a few of the others have done above, but just to be clear, I find myself in the same camp as others who feel this an "OK" shot, yet not perfect, but it does appear to show a tender moment and that has to count for something.

 

 

Sprouty

 

Rui, I like the "shot you were looking for" that you just posted a link to. More powerful in it's simplicity than the POW. Of course, the kiss gives it more impact, as well. Even the railing from the staircase is better -- not as distractingly white as in this image.

 

Center framing is still debatable, though I think it works in the alternate version. Try cropping it from either side and see if you like the effect.

I'll keep this short... it's a gorgeous shot! I believe in showing and sharing a feeling with a picture, you certainly did with this one!

"Doisenau's The Kiss (which was faked anyway). Really? I thought it I had read that it was posed, but was it actually claimed to be a candid?

 

Tony is right. It WAS faked and it WAS a candid or street (Tony, why do you hate this word btw?) until 10 or so years ago, when a couple sued Doisneau, claiming they are the ones in the photo and the photo was taken without their permission which forced Doisneau to 'confess' that it was posed.

I wish that I had the talent to come up with this composition. I love your picture and hope to see more of them soon.

 

 

Who really cares if this shot is altered digitally? Does that detract from the overall asthetic? I don't think so....If Steve McCurry had shot the Afgan girl two years ago, rather than twenty, someone would be swearing that he had "photoshopped" her...I'm willing to believe Rui. ..The truth is, we can find fault in anything if look hard enough....This is an awesome shot! all I want to know is , where do I get my print?

good photo... i shouldn't be saying anything about someones pictures, because I am just learning. But.... photoshoped photos are lame. good idea though

The alternate picture is much stronger. The description "centre of their own little world" makes much more sense. The blurred train, in the alternate version, far from being a distraction now takes almost equal centre stage and one's eyes can rest on the central primary subject more easily.