dcphotog1

The people that look at the techy stuff will say the part of her sleeve in the foreground is out of focus, and perhaps you could knock it down a bit. But she's a very beautiful model and the light on her face is nice, I thin it's a wonderful photo.

I guess I'm just not a fan of staged photography like this. If I were, perhaps I'd find it more interesting. I certainly can't see mentioning it in the same breath as Eisenstadt's sailor, that was not set up and created, it was a real moment frozen in time.

 

I think this photographer has done a great job with lighting, exposure, wonderful color and everything technical. The content just isn't real though, it's staged. We can't create moments, we have to find them.

Reflection of a trumpet player in the bell of his trumpet. Shot this

last fall during football season.

I like the tones, it has that selenium look to it that I always liked. The model has nice legs too.

But the art side of it is just cheesy to me. Right up there with dogs playing poker.

Photo of chemist. I used one light w/grid on his face and an overhead

projector to place the images of chemical models on his face.

I think it looks great as it is, no need to change a thing. I love the image, what a mysterious looking place.

 

The only thing I'd like to see, and this goes for almost every image of the week I see on the site is some text describing it. I don't mean tech details, most of us already know how to take photos. What I would like to see is a cutline and some info about the place. Photos leave me curious about the people they are of and the places they show. It would be cool if the shooters would write a short few lines to go with them when they are selected.

After viewing this great image I googled "Riga bay seashore, Latvia". I am glad the photographer gave us that info, the reason I am posting this is because so many give nothing. Google took me to a few sites where I read about Latvia, so I learned a few new things today and that's always a good thing! Thanks Vilnis!

Wonderful image! I love it. Where was it taken? Did you just happen to be there when the person walked by or was it arranged? Very interesting piece of archetecture, I would love to read more details about the photo.

I have no problem with the composition, I think it's a great shot. I just want a cutline. I judge photos for competition every month and I mark higher when a shooter knows how to write a cutline.

What a great photo, I have no critique to offer.

 

But there is something that often bothers me about images like this. No cutline! I am constantly drawn to photographs as they take us to places we only would have dreamed of otherwise. But I really wish there was some text to explain where this was and what the giraffe was doing. I really don't care about the technical data, I work with a camera everyday and often that stuff is just rhetoric, but I need captions to satisfy the enormous curiosity that I have about these images. My work is primarily photojournalism so I guess part of the reason I feel this way is I am used to writing captions for all of my images. Anyway, it's a nice shot I just wish I knew what country this was in, wheter it's a zoo or he's poking through a backyard fence, what he is investigating, etc. I love that the photo intriques me, now I want to learn something new.

I love it! It has a very Holga-like feel to it. The bright background and other so-called flaws that others refer to works fine for me. Those old standards about things always having to be so sharp and clean are just that-OLD. Keep that stuff with the dying dinosaurs of the PPA, this is wonderful.

What a pretty scene! As a photojournalist I have only one problem, no cutline. The photo has me wanting to know more about this place and these people. For me to say it has me wanting to know more is a compliment to the photo also, I find it very pleasing.

Well to add to some of the above comments I will say I am someone is opposed to digital manipulations even being in forums on photography, they belong in graphic design forums.

 

That said, this is very doable in camera and I love it. It's a beautiful scene, maybe it could stand for a little less tilt, but still a beautiful scene and very well done. It's a lot nicer than that silly ol angel photo for sure! If it had to be critiqued, and I assume the photographer in question would want to her that I would have considered using a low angle and getting some of the plants in the foreground, or perhaps getting closer to the buildings. But it rocks, great shot.

 

Also, I'd like to say that I absolutely love the image posted inside here by Pat Hilander. That is awesome Pat! I actually like it better than the image of the week, but I like them both.

--

Interesting points.

 

"Let's throw this in the mix, why does it matter if set up or not??"

 

Well to respond to Mary's point above, it matters to a lot of us in the realm of photojournalism these days. If it a model or commercial shot then it's different. Staged art is one thing, staged photojournalism is another. It's a question of ethics, and in my opinion someone doing staged street photography is discrediting the profession.

 

After looking at the link and the guys portfolio and website I see it is a model shot, and he is not showing it as a street shot. So the setup part is OK and does not bother me.

 

As far as the discussions on whether or not the clutter and the uneven tones are preferable, it's a matter of opinion. To me this really works. Then again I am a more of a journalistic shooter than anything else. For someone with the PPA mindset perhaps this image would not work, but a more modern photographer is going to see it differently. It's all a matter of where you are coming from. The last time I attended a judging for a PPA photo contest I was amazed at how the images were all so technically perfect, yet so lifeless and boring. For me, this is a great image. Like many I see here I wish there was more information included. I could care less about technical details, if you take photos for a living you know how to do it(I might think different with other types of work though, IR, pinhole and such). I would like to know what the assignment was, or perhaps just some general info regarding usage, etc. Cutlines ought to be featured if it's photojournalism.

I like it much better if is unposed rather than posed. If it was not staged it shows a young woman caught in a moment of silent reflection, but if it was staged it shows the photgraphers vision of such. Would be nice to see labels such as "photo" and "photo illustration" on such images.

I can say a few things, but I like the origional better than anything else shown above. The tech flaws are not a problem, the goal here wasn't to capture a technically perfect image. If you put all your efforts into technical perfection you lose the soul of your images, especially with street photography or photojournalism. As someone else asked, I'd like to know if it was staged or not. In other words is it a photo or a photo-illustration?

Hey, thanks for sharing! I got to see the Ramones on several occasions and have some great memories from thier shows. I was browsing the gallery thumbnails and that caught my eye.

It's a great nature photo. It looks sort of like the smokies, which is one of my favorite places.

But you are looking for critique. First off I'd say I don't like the grayscale frame. It really wrecks the whole thing for me, if a photo is good enough it doesn't need cheesy digital manipulation to add interest. I would prefer to see the whole thing in color(or grayscale if you prefer), but not with the frame, it looks amatuerish. As far as the color area in the center perhaps you could amp the blacks just a little tiny bit, but it's hard to say viewing it on the web. Composition is good, I really can't say much as to how you could have positioned yourself differently without seeing the scene. I can say you have me long to go backpacking again.

Nice. I used to skate when I was young, it's an escape for a certain type of person, hard to explain if you were never into it. For me it's an awesome image.

Great tones, perhaps composition could be improved. It's hard to critique without actually seeing the place. Interesting theme though, the jungle gym no more. I remember playing on one like that as a kid.

Well that's news to me, I have always loved that image. Note that he did make it very clear that he cropped it though, and his lens was blocked as he shot. Many standards and ethical guidelines change over the years. Dorthea Lange's "Migrant Mother" had a part of a hand airbrushed out of the original image, that's something that could get a photojournalist fired or at least in a lot of trouble today. All that said, I shoot images all the time and crop them. I wish I had to discipline to shoot that way though!

Henri Cartier-Bresson held to the same belief as Mr. Avril, he also did not crop. As I said before that is why when we were all shooting film what was considered the proper way to print journalistic photos was in a filed carrier showing the edges. Of course, this rule doesn't apply to everything one shoots at a paper, sports for example. But with this type of work uncropped is the standard. It's been a while since people took that into notice as digital has come around.

Anothter point Mr. Avril makes that is relative to this discussion is that shooting like that gets you into your scene. It is a subject I have not heard anyone get into in a long time but a very worthy one. Those of you in the field have heard people talk about how excessive chimping makes you less aware of what needs to go on and takes away from your shooting. It's a simular deal. I believe it is relative to this discussion also, but I will look at that other forum after lunch.

I think it's the best photo I have seen as a photo of the week on this site to date. I don't get any of the discussion on cropping, this image is about a message not composition. If the shooter moved here and there and centered things or whatever the message would be the same, and it wouldn't be more powerful. This guy did his job. The fact that fog was there and everything else, damn.

I will add one thing to the cropping discussion. With people that do this type of work the way they generally like to crop them is the way they are shot. That's why when you see images shot on film displayed so many photojournalist will print the negs in a carrier that's been filed out. It's not about an artsy black line around the image it's about showing what you saw in the frame. From the dimensions of the photo, I don't think this guy cropped anything. Kudos to Jean-Baptiste Avril!

A photo I shot of a hawk. Camera wa a D1H and I used a 80-200 lens.

Just going through old negs, trying to find stuff to print for xmas

gifts. Anyone like this?

This was taken the night of hurricane Ivan. The rain had stopped and

Ileya had to go to the park. Kiesel is a no-leash dog park in Auburn

where dogs can run and play.

Photo taken with D1H, 17-35 lens.