trasparenze veneziane

If you would have shown only the lady with the transparent dress, it would be a bit of a vulgar shot. The lady looking at it, makes it a fantastic street shot.

It goes to my favourites with full marks.

Ben

A very nice result with beautiful lighting, Niki!

Absolutely perfect and unique capture!

Sempre in giro, eh? Molto carina e...simpatica!

I really like the interplay between the two main subjects. This is another shot that gives the viewer the opportunity to apply his/her own interpretation, should he be so inclined to do so (which I am). The younger (or she looks younger anyway) woman seems to be in some kind of pain and unaware that the older woman is looking at her. What could that older woman be thinking? Thinking back to Fred's philosophy topic regarding ambiguity in photography and how we might miss other details if we get too caught up on trying to interpret the story, I can see where such might occur with this particular shot. Lots of activity going on in the background. However, for me, it's the imagined thoughts of the women in the foreground that provide most of the interest here - well, that and the shapely legs of the younger one.

To me, this is a bit of a missed opportunity. Obviously the main hook, both as I see it visually and I think as the photographer was intending given the title, is the translucency of the dress. ("Transparent" doesn't describe it, though it's a more poetic word and poetic license to use it seems fine here.) That lighting on the dress could have a nice visual and rhythmic interplay with the six lights on the square. If the perspective had been different, where the photographer wasn't looking up at the scene so much, perhaps to exclude the sky (which is exposed in a way that dominates the scene, the sky being bright enough to lessen some of the drama of the lighting throughout the rest of the scene) and the background had been limited more to the darker buildings, all of the lighting would be much more evident and effective, IMO, and the women's faces could be quite a bit less in shadow. I'm missing the facial expressions for the most part. A different perspective would also be less awkward in that I currently feel like I'm looking up the woman's skirt and it feels awkward and inappropriate in this particular shot. Another photo that felt more voyeuristic, etc. that could work, but that doesn't seem to be what this photo is about. There is a nice dynamic set up by the placement of both women and the way the one looks at the other, which does set up the feeling of narrative and connection but I think some of the narrative potential was in both the lighting and the facial expressions, neither of which were used as well as they might have been.

I wouldn't post it as a substitute, but in response to Fred's comment, I tried a little of the Nik HDR on it, and that balances out the exposure, without too much glowing edges, to show both faces, darkens the sky relatively, and brings out detail in the architecture. Improvement? Depends on what you like, don't it?
I'll trust the aesthetic judgment of the photographer anyhow. In this case the original image as shown seems to me to give a better sense of the place, sun beating down, feels like Italy.

This is a bit tricky, IMO, though I appreciate what you're saying. In offering each other critiques and as each of us tries to learn and grow as photographers, I know that I'm often saying about both myself and others that I don't always trust my aesthetic judgments or those of my photographic peers and that part of the way to grow is to hear what others' aesthetic judgments are and then decide for myself where my own vision for a photo fits into that or could possibly be changed or improved. BTW, you may have misinterpreted my comments if you used an HDR filter to try to get close to what I was talking about. I wasn't suggesting balancing out the exposure at all. I was saying sort of the opposite, that without the need to expose for the sky, there would have been more inherent contrast to allow the lighting to have more dramatic effect and the faces might not have been as back lit as they are currently.

I, too, think that the transparent dress is the main point of this shot, and that works: but is it enough? I suppose just the transparent-dressed woman would make a shot on her own (a voyeuristic pleasure perhaps), but when the woman on the right is added, it perhaps diminishes the impact of the striking effect of the sun. Of course, the older woman cannot see the transparency that we can.

On the other hand, I suppose one could contrast the youthful figure of the woman on the left with the older woman on the right: one so young and one so old (if you see what I mean). In time the younger will become like the older one. So one could read the photo as a comment on the passage of time. So I guess I've talked myself into quite liking the shot.

While I typically agree with Robin, I disagree (with Fred as well) in this instance that the transparent skirt is the main point of the shot, in spite of the title (perhaps 'transparent' isn't merely referring to the skirt - could it also refer to how the older woman is perhaps seeing through her based on her garb?). If you remove the older woman, the shot doesn't hold nearly the interest for me. Because of the framing, I assume the photographer was well aware of both subjects and the interplay between them (or at least the older woman's look of envy, as I interpret it). I can just hear the older gal thinking 'oh sure, and here I thought I was looking pretty good in my revealing top and short shorts. You're time will come sweety.' I also disagree that the older woman cannot see the transparency. I imagine she saw the woman coming outside of the frame, and was staring her down all the way. Having both women in the frame totally changes the character of the shot from simply having the younger, one being more comical and slice-of-life, and the other being more voyeuristic.

Bill, when I said that the translucent dress was the main "hook" of the shot, I chose my words carefully and didn't mean it was the point of the shot. A hook is something that grabs the viewer's attention, often to something more deep. I happen to agree with you that the narrative of the two women is what the photo centers on. As you know, I won't be filling in the hypothetical details of narrative because I think a photo's visual narrative is something often better left much more open, suggestive, and non-literal.

I love this picture and your comments demonstrate that this picture really says something and make us wondering. The only think that bothers me about the composition is the dome on the right, I cut it out on my screen and the scene looks more balanced, without the weight of the dome it gives more rhythmic to the scene.

Understood Fred about the 'hook,' but in regards to your other comment, I don't know how you can look at the expression of the older woman or even the younger, and not have some sort of thought as to what they are thinking. I know this was discussed in detail, so I'm not trying to rehash it here. Just expressing my amazement at your ability to leave it so open.

Adriano,

Visualizing the shot with your cropping suggestion does make it work better. It creates a nice diagonal from the taller women in front to the back of the frame, leading your eye right through the scene.

Bill, although a little dense at times, THIS ESSAY by Sontag might help with where I'm coming from.

A few salient quotes, in brief, not meant as gospel but rather just to stimulate some thoughts on content and interpretation . . .

Fred,

I found this line rather ironic, given the title and content of the POW:

I think photography, particularly street photography, might be seen a bit differently from other art/photography forms. When there are people in a street photograph, they are real, and are likely thinking something, given people are always thinking something. For me, one of the most interesting aspects of such photos is guessing at what they might be thinking, or what they are feeling, which is often easily discerned from the situation and facial expressions. But that's also different from trying to interpret why the photographer took the shot or what he was trying to portray, if anything.

In the POW, we can guess at what the photographer's intent was, or try to interpret it, but that would be pure conjecture and adds nothing of value for the viewer (why did Ansel Adams photograph the Grand Tetons? - who cares!). But when living beings are included (and I refer to animals as well as humans), I think it does add something of personal value to consider what they are thinking/feeling. You are probably even cheating yourself out of a more emotional experience by not doing so.

I agree, Adriano, about the crop.

Niki does wonderful studio work. I think this street shot can hold its own. There is a naughty seeing the forbidden comic element to this photograph. If you look closely, however, you'll see that the vital elements are neatly obscured by dress's patterns. The joke is on the viewer. There is more to be seen in the second figure. That's part of this visual joke. I like this photograph as it is. Very good overall structure.

Thumbs up.

I agree what Adriano says about the dome visible on the right. In my opinion this picture really tells a moment of daily life in our beautiful Venice. Title is appropriate to the scene and that left side transparency well transmits the sense of strong light of a sunny, summer day in Italy.