'The Family Photo Album'

the photo is excellent for the moment you found. dynamism, composition. I dont like somuch the bw. the burned shoulder, and the grey gamma of the background, where there are no whites and no blacks. if you agrre, i think is easy to improve differents solutions. the pic is very good, really

This photo actually did have plenty of blacks -- mainly the little boy's face . . . . heh.

 

I had to lighten lots and bring down the lightness of the woman's top to bring it into viewable range, but I do not like the tones of the boy's top or his choice of fabric, but then I didn't dress him (nor probably did she).

 

You live with what you get, but then again, there probably is a great deal of improvement.

 

This was worked up before I even knew about levels -- several years ago, and I just stared at it for years, liking it but feeling it wasn't worthy of posting.

 

Boy was I wrong. It currently has 25 comments (half mine) and some worthy criticism and a 6.0 for aesthetics rate after 6 ratings. Boy was I wrong . . . say I feeling happily sheepish.

 

John (Crosley)

They love it!

 

Character, yep.

 

Hey you have a little yellow POW award. What did you get it for?

Yep, you're right as always (almost).

 

It is getting high ratings. Even my girlfriend e-mailed me a copy with a congratulatory letter, not realizing I took it several years ago. Saying I caught a moment.

 

I caught a moment several years ago and kept it to myself feeling it wouldn't translate. Reminds me of Cartier-Bresson who kept a personal snapshot he felt but someone picked up - a photo expert and visitor- who pronounced it 'real photographic art' and le maitrre said 'oh, I always considered it just a snapshot' -- even he could be blind (not that I can really compare my work to his or myself to him, God knows.)

 

And yes, the comment on Photo of the Week is an opening to give me a chance to brag, but I won't -- for a while it was the photo most stolen by blogs on the Internet and caused an enormous number of my photos to be reproduced on blogs worldwide and they still are to a lesser degree -- a mixed blessing. At one time there were 30 or more such reproducing sites, all with my copyrighted material as their content.

 

But they did spell my name right and they mostly chose the correct photos with pretty impeccable taste, and they split between color and black and white.

 

Google my name and you'll find a few, and even some prominently.

 

But no bragging; I'm a journeyman amateur, slogging along, with two cameras in tow.

 

'Did YOU take a photo of MY KID? " "I may have, but I'm interested in the photo, not the kid . . . and invariably they turn into friends when they see that it's serious photography I'm interested in . . . and I don't take too many kid photos . . . too many hassles though i think I do well with them because I'm good at catching unguarded moments and kids are pretty unguarded anyway.

 

Best to you, Micki.

 

John (Crosley)

hands down!

 

I can't believe it took you TWO YEARS to post it!

 

HA!

 

I just did a wedding last Saturday (OMG can you believe that) and the father of the Groom is thrilled that I got a picture of HIM taking a picture of the bride and groom kissing JUST LIKE THIS. :)

 

See, it is the NEW thing out there to take pictures of people taking pictures.

 

So, now you have a new kind of picture to go out and take.

 

Oh wait, you were already doing that. You did that with that woman and her chest. HA!

 

I loved that picture.

 

Well, I just wanted to respond. Sorry it has been a while, I am so busy with work and my mom is here. I am, in fact, going to go shoot a retirement in a couple of hours. Somehow I got busy. WILD :)

 

But it is MONEY ~ micki

Whenever I see someone taking a photo of someone else and the someone else posing, I take a photo over the shoulder. I always have. I have quite a collection. I could fill a gallery, but I feel few are worthy (but then I felt this was not worthy either . . . so just goes to show you).

 

Glad the bug has bit you.

 

Infectious, isn't it?

 

John (Crosley)