bridget_hunt 0 Posted July 6, 2003 This is a great shot, I can't believe it hasn't got more ratings? Simple clean lines that tell their own story. Lovely tones too. Well done. Link to comment
tom t 0 Posted July 6, 2003 Simple composition. Good tones and GREAT angle! Very effective! I have nothing to suggest to make it better (sorry - I just like it the way it is!) Link to comment
carol_watson 0 Posted July 7, 2003 Great clarity and tones in this shot! The angle makes it look like she's walking on the clouds. Was the subject of this photo on a hill? Link to comment
scott bulger 0 Posted July 7, 2003 I wish that thwere were some feet visible in this. It appears as if the have been cropped from the image (Whether post production or in camera) and I feel that it would greatly benefit from the additional anchor. Link to comment
philmorris 0 Posted July 7, 2003 I agree the tones and sharpness here are outstanding. Great blacks. Yet as Scott says, the picture needs something to root the figure to the ground. Two feet would be an idea. Weve simply got sky and clouds and whilst that represents a distraction free background it deprives the viewer of the context in which this figure walked past your camera. Link to comment
bgelfand 1,255 Posted July 7, 2003 Nice sharp focus and good tone, but why cut off the feet. Link to comment
brad j 0 Posted July 8, 2003 Why do we have to cut off the feet? Just let your imagination goes. Without feet the picture still works for me. Well done! Link to comment
joe_garrick 0 Posted July 8, 2003 Just for the sake of being contrary, I have to ask those that want feet what they think having the ground the feet are on would do to the composition? I'm not trying to pick a fight, but you don't get the feet without the ground. Something tells me that the lack of feet and accompanying ground is a huge part of the appeal of this photo. Link to comment
mclaine 0 Posted July 8, 2003 This has the potential to stimulate a worthwhile discussion. Of course both sides to the debate have valid positions on the issue. I can see how some could enjoy the picture as it is, and my desire for feet and ground reflects a purely subjective view based upon my personal preferences in the crafting of images. I like a degree of completeness in composition, which the lack of feet compromises, and I like an interpretable quantity of environment to support environmental portaits. I doubt there would be much argument against the suggestion that the picture can be classified as an environmental portrait. We don't see the face. Mostly what we are presented with is the clothing and working tools, which constitute part of the physical environment of the person portrayed. What is withheld (along with the feet), is a sense of place, a "grounding" of the image, somewhere on planet earth. The title informs us that the picture was taken near Hanoi, but apart from the mode of dress and the baskets, there are no visual cues to the fact. It could just as easily be taken in an open space in Launceston, Tasmania (my city) or on top of Half Dome, Yosemite. I can accept as Bradley suggests, that for some, imagination will suffice to fill in the gaps, and indeed for others, the lack of environment may aid the undistracted appreciation of the dress and posture of the subject. My desire for a base is purely subjective, as is my desire for a certain completeness of composition. Link to comment
atieh_noori1 0 Posted July 8, 2003 you are very good photographer.Im photographer in iran please looking my picture. Link to comment
joe_garrick 0 Posted July 9, 2003 John - I think your characterization of this as an environmental portrait is correct, but i can't get past the idea that having a dark band of ground running across the bottom of the frame would completely change the aesthetics of the shot. I don't know that I'm necessarily getting the "walking on air" feel that some are getting, but that may be partly it. I really just like the clean lines and the motion. It would be interesting to see a version with the feet and ground for comparison. Link to comment
cux 0 Posted July 9, 2003 It's a great picture. The balance of composition, the tones, the light, are excellent. Me too I would have preferred an environmental context (and the feet, of course) but this is another kind of photo. We have to take and comment the picture as is. The better we can do is suggest to crop or remove something, not to add. At my opinion the lack of a environmental frame adds some fascination to the picture. Link to comment
jeff_oxford 0 Posted July 9, 2003 Striking and evocative image. I appreciate the fact that the feet are cropped where they are. Besides having your own reasons, it just works. Balance is pheneomenal in this picture. Link to comment
nikos 0 Posted July 9, 2003 The subject has been photographed a lot at roughly the same composition. Yet, your photo has a unique quality - I cannot put my finger precisely on it. It's something about the movement, the harsh light, the confusing background.. The more I look at it, the more it convinces me that this is not a human I am looking at, but a cloudwalking marionette.. maybe I need to get some sleep.. ;) Link to comment
john_kroy 0 Posted July 28, 2003 Lovely, can't we see the whole body though? Near perfect as it is though. Link to comment
daniel_wyeth1 0 Posted July 30, 2003 This image has a lot of good old-fashioned qualities. An interesting subject and a nice range of tones. Link to comment
Recommended Comments
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