davidnoblephotography

<p>It's in the eye of the beholder, isn't it?</p>

<p>One man's object of beauty could be another man's car wreck.</p>

<p>Totally objective.</p>

 

Erm....

 

I'd quite like to do the Pirelli Calendar.

Hello Everyone.

 

I recently purchased a FinePix S9500, and I must say, I'm rather pleased with

it.

 

The camera I was replacing was my old FinePix S7000. Ideally, I would have

liked to replace like with like, however, I couldn't find an S7000 anywhere.

 

Are Fuji still making them?

Hello folks.

 

I've recently got back into snapping bands as they are performing, as I'm

currently doing a lot of stuff with musicians at work.

 

There's a new folder in my PN portfolio called BANDS & ENTERTAINERS, and if you

care to take a look, you'll see that the focus isn't sharp in any of the shots.

 

My question is: When taking these kinds of pictures, is it essential to get

sharp focus, or does the slight blurriness add a kind of LIFE, if you will, to

the image?

 

Personally, I quite like my shots, obviously. The performances are usually full

of energy, and I think I capture it nicely, but when I look at professional

photos of concerts and the like, they are always in perfect focus. Is this

always essential?

Thanks, everyone.

 

Keep the advice coming...

Hello everyone.

 

I'm looking for some advice... I have a houseful of my own photography,

covering all types and genres, and I would really like to get them exhibited

somewhere.

 

I know I'm not likely to get in at the Tait, but any small place would do: a

cafe, a shop, anywhere.

 

If any of you have had your work exhibited, please let me know how you got your

foot in the door.

 

Cheers.

if you take a look in the "PEOPLE" folder in my PN portfolio, all the shots there were taken at weddings. I wasn't the official snapper, I was DJing at the night-time party. So it may be a good idea to hang around, because most of the best informal shots can be captured when everyone has had a drink! ;-)

Ha Ha Ha - whilst trawling Photo.net i came across this sexy tree picture by our colleague Josh Myers...

AND ABOVE ALL... Appear confident. If the wedding party get a whiff of your nervousness, eyebrows will be raised.

Well, in the ten years I've been doing photography as a serious hobby, I've only ever done two weddings, and both have been friends' weddings. weddings are not so much difficult to shoot, but because it is thier "special day", the pressure is very much on the photographer to get it right.

 

There are a few simple shots that I would recommend:

 

1. Get a few shots of the wedding party arriving at church - the cars, etc.

 

2. If you're allowed in church, get at least one good one of the bride walking down the aisle.

 

3. Signing the register.

 

4. Bride & Groom outside church (preferably on church steps) after ceremony. Get a few of the family and friends with the happy couple outside church, too.

 

5. If there's a park near to the church, why not take the wedding party, ie Bride, Groom, Best Man, bridesmaids, parents, ushers, etc, to the park, and pick a nice spot to have some photos done. group the people however you like.

 

6. Make sure you get some good informal shots throughout the day as well. It may be an idea to present the Bride & Groom with TWO albums: one formal wedding album in colour, and an informal black & white presentation. I did this for both weddings I photographed, and the idea seemed to go down well.

 

I hope I've been of some assistance here. You must post the results and tell us all how it went.

Right... I'm off to take some sexy pictures of trees. :D

Well explained, Fred.

 

i still stand by my opinion of Sturges's work though. :)

E BAY E BAY E BAY E BAY E BAY

I've been on holiday, and away for a couple of weeks, and just got back. Read the whole thread through, and I'm quite proud of myself for starting this one off!!!

 

I'd like to make a couple of points regarding the work of Jock Sturges: Zoe pointed out that Sturges took the photos in places where society accepted nudity. Well, that's all well and good, but he chose to exhibit the pictures in places where nudity was not accepted as the norm - especially when it involves very young children.

 

Zoe also points out that the authorities has a problem with Sturges taking family portraits on a french nudist beach. She asks us "What could be more innocent?"

 

I ask: What was a man doing on a nudist beach with a camera???

 

"Hello, madame, I am a man with a camera on a nudist beach. Would you mind if I took a few snaps of you and your children - naked?"

 

Come on - this is perverse!!!

Sorry, but I have to take issue with Fred Goldsmith here...

 

Fred, how can you say that my photograph is more exploitative than any of Sturges's work?

 

I have a photograph here - which I took of a professional model, who was getting paid for the work she was doing, she was a consenting adult, and furthermore, you can't actually "see" anything in the shot because she is kneeling behind the speaker.

 

Now, how you think that is more exploitative than full-frontal nude shots of children who are clearly not even of school age, and clearly not getting any sort of reward for being made to pose like that - I find hard to justify.

 

Could you please explain yourself, Fred.

I guess it's all about personal opinion at the end of the day.

 

I don't think that we should start to criticize each other for our personal opinions.

Hmm... I took a glance at Jock Sturges's web-site, and quite frankly, I can see why yhe FBI were so interested in him.

 

Some people may view this sort of thing as art, but you have to admit - some of his models seem incredibly young.

 

What constitutes child porn? That's another thread.

 

Needless to say - I didn't enjoy his pictures, and left the site after only looking at about half a dozen images.

Thanks Zoe. Glad we're on good terms again. :) I'm not familiar with Jock Sturges... Do you know of any sites where we can take a look at his work?

I had a load of un-developed 35mm in my old house.

 

When I moved, I just threw it away. I had no idea what was on it, and I didn't really care.

 

I don't miss them - because I never knew what they were.

 

I guess we just move on...

Agree? Who with?

Hey - I think Ms. Wiseman must have a problem with me...

 

Zoe, what is this forum about? What is any forum about? It's about sparking debate. That is what I've done here, and the thread is getting a lot of response - so a job well done on my part, I believe.

 

If in your last entry here, you were trying to insinuate that I was in any way immature in my approach to shooting nudes, then you would be very much mistaken.

 

I doubt if you've even taken the time to look at any of my photographs...

Hmm... i seem to have started something here...

Yann, are you saying that men don't appreciate pictures of men in the same way that they appreciate pictures of women? That's exactly what I'm saying.

Jeff, do you think of the male form in the same way when it comes to photography? If you don't, then I think I may have a valid point here...

Zoe, you can't have sex with a flower...