Boys in Blue/Yellow

Beautiful. It was the painterly effect that caught my eye in the first place - the texture that the shadows caused is wonderful.

I do know that this shot is not the best one: I was the first one to notice the feet missing, but what should I have done? go back to that lovely island in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean, and kindly ask them to pass by in front of me again? Hmmm, seems good. Or maybe, spend some more money in the scanner instead of a new lens? Hmmmm, no, definetely no. And what about sitting for hours and becoming a PS Master? too tired for this one!

 

But, even though I knew all the "contras" of this shot, I decided to upload it, and ask for some critiques, I never thought it could get so many comments and ratings, and needless to say that it would be a POW. I still wonder why it was "honoured", but I like the fact that this "not-good-shot" have made you stop, take a look, and leave a comment: saying NOOOO, or YES. I don´t mind, I´m enjoying everysingle word of all of you.

 

And to be honest, this kind of "honours" or comments, make me think that carrying a very heavy bag, with my camera, lens, films, tripod, batteries, filters... it´s worth the effort.

 

I nearly forgot it: someone has asked whether I knew the kids, or even talked to them... not at all. I took this shot around 8 a.m. when children were going to school, and they didn´t realize I was taking the photo, they were reading a piece of paper.

 

Hope you understand my "poor" english...

Thanks Doug!

What does one do with this image? Learn from it. Don't throw it, but keep it as a reminder of what worked and what didn't.

This is a good place to discuss aesthetics. The yellow and blue colors are aesthetically pleasing and serves well as a background against the contrasty subject. It's a clean composition without any roadside clutter, wall graffiti, other buildings, sky, etc. The strong straight vertical line on the 1/3 is good . . . . BUT as has been said repeatedly, the feet were cut off. That throws the aesthetics off, no matter how much you like blue and yellow.

. . . but why were they cut off? Not because the photographer was in a hurry. . . . Look at oll the other things that were carefully placed just so. The problem is a very common one . . . . placement of the head(s) on the mid line. It's a hard habit to break. When you have time to compose an image using a tripod to place the shapes in a balanced way, it's not as challenging, but when people are involved, timing is everything and you tend to 'center in' on their expression rather than seeing them as a shape to be placed in the picture space. Can you learn to do both at the same time. I think so. What to do differently? Forget PS, except to help you visualize what it could have looked like, as Lannie has done. If time permitted and if there were neither too many or too few pedestrians, I would have planned the composition to include more foreground and waited for a woman with a red dress to walk my way. Either that or give your wife or an interested passerby the red hat you carry with you for just such occassions.

Now there's another can of worms.

Is it ethical or not to you use PS to clone in a floor ? Well, what an ethic in the first place ? To me, it's a set of values set by an individual to rule his actions. So, you like to clone...? Well, clone then ! :-)

Would I clone personally ? Yes if the shot were sharp enough to be sold and if I had a buyer for it. Would I clone besides that, just to make a print for myself ? No. Why ? Because I can take other pictures tomorrow. Not of the same subject, no... so what...? Life is more than a wall with 2 colors and 2 boys. And life goes on. Charo took better pictures than this after that, as he said himself, and he will take even better ones next week. This week he can't, he's got to face his POW court case...:-)

 

...does Charo work for National Geographic? (Obscure reference to the red hat that he alledgedly carries with him) LOL

Marc, you get 5 points for keeping it under 200 words. Rather rare for you, and another 5 for disagreeing politely.

 

Carl, Carl, Carl. This is going to hurt you more than it's going to hurt me, but I'm willing to make that sacrifice.

 

Minus 10 points for assuming you were going to get any points.

Minus 10 points for trying to give away something you didn't have.

Minus 5 points for exceeding 300 words.

Minus 5 points for waiting until Tuesday to post your comment.

Minus 15 points for rambling nonsensically.

Plus 10 for not including the phrase "painterly effects" in your comment.

 

That totals you at minus 35 points, a new record.

 

Charo has posted a third post on the same day, which credits him another minus 10, so he's at minus 20.

People actually do this sort of thing, you know. Who was the famous

photographer of Native Americans many years ago who used to dress up

his subjects?

 

(Plus 5 for important historical reference . . . would have been 10 if

I'd remembered his name.) . .

Carl, Carl, Carl.

 

It's Edward Curtis you're thinking of.

 

 

 

Minus 10 for assigning your own point value.

Minus 5 for muffing his name.

Minus 20 for more than one post in the same day.

 

Total of minus 35 added to your already minus 35 for yet another record of minus 70.

 

Take it easy Carl. You'll get kicked off the POW if you're not careful.

National Geographic is notorious for it! They use to deny it until a photo of a factory worker was printed and he had on the common red shirt. Only problem was, they didn't have him take of the one that was underneath it and the original shirt was clearly visible.

 

A few months ago they did a story on China and ouside a factory in a snowstorm they showwed the hundreds of workers milling around all dressed in black and with black umbrellas, amazingly enough, one of them had a red umbrella!

 

They don't even deny it anymore.

Simplicity, so often, generates power. A slight tightening of the cropping, this way or that way, could help, but it is excellent as is.

"I do know that this shot is not the best one: I was the first one to

notice the feet missing, but what should I have done? go back to

that lovely island in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean, and kindly

ask them to pass by in front of me again? Hmmm, seems good.

Or maybe, spend some more money in the scanner instead of a

new lens? Hmmmm, no, definetely no. And what about sitting for

hours and becoming a PS Master? too tired for this one!"

 

CHARO DIEZ

 

Charo... it's not "what you should have done" but what you should

NOT have done. You should NOT have included a shot you

yourself said ""I do know that this shot is not the best one: I was

the first one to notice the feet missing..." Just like when you are

preparing pieces for your portfolio, or for an exhibit; you choose

by elimination. You eliminate any photo that have even the

slightest flaw (like a flat/no cntrast picture or cropped-out feet). It

is always much better to have a small high-quality flawless

portfolio or exhibit, than a big high-quantity portfolio or exhibition

with a lot of flaws.

 

BTW, I taught photography, Photoshop and portfolio preparation

and have had more than a dozen photo and design one-man

shows and exhibitions.

 

Finally, there is criticism and criticizing; but in art and

photography, it is called critique and critiquing. And they are very

different. Artists and photographers will always welcome the

constructive critique from fellow artists and photographers. Most

of the time these critiques are about the WHAT and really

seldom about the WHY -- if at all. In other words, technical and

not philosophical.

The Contrast is beautiful but what caught my attention was the shadow of the tree that runs so naturally across the two colors, seemingly holding the picture together in one beautifully orchestrated composition. Very Nice.

 

Sunder

Kohda, I respect your opinion and your work (although I would like to see more of it), but I think in this case that you might be in error through no fault of your own: if Charo had excluded the photo, the PoW award might not have come her way, since the colors and the much talked about "painterly effect" seem to have gotten the Elves' attention. In general, however, your strategy was surely good advice for anyone hoping to sell or exhibit.

 

As for words like "critique" versus "criticism" (sigh), these are curiously interchangeable in most fields (including philosophy and literature, fields I know a bit about), but, not being anything more than a sometime amateur photographer, I will defer to your judgment on the linguistic fashion in that realm. Of course, it's simpler for Charo, since the Spanish "la crítica" translates as either "criticism" or "critique" in English--but I get the sense that you knew that or you would not have pointed out that English can be more complicated and nuanced on this word. Ah, fashion!

"In general, however, your strategy was surely good advice for

anyone hoping to sell or exhibit. " --Lannie Kelly

 

No Lannie, it's always a good strategy even if you are not into

selling or exhibiting your work. It is always a good idea to have

the dicipline to show only your best work even if you're "just"

showing them to your friends or even to PHNetters; because that

one, singular image (with a flaw) can ruin and affect your entire

portfolio or exhibit negatively.

Ok Kodha, I will remember that next time I invite my friends to see my new shots.

 

BTW, I´m not Mr. Díez.

"It is always a good idea to have the dicipline to show only your best work even if you're "just" showing them to your friends or even to PHNetters"

 

Kodha, I don´t agree with you at this point. I think this comunity is to learn and to improve our photographic skills (if any). So what´s the sense in showing our best shots, to get back so many wows! incredible! perfect!???? Besides, I´m afraid I don´t have those wow-shots, if so, I´d be selling them and stop getting up early in the morning to go to work...

 

Two posts in 5 minutes... how much is it Doug?

So one just post any and all photos, even if they are really lousy?

 

No Charo, I tell you, it is good dicipline to be critical of your work

first, even before you ask others to critique your work. I know that

this is not easy, but by being discriminate and putting yourself to

a higher set of standards -- even if you never become a

professional photographer -- will make your images more

gratifying to yourself and others. (As I said in an earlier post, you

do not want one photo with a flaw, affecting the rest of your

portfolio/album/folder/show.)

 

Also, this is the right time for photographers like yourself who are

just starting out to begin practicing this dicipline early, so that

later it becomes second nature to you.

 

And do not worry, even if you show only your best work, people

will still find things to comment about and critique.

Charo, congratulations on POW. Very nice graphic image. I would have to agree with you about what images we post. The response by Carl, about bad habits, was just the kind of feedback that is so very helpful (at least to me). I would bet that there will be changes in the way Charo will see people in the viewfinder because of that one comment. The joking, arguing and ego bashing may make this forum interesting to read for some, however it's the positive and helpful critique along with good advice for improvement that is most appreciated. IMHO

I went to your folder and did see the three pictures with the

subjects' feet chopped off. One possible problem for this is that

the viewfinder of your Nikon FM10 has a frame coverage of only

92%, So it is very possible that you saw those missing feet in

your viewfinder, but were never recorded on the film. So it is a

good idea to always keep this in mind next time you put your

focusing eye on the viewfinder. (Only the F5 has a 100% rame

coverage.)

Notice that the wheels of the tricycle is actually intact.

Now, notice how at 92% percent frame coverage all the wheels

are chopped off!

I think the frame coverage works the other way around...you see 92% of what you get.

Kodha, thanks for your time, but this time I think that the cropping is due to the fact that I scan framed slides (and there is a very small part of it inside the frame), plus that I need a lot of time to prepare my shots, and them the main subject leaves the scene...

 

To continue our previous discussion, you wouldn´t imagine the amount of shots that I throw to the basket. Thanks for your advice, but I´d like to show some shots at least!

I used to have a Nikon FM, FM2 and FM10 and they are all great

cameras. I have trained myself to "crop" my shots in-camera and

actually I am having a one-man show this coming March 28 and I

will exhibit 30 images all taken on the same day, in the same

place, with the same theme. All of the 30 images were printed

sans cropping.