simon evans.

Tony, I couldn't agree more.

 

The lack of unbiased reporting by American media has had large numbers of US citizens checking the BBC for relatively independent coverage (although the attitude of the US and GB forces means embedded journalists can't necessarily broadcast what and from where they want). So where's free America now? It seems that anyone pro-war tries to silence dissent.

 

Mike Johnston on the Killing of Mazen Dana

The balance between patterned roof and the wall/windows is good, but I find the blue tone a little too strong. I would prefer to see either all or none of the wall that intrudes into the bottom LH corner.

 

A different take on the same subject is at http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=565321

Glad you like the photo, it was taken my 50mm f1.8 Zuiko at about f4.

There seems to be genuine affection and warmth in this interaction. The close crop works to capture it. Nice one Jim.

Thanks Douglas. I didn't want to boost the contrast too much, as I quite liked the subtlety of texture in the leaves. I hope to print it sometime, I think it might look better as a 9x6" than on the screen.

In this frame you seem to have captured the essence of hillclimbs, the fraternity and interest of those involved. Excellent.

This is blurred, no focal point, appears to shown nothing of interest. It's not straight either.

An image that really draws the eye in to the centre. There is enough interest to keep the attention within the frame. The shapes of the wall tiles are fascinating, and I like the way everything has a tactile quality thanks to the changing tones and reflections.

 

My only complaint is the title - it draws me to look for the idea imperfect symmetry. I may not have noticed otherwise.

An intriguing image, simple but striking. It raises questions - who, where, why? I like the fact that his(?) face is partially obscured. Good framing and perspective, and the simplicity of the blue sky adds to the overall effect.

This photo gives a wonderful impression of the subtle colours and textures that abound in Wales, particularly when the light is overcast (which happens a lot).

 

I like the fact that the river winds away into the distance, and is only a small component of the image, hemmed in by hills of many shapes and sizes. Brooding Cadair Idris off to the left is shrouded in cloud while there is a hint of sunlight (a ray of hope?) at the far end of the estuary. An atmospheric portrayal of a wonderful place.

I keep coming back to this, and always enjoy looking at it. I think the composition is great, and love the light & shade on the escalators, contrasted by the dome of the roof.

The only thing that images like this make me feel is the desire for a B-52 navigation error to result in several carpet bombing runs on Berkeley. You are all nothing but a bunch of pampered college kids who are wasting mommie and daddy's money in protests like this because you are too lazy and stupid to get a job.

 

What if educated, employed tax-paying non-students strongly disagree with and protest against the bombing? Are we to be derided in the same dismissive way?

 

Such outbursts display a breathtaking ignorance of the complexities of international politics and terrorism. Do you really think bombing a desperately poor country into the ground is going to stop the terrorists, most of whom aren't even Afghani nationals? By early December over 3,500 civilians had been killed by allied bombing raids in Afghanistan. Now, SEVEN MILLION remain at risk of starvation. But then they're not American citizens, so they don't really matter.

 

I can understand the desire to exact revenge, but the history of such actions is not successful. You only have to look at the Israel-Palestine conflict and Northern Ireland to see that "an eye for an eye" will never work.

 

Try reading a bit more widely, Scott, you might even learn something. You could start with Noam Chomsky on The New War Against Terror.

Lovely shot of a magnificent building. You've managed to give some impression of its shape and size without too much wideangle distortion.

 

I think HP5+ is an excellent all-round b&w film, nice to see it being used well.

Ken, the Stylus Epic's lens is sharp enough - I love mine. It could be the printing that took the edge off it.

I initially wondered if Tony Dummett's remarks seemed a little harsh. He has subsequently more than justified his comments. I not only understand his point, but feel it has expanded my perspective on viewing photographs. Thank you, TD.

 

So to the image. No way is that flare "ethereal", it's obviously a product of the lens. What is written in that box marked "Why this photo was chosen" is merely an opinion, not necessarily any more qualified than anyone else's. Hopefully, we can see each week's image as providing us with something to chew over and discuss, rather than some 'ultimate' image.

 

I hope, as a participant, that if I see flaws in an image I can go away and hope to minimise those flaws in my own work, while being inspired by the photographer's idea. This is one such case. I like it, but it is still flawed.

This week's image appears to attract even more polarised opinions than usual. A black & white image from a cheap digital camera. And the guy even has the nerve to manipulate his images too! Perhaps he is trying to offend all self-styled 'serious' photographers. Suspend your prejudices and see more images from a digital camera at http://www.urban75.org/photos/.

 

If it is, as Tris describes, an average or perhaps above average snapshot of a relatively static (not to say sterile) scene then it would hold the interest for a very short time. I think this description may fit a few of the images in Jeff's folder, but not this one.

 

What elevates it above the mundane? Firstly, the choice of composition, which has certainly not pleased everyone. Centering the subject is a rule book no-no. Bollocks to that. As was stated by the creator himself, no other composition worked. The fact that he realised this (that it worked) elevates his decision from mere accident to positive choice. Acquainting oneself with good photography will help us to understand this, and surely is the obligation of all who wish to take their work even remotely seriously.

 

Secondly, the isolation of those poles in a calm sea or lake (is it a flood?) renders the image into something of simplicity rather than lack of interest. The two are not the same. This image definitely has a sense of place, a resonance beyond the fact of it being an image of three poles. Isn't that the point? While I wouldn't call it a masterpiece, it certainly carries intrigue and interest. Well done Jeff.

 

Whoever mentioned Fay Godwin hit the nail on the head. Fay has made her name with B&W photography of the English landscape, which displays an original perspective. There are faint echoes of her style here.

I can't help feeling this images lacks a little 'zing' (for lack of a better word). The rocks don't have enough contrast, which leads me to think this area was underexposed. It may be that the photographer had to lower the contrast on the scanned image to retain information in both the sky and rocks. Whatever the reason, it robs the final image of impact. If you compare it to good examples of the same subject it will appear dull and a little dark.

 

I also don't like the very large white border above and below the image. This expanse of white probably makes the image appear darker than it is.

 

However, it is a lovely scene and a very pleasing composition. The rock shapes on the left & right appear to balance well and there's plenty to keep the viewer's eye occupied without it being too busy.

While the image can be considered lacking in technical merit (too flat, not sharp, too much grain), these are the very qualities that give it the 'atmosphere' and evoke nostalgic thoughts in some viewers. I don't think Tom's attempts to improve it are anywhere near as pleasing as the original. I often find myself admiring images which have some technical flaw but which evoked a more emotional response than those that are super-sharp, fine grained and demonstrate all the tones of the Zone System. Both approaches are valid, but I think the non-technical 'look' probably suits this image better. I think one's opinion of this image depends on whether one can enjoy the technical deficiencies.

 

Does it matter if it was truly "candid" or not? I don't think so. To my eye she appears to be looking out of the window, and it is not obviously posed. That's enough analysis for me.

 

I would be interested to see the uncropped version of this shot, to see what was originally in the frame, particularly to see if the presence of jeans added to or detracted from the composition and atmosphere.

I can't see *anything* wrong with this image. The grey rock contrasts nicely with the main subject, and there is 'breathing space' and just enough contextual interest around the building. Excellent.

And for anybody who wants to see one of the most beautiful cameras ever -

http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1316617710#DESC

 

Yuck! What a disgustingly UGLY waste of money and materials. Or did I miss the joke?

Lots of black:

I do not have a problem with digitally manipulating an image to get the effect apparent here. I really don't think it matters HOW it was done, just whether it was worthwhile. It's not relevant whether it's "digital black" or heavy darkroom burning-in. Some people can't help but comment negatively on digitally-sourced images, which I think illustrates prejudice. Surely it should be judged by the end result rather than the means?

 

Square crop:

I don't care what shape the original image was, I equally don't have a problem with cropping an image to a square, or a panoramic format as desired.

 

This image strikes me as an exercise in lighting which, while interesting, does not hold the attention for long. This, I feel, is because there is insufficient information to make this anything more than an exercise. It might work as CD cover art because CDs use the blank space for text, and the cover really has only one purpose - to attract attention when competing with 1000 other CDs in a shop.

 

As a photograph on its own it suffers from the aforementioned lack of information - it's just too minimal. It is also unbalanced. There is no way I can be happy with this fellow's face being this close to the edge of the frame. You can argue that 'breaking the rules' is an artist's prerogative, but an image that does so has to be successful. This one doesn't.However, I do like the colour and texture of the hat. I don't think this image works any better in b&w. The cropped image posted by Ovidiu Moise further down this page is a more balanced composition. But I disagree with Ovidiu's comment - how can you rate an almost monochromatic image as being significantly better (9/9 v 6/5) if it was in b&w? I do not understand that logic.

And just how does one best go about the process of learning?

 

Tris, you obviously didn't take my suggestion in the spirit it was meant, in which case there is little point me expanding upon it.

 

Thanks for your feedback.

 

What I wrote wasn't feedback. I have a feeling this reply was just sarcasm, which probably isn't really the best way to go about learning and sharing.

 

I agree that comments such as "wow" and "great" do not provide the kind of constructive criticism that is useful. However, if that is how viewers feel about an image, at least they are able to register their delight. They are surely entitled to their opinion too. Among the brickbats, the photographer can at least take solace in a few modest bouquets.

I'm here to talk photography and learn something if I can

 

With all due respect, Tris, IMHO your posts don't always give the impression you are quite keen to learn as you suggest.

 

As for this image, I find the central position of the singer makes the image too static. I would have tried to place her to one side of the frame and allowed space, preferably to her left. However, the limitations imposed on this occasion (mentioned by the photographer) make it hard for anyone to move to a more suitable position.

 

The central figure is not as sharp as the two musicians, which is disappointing. I don't think this is scanning, it is likely to be focus. There are better images in Alen's music folder, so I guess it was chosen to stimulate debate rather than as an example of excellence.

This style of photography requires patience, skill and perseverance - brandishing a camera, even at a wedding, often causes people to be on their guard. Chris has captured a fascuinating, fleeting scene, and this photograph is surely an image to savour from such an occasion. To criticise it for the burnt-out window or his choice of border is a little harsh, and perhaps missing the point. I value it much more for what it says about life and society. Constructive criticism is invaluable, but I think only aspiring to technically 'perfect' results is a dead end and a complete waste of time.

IMHO the best photos are the ones I wish I had seen (and taken) myself. This image qualifies - it both intrigues and inspires me. I can't really ask for much more.

An appealing and well executed shot, but not the most impressive image in your folder. The colours work well, but IMHO it just doesn't have the interest to sustain prolonged viewing.

 

You obviously have an eye for close-up and detail shots Seven. Keep at it, I'll certainly be revisiting your folder in future.