Jim_Tardio

A fine portrait but way over sharpened...especially in the hair.

And my last comment is not to imply that Juergen is not a photographer.

OK, Michael, technically it's a photograph. The missing ingredient here is the photographer, since one never needs to learn the basics of photography, or how to apply them to make this "photograph".

That's all well and good, Michael, and I don't think anyone would dispute that. It's a wonderful image...it's just not a photograph.

Let me first state that I think Juergen's portfolio is wonderful, and that he's obviously a very fine photographer who understands the photographic process.

But this is simply not a photograph. To me, a photograph requires a camera. Whether it be digital, film, pinhole, whatever...that's the required piece of equipment. This reminds me of people who make Xerox copies of their butts...or other private parts. Interesting and fun to look at, but not a photograph.

And it's not just the lack of the camera. What's missing is seeing the opportunity for a photograph, the act of taking the picture, choosing the subject & light, the f-stop, the shutter speed.

Here's another shot I found in my box of rejects. Not a good photo by any stretch, but it's a similar shot.

Here's a shot from my files for comparison. I like Dan's shot, whether it be manipulated or not. You feel very small when you're standing in St. Peters, and his shot conveys that feeling.

Since Charo claims that the missing feet were hidden by the slide mount, I guess we have the perfect photo here.

But I agree with Tony. The technical part of me keeps me from fully enjoying the photo, even though I think it says the same thing with or without the feet.

It's like when I was a kid sitting in school and the teacher would erase the chalkboard but leave one tiny line of chalk up in a corner. I wanted so badly to run up there and erase it completely.

If a viewfinder has 92% coverage, it means that the viewer is only seeing 92% of what is getting recorded on the film.

So called frame coverage has nothing to do with it...I've never heard this term. If you have anything less than a 100% finder, there will be more recorded on the film than what you saw in the viewfinder. For Nikon, I believe only the F5, F4 and the F3 have 100% viewfinders.

One possible problem for this is that the viewfinder of your Nikon FM10 has a frame coverage of only 92%, So it is very possible that you saw those missing feet in your viewfinder, but were never recorded on the film.

I'm afraid this is wrong. A viewfinder with 92% coverage would only show you what's going to cover 92% of the frame. In fact, there would actually be more on the frame than what Charo saw...as proved by his discovery when he removed the mount.

Maybe they're all just talking at the same time. I come a big Italian family where they never stop talking. It wouldn't be too difficult for me to catch them all on film with their mouths open.

But of course the beauty of this shot is that David caught it in an instant on the street. It would have been perfect, IMO, without the man in the background, but the magic of the shot still shows through.

In the professional world, cropping is as routine as editing copy is. Take a look at any magazine, book, or newspaper and you'll find a wide assortment of image sizes.

Thanks, Marshall, for the correction...Grammy instead of Emmy. In no way do I mean any criticism of Chris or his work...he has an outstanding portfolio here.

My remark was aimed more at the elves for being fooled. But I'd be guilty of that, too. The thought that this was a wax figure would have never crossed my mind.

This is like when they gave the Emmy to Milli Vinilli (spelling).

Great shot, Tony, one that I've admired many times...but my heart belongs to that little, (nasty) dog in Greece who was getting a nose full. That's a classic.

I'm not a real big fan of portrait shooting, but I find your work much more enjoyable than the sterile, dime-a-dozen shots offered by most.

Your style is instantly recognizable...and that's a great accomplishment in this day and age. I wish I had the same gift.

After wondering how the child was hanging in mid-air, I realized it was a doll, or toy of some sort. Nice job...makes me think of Main Street, USA.

Great mood capturing shot. I enjoyed your whole portfolio.

On the photoshop thing...A year ago I would have completely agreed that anything PSed was fake, but after watching the recent special on Ansel Adams, and noting the countless hours of burning and dodging he did in the darkroom, all I can say now is that I appreciate Photoshop.

That's not to say that "anything goes" but certainly some contrast adjustment and a little burning and dodging is Ok.

It has a wonderful, calming feel to it. Very nice.

I must say that I like almost all of the "improved" versions of your shot better than the one you presented, except the cropping.

Was this, by chance, scanned to a Kodak Photo CD? It seems to have the same overall look of the raw scans I receive via this method.

I bet your original looks more like Sean's version. By the way, I like the subject and the Motown comparison.

Absolutely Outstanding.

Yes...why is it that everything seems more coloful in Italy? It just must be the quality of the light. Wonderful mood for this shot, and very fitting for the last day of a trip.

Noticed your raisin brand shot was taken in St. Louis. Hope this person wasn't a result of betting on the Super Bowl.

You've missed the most glaring fault of all, Tony.

This shot wasn't taken with a Leica.

I don't think the above crop works all that well...the shot loses its depth and I no longer feel like I'm standing in the room. It's more like I'm now looking through a window.

I like Bill's adjusted version that he linked to above, toning down the sweater, etc...but this version is just as good.

Speaking as someone who does a lot of travel shooting, you come upon a scene like this and just shoot it. If the scene doesn't change before your eyes, then you think about getting around guys in yellow sweaters, etc...You often can't work a shot the way you'd like in these situations. They just change or disappear too fast.