boring landscapes and stuff... Indian lady shouting at riotcop, Davos

A littler earlier I commented that I would like to see this pick cropped a little wider, but as I look at it more I like it the way it is. Yes the police man and the woman seem not to be engaging one another, but I think this is one of the most interesting aspects - they are not more than 3 feet away from one another yet they seemingly pay no attention - why? Shouldn't the policeman be threatened by a protester standing so close? Is there something worse happening off camera that has caught his attention? On the woman speaking - go to a mirror and try to imitate her mouth and tongue movements. Do you normally pull your lips back from your teeth and lift your tongue when breathing? I'm not a linguistics expert but it looks as though she is talking or shouting to me. And what about that hand movement - I have seen people point with their hand in a fist but with their index finger sticking out. It is the type of pointing an aged man or woman might do.

 

Finally, given all the details everyone has pointed out so far - I wonder, did the photographer see all this when he snapped the picture (including the glint on the helmet of the policeman) or was there only one or two elements that really caught his interest?

 

 

A picture of people !!!!!!

 

Try this, crop the image on the left close to the right eye of the policeman. I think this results in a stunning photo.

 

 

It disappoints me to see that someone has gone and made their own "improvements" to the artist's work. If someone wants an opinion of how they might crop their image, believe me they'd have asked you. It's just somewhat annoying to see another copy of the POW hacked up by someone other than the artist and asking for it to be modified. Try suggesting it in plain text next time, or ask.

To clarify my earlier comments, I guess I should say a little more prominently that I did indeed like this photo. I mentioned this in my caption and my last sentence. (I don't think I've ever said that I don't like a POW.) I really liked the drama added by the snow (as if there wasn't enough already), and the whole unusualness of the situation.

 

Most of my earlier comment was merely on the how the elves expressed their reasons for choosing it. (Their reason itself--that it is a good PJ shot--may be a good one, but let's be clear.) My point was that if the woman is the subject or central element, she doesn't "add" anything to the photo, it is all about her. To say that she adds something, is to imply that it would still be substantially the same without her. I don't believe it would.

 

As for whether or not the woman is shouting or even speaking, I thought Richard made an interesting observation that wasn't immediately obvious. I don't think a determination of this issue has any bearing on whether it's a good photo. That is, if a witness could tell us either way, I wouldn't change my mind about whether I like it.

 

Phil says I should make up my mind. Well the answer to that is that I just convinced myself more on the second comment.

 

However, Brent Haydamack makes a good argument that she is speaking. I find this all very interesting that we can point these things out to each other. It still apears to me that her eyes are really paying attention to something happening outside the frame, and that's why I don't think she is speaking. Though she may be about to or may just be speaking reflexively, saying "hey," or something. Again, I did like the photo, and I think Rienk Jiskoot ought to be complimented on this and his other work as well.

Well at last there is a photo worth lookin in pow! the elves at last did a wonderful job there! Great photo! I must say that cropin the police's head does not looks fine and the focusing to the object you are shootin brings better results tough still it is great! May be shot from a different angle.

phil please spare us your retorts. comment on the photo. no one is insulting you. you're acting childish, bitter and insecure. enough.

It's reallife.

Reason for my suggested crop

 

Putting the Policeman's eye into the top left corner allows that part of him to interact with the border of the photo. He is looking over the entire image rather than just standing guard. I also feel that this creates more impact. The original photo for my mind is too symmetrical. The crop creates a better visual balance. The subject of the photo is a famous person in some form of public demonstration. Making the policeman more abstract I feel is an improvement.

 

Why post a cropped image? What better way to illustrate my point? The crop is done respectfully and is used as means of communication. This is a discussion forum. I do not claim to have made an original work. I state that I think my crop creates a more powerful photo. Suggesting a crop is no different from suggesting burning in the white snow. However I am able to SHOW people what I mean. If those who think the snow needs burning in would illustrate what they mean I would very much appreciate that. I actually don't mind the snow as it is.

 

Lots of Love

 

John

 

 

yes, O photos. I have no scanner. Maybe one day. I look at yours. Now I understand the bitterness and insecurity. Please say no more. You make ass out of yourself. I am now done. No more with you.

Phil

 

Don't you feel the tight crop into the policeman's face is disconcerting and unnerving? It adds needed emotional content to the photograph even if subconsciously.

 

Also the picture is of the famous lady interacting with the riot police (ref. title) The lady is identifiable. The policeman is really a representative of policemen generally. If however the policeman himself was a specific identity involved in some newsworthy way - then my crop would be totally wrong.

 

LOL

 

John

I find it extremely frustrating that the biggest critics never post thier own photos...

 

Put up or shut up

Yeah, like Mike said. And what really burns me up is when people post critiques of critiques without first writing a scathing critique of their own, or people who write critiques of critiques of critiques without first...hmmm....?!?.....D'oh!

The suggestion that we have one POW chosen by the elves and one by us, the readers, has some merit and I think it's a good idea.

However, am I the only one who feels enormously constrained in rating the photos by just the two criteria were are given, aesthetics and originality?

 

"Originality" especially is a very difficult concept as time goes on because someone somewhere has probably taken the same or very similar photograph as you. Soon, taking original photos will be almost impossible!

 

There is, of course, an argument for limiting the number of rating criteria so people aren't put off by a myriad of pull down menus to select, but I do think that if a POW chosen by us is to have any real merit, we should be able to rate the pictures by more aspects than just originality and aesthetics.

 

I apologise to the photographer of this particular POW for raising this here - it just seemed relevant based on comments above. This photo does nothing special for me - and I agree that there is little tension in the scene - but I respect it on its technical merits and composition.

 

 

I apologize for a comment not relating to this photo. Since the subject has come up several times with previous POW, I like to add my 2 cents.

I dont think someone has to take pictures to enjoy pictures. Therefore I dont see anything wrong with someone making a comment about a photograph even though they dont have any photographs to share. I do however find the I dont have a scanner excuse completely ridiculous. I dont have a scanner either but that doesnt stop from posting my pictures. There are numerous labs across the country that provide scanning services.

Two things here. IMO picture taking is about a lot of knowhow. There are many things, about light, composition, colors, a photographer have to know to make good pictures. I can take the opinion of a painter for example, as competent. But not somebodys who never took a picture.

About the rating categories: what can you call a beautyfull picture? I seen a lot of photographs wich was good photos but was not beautyfull. A lot of press photos cannot be rated due to aesthetics. Press photos should inform. They dont have to be beautyfull. Often the subject of the photos is not nice at all. As for originality, I agree it is very dificcult to take completly new pictures. Each photographer relies on the work of somebody else before him. This is what learning is about!

Stop arguing! :)

 

Make love. Not War.

I can't tell what the woman is doing nor what she's holding. Great contrast and cool idea, but it's the little things that make a big difference between a front-pager and an throw-away. The riot cop's eye is a bit dark, too. Dodging it out would add to his facial expression.

 

Keep up the good work.

It's a good thing Ellis Vener put up a few pictures, because otherwise it'd be obvious he knows nothing about photography!

I am very amused by the number of comments regardin the elve's stated reasons for liking the shot. I thought we were supposed to talk about the photo? In my opinion you cannot critique a photojournalism shot with the same criteria as you critique a portrait. They are two different animals with two different objectives. I like this picture a lot, as is.

Not bad. My main gripe with this pic is the fact that both the main leads are not actually face to face. For this image to have the visual impact intended they need to be staring directly at one another. I will say though that the exposure is just about right as the dark contrast actually sets the correct mood. Please accept though that this is only my opinion and unless we can accept constructive criticism or opinions we will get nowhere. I am jealous that you find yourself in the position to be able to get a chance to take great news pics.

I have to have my weekly fun....going into the POW to read the controversy. So much fun. My two cents: In my humble opinion, photojournalism is the ability to capture a moment and project a feeling, emotion, mood, reaction. This does just that. Shooting in this way means you have to compose the shot quickly and with the best angle provided by limitations and yet being quick enough not to miss the moment. My favorite piece of this image is the bored - glazed look of the cop in contrast to the agitated woman who is obviously directing her attention to the cop standing next to the one we see....and who is not in the frame. As to all the critique flack.... I think everyone is entitled to their opinion and that there is a constructive way to express that opinion. I once meant to write "kind of dull" on a crtique and went on to make suggestions...UNFORTUNATELY I made a typo and wrote "king of dull". The photographer wrote me and clearly I had hurt his feelings... I apologized and explained. Now when we communicate, I call him King and he calls me General. We got past it with humor.. but there is not need to be brutal here is there?

I presume the last article is partly directed at me. I hope I haven't given the impression that I was being very hard on the photographer. Far from it. But I believe it would be foolish to say that the pic is a good photojournalist shot when it plainly isn't. Why fool ourselves? I'm sure the photographer won't benefit from being lulled into a false sense of security.

Yes, the lady and the cop are not face to face..

so it kinda feels like I am looking at a collage.

And what's that white stuff in the middle?..

There is nothing to say except: a perfect picture!

I'd rather see more direct interaction between the two.