john_cerovac

Nice shot - and nice folder as well.

Funny, as soon I saw the thumbnail of this shot; I thought - "That's A&M". I was there earlier this year but never got a good chance to drop the hose and pick up the camera :(.

First off - I really do appreciate your comments.

A. This is full frame. What you see is what I got. I played with cropping it horizontal, but I thought (perhaps in error) that the fire gave the shot context.

B. The focus - I'm not sure I could have gotten them in focus due to the rippling (?) caused by the heat. I was standing about four feet from a pit containing approx 800 gallons of burning diesel fuel and shooting somewhat across it (to get that "context"). You can see the setup in some of the other pics in this folder. As you can imagine, this isn't exactly a "could you guys stand over here, please" environment. (More like "who's the a-hole with the camera...")

John

Jill,

To answer your question (unlike others :) )regarding TECHNIQUE - I like it. The lighting setup is not readily seen; the edges are well accented; Maybe it could use an olive or twist. Heck, I may fire up a martooni now because of it! Simple yes, but it works. Having just finished my first reading of Light, Science and Magic - I now realize the work that goes into these "simple" shots. And I'm not sure I've got the patience for them!!

Hopefully this answers your question!

John

gonna ask what you used for support...

Hey Mister - is that a monopod in your pocket?

Was the west side of my front porch (dark concrete). I had taken a wider shot of this; unfortunately at the time, I didn't notice the shadows of the railing cutting thru the water. DOH!

There's always next year...

As far as this pic goes - it's allright. So it doesn't rock MY world - who cares? More importantly, I think; does it work for the photographer? After all, isn't personal gratification why we do this? Sure it's nice to get people to fawn over our work; (I've heard... that ain't happened to me personally :) ) but isn't that slightly smug inner feeling of "yeah, that pic'll work" what drives us?

To PSS to Sheldon's PS to Mary - I believe Mary said "constructive" comments - not just "positive"... I assume telling someone what we like/don't like about a shot - or - how we would've approached a shot vs. a generic compliment.

Or worse; the dreaded "OH MY GOD! - that thing is less than garbage and not even fit for MY trash..." And is anyone else amused that some of the harshest, most pompous-a@#ed critics on this site have posted... NOTHING.

hmmmm...

I wasn't looking to blur this guy - it just sorta happened. Now - is

it a good thing or a bad thing? (Time out for Wizard of Oz

flashback...)

At first I thought the gate would add to the shot, now I'm not so

sure...

I was hoping to get a boat on each side of the guy - unfortunately I

forgot to tell the boats...

So, should I keep or lose the one on the right? Any other comments

welcome.

Shelly,

I don't know - it's just so dark on the right side. If you couldn't get some illumination on that side (car headlights, whatever) maybe I'd just put the top-of-the-hill horizon about 1/4 from the bottom of the frame and go that way.

BTW, I really like your other pics.

John

Well, having been called "a F#$%ing liar" by a priest in a previous job, I think I've got the 'don't take it personal' part down... :)

If you've got the time, check out my other stuff also - I'd hate to commandeer the Critique section with 30 "please critique this"'s.

A bit much?? Or should I plan on reshooting this on my next trip to

New Orleans?

I'm just starting to post pics here so any comments (snide or

otherwise) you can add...

Was trying to convey the griminess of the place.

Hit or Miss??

Wasn't sure if I should have cropped out the actual statue and

featured just the shadow... What do you think?

Charles,

I may be way off but... what if you reshot this from down low in front of the statue. This way you'd get a better look at the face of the statue and maybe eliminate the columns you mentioned. I'd also go with B&W, but that's me.