CAUGHT RED HANDED

so funny David...an exchange between the photographer and the dog in their own world...

Did you give him a biscuit? Very good street shot...Marjorie

Thanks for the look. It's a little change of pace for me.

I originally had intended to do a shot down low of the feet and the bench. I got down low, and the damn dog catches me and turns around. When the dog did that, the man was alerted, and turned just as I snapped. I didn't have anything to give poochie.

priceless! and i thought you didn't do cute animal pics :-)

It was only by accident. Don't be typecasting me now. :)

Just looking at the scene made me smile... accident or not ! The dog looks so "serious"....and... very nice legs exhibition...;-))

Another excellent photo.

 

I love the content, the subject matter, the main subject, the feet, the naturalness, the composition. The dog's stare is so intent, so believable, and so direct it's almost scary at the same time that it's so engaging. Good graphic elements, too, the horizontals of the bench planks and the brickwork in the foreground. Great perspective and wonderfully whimsical view under the bench.

 

Processing puzzles me a bit. It's unclear whether you were going for a high key kind of look and if you intentionally were going toward an almost illustrated feel. The dog in particular has an almost statue-like quality. I guess I see this as a wonderful street shot, but there's something rather unnatural about how you've presented it. The shadows are quite light and, once again, most of the elements are given equal weight in terms of emphasis through lighting, focusing, etc., so it's rather flat in terms of actual dimensionality. You seem to have avoided any rich blacks. I'd have to know more of your intentions here. Are you pursuing an almost Rockwell-like approach, that hyper-realism he's so good at? Certainly a valid way to see this. I'm just not convinced one way or the other with the technique here.

 

That being said, I can see the progress you are making in your honing of technical skills. Even though I have some hesitation about knowing just what you're after here, you certainly seem to be converting with more adeptness and using your exposure and lighting with a lot more clarity and purpose. I notice your more recent photos having a refinement in terms of technique that is quite obvious.

I agree completely with Fred except I'm inclined to be a bit more blunt ( a lot in fact) This one is in dire need of contrast. Yes, it's a street shot and a damned good one that I would have felt lucky to get but it will be infinetly better if you use curves. True also about the processing but here you're not finished yet. Stately dog btw. Willian Wegman has immortalised them in a terrific way

I'll go with Fred and Ton (with whom I've learned never to disagree b/c they're always right) on the processing, but I think otherwise this is a great shot with a perfect captured moment and a really nice composition.

Thanks. After you it was not all roses.

Wow! This is so interesting. From the start, I debated posting this. Not because I saw technical flaws in it, but because I didn't think it had much going for it intrinsically. It seemed kind of frivolous, and lacking in interest. At least that was the way I perceived it would be received. And then you LIKE it! And the part that disturbs me even more than your critical comments (which did not disturb me at all) is the fact that I did not see the faults you mention. It's sort of like a kid getting a Christmas present of a shiny new toy, and running next door to tell his buddy, who then advises that the present has a serious flaw. Okay, that's a bit of exaggeration, but the part about being really pissed off at myself is absolutely true. Too often I seem not to be able have a critical eye. Once you started pointing those things out, much of it made sense. But, Jeez, why didn't I see that?

 

Now I have to tell you that I saw it as a straight forward image. Try to avoid blown highlights (woman's face, i.e.), and don't have blocked out shadows (the bench slats looked black to me). Not trying to do anything fancy. And that's the part that pisses me off. If I can't do straight forward right, how the f am I going to do tricky right?

 

So, I'll admit I'm completely at a loss for words. Let me vegetate on this a bit. Do understand I'm not in the least angry with you, or the critics following you. I'm just trying to figure out how I can avoid such misjudgment in the future.

 

Thank you, once again, for your comments.

See comment to Fred. Also though I am sure I did use a curves adjustment. Apparently not well enough. But I did. I suspect from what Fred said that we are talking about more than just a curves adjustment. Thanks so much for your thoughts.

You gutless wonder. You are just afraid to take Fred and Ton on! Just kidding. I'd be voting with them too. Thanks for the look and your thoughts.

we all cock up [if you'd only knew ;-) ] but frankly speaking I'd rather cock up on a beauty like this which is fairly easy to correct than on a mediocre one. You'd be surprised how far a nicely shaped S-curve will get you here for starters. That's technics. I'm not surprised because sometimes when working on a photo for some time it's easy to overlook the most obvious. What surprises me is that you think this to be a fairly straightforward photo without much going for it, it's anything but and I would be very glad to have this one photo in my portfolio.

A very eloquent interraction, one that communicates without words. The dog looks more interesting, not to mention, interested, than the humans. Nice work.

I've done that countless times, myself, David. I'm no great shakes at the technical end of things but sometimes I work quite a bit on a picture and think I've got it just right. Then the next day I look at it and wonder what the hell I was thinking. By that time I've usually posted it where my misguided efforts can be viewed by everyone.

 

Anyway, with this picture, Fred's Norman Rockwell analogy strikes me as on the money. My first thought when I saw this was it would have been better left in color but beyond that, consult the experts (Fred and Ton seem to be right at hand).

David, cool composition & caption. Like it a lot for its originality,simplicity and humour.

There's a simplicity of content, a very human (and doggie) story, and a decisive moment to boot. That's the beauty here.

 

It's rare that I don't work on a photo for hours, days, or weeks, and then put it aside for at least 24 hours before coming back to it with a fresh pair of eyes. Often I am amazed at what I've missed the first time around. Sometimes the eyes will be mine, other times a photographer friend's who gives me an honest and objective perspective. Actually seeing what I do is as difficult as knowing how to take a good photo. Don't be hard on yourself. You're not unusual and you're not alone. When working on my final portrait of the series of Ian, I went for days with a version where the lighting on his chest looked very unnatural and unreal and not very appealing, because of some darkening I had done to the lower half. Only after a day's rest from it and an observation from a friend did I go back and actually start over from scratch on the post processing, getting a much better final result.

 

Ton, I think we now know that David seems to be leaning toward more contrast and a straightforward image, which I think is a good choice, but I think there would have been other choices for David to have made besides that one. That's why I was beating around the bush a little. Not to be nice or overly protective of David's feelings (Lord knows, I wouldn't want to save David any heartache!), but to be an advocate for his personal vision. If he had been seeing this as more illustrative, or more mid or high key, different advice would have been in order.

Fun image, Dave, and a good one for teaching composition students about "center of interest".

good woofs to this photo. The dog looks like a dachshund on stilts, his thinness nicely contrasts the ultra-wide lady on the bench (do you think she's 10-20mm or a fish eye?). I like the post-processing treatment you gave it - at least it seems you did something to it. Cheers, Micheal

Fantastic how the dog look.Giovanni

Thanks to all of you for your comments. I'll be trying to spruce this one up a bit, hopefully to improve it.

To those of you who suggested the image was somewhat less than stellar, I have done a rework. I still am not very pleased with it, but I seem to not have a clue as to how I can make it any better.

Great B&W David - love the off center composition.