Stretch

michswissmichswiss Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 2,235 Major grins
edited March 5, 2010 in Street and Documentary
793423833_2GqjT-XL.jpg

Comments

  • bdcolenbdcolen Registered Users Posts: 3,804 Major grins
    edited March 3, 2010
    michswiss wrote:
    793423833_2GqjT-XL.jpg

    One of your best! The pearls?! Fantastic!! clap.gifclap.gif
    bd@bdcolenphoto.com
    "He not busy being born is busy dying." Bob Dylan

    "The more ambiguous the photograph is, the better it is..." Leonard Freed
  • michswissmichswiss Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 2,235 Major grins
    edited March 4, 2010
    bdcolen wrote:
    One of your best! The pearls?! Fantastic!! clap.gifclap.gif

    Thanks B.D. I was questioning this shot as I felt it was formulaic in structure and composition and wasn't sure if I'd pulled it off.
  • PattiPatti Registered Users Posts: 1,576 Major grins
    edited March 4, 2010
    As an inexperienced photographer, especially of street/pj, I've got some questions I'd like help with. I love this shot but would not have thought of it as street/pj per say. I see shots posted here that I wouldn't have thought belonged in this forum but seem to be considered appropriate (ie self portraits, concert). I know this genre is not clear cut but it would really be helpful to get a sense, with this example, of why exactly it works for this genre.

    Could you both explain a bit more about the composition of this great shot and why it works so well? Where do you draw the line between what you judge to be street photography and a candid shot of people? Michswiss can you talk specifically about what your concerns were about the shot? What do you consider formulaic about it?

    I'm sure I'm not being terribly clear but it would help me understand a bit more about the genre.

    with gratitude
    patti
    The use of a camera is similar to that of a knife. You can use it to peel potatoes, or carve a flute. ~ E. Kahlmeyer
    ... I'm still peeling potatoes.

    patti hinton photography
  • thoththoth Registered Users Posts: 1,085 Major grins
    edited March 4, 2010
    Patti wrote:
    As an inexperienced photographer, especially of street/pj, I've got some questions I'd like help with. I love this shot but would not have thought of it as street/pj per say. I see shots posted here that I wouldn't have thought belonged in this forum but seem to be considered appropriate (ie self portraits, concert). I know this genre is not clear cut but it would really be helpful to get a sense, with this example, of why exactly it works for this genre.

    Could you both explain a bit more about the composition of this great shot and why it works so well? Where do you draw the line between what you judge to be street photography and a candid shot of people? Michswiss can you talk specifically about what your concerns were about the shot? What do you consider formulaic about it?

    I'm sure I'm not being terribly clear but it would help me understand a bit more about the genre.

    with gratitude
    patti
    I would not call this a street or PJ shot, Patti. Rather, this is a wonderful candid photograph which, though not specifically designated for this forum, is widely accepted. In the beginning, many of us were proponents of having the "borders" of this forum widened to encompass all candid photography. This shot is the reason why. It obviously fits here in a way that it would not in the People section but is not, technically, a street or PJ offering.
    Travis
  • PattiPatti Registered Users Posts: 1,576 Major grins
    edited March 4, 2010
    thoth wrote:
    I would not call this a street or PJ shot, Patti. Rather, this is a wonderful candid photograph which, though not specifically designated for this forum, is widely accepted. In the beginning, many of us were proponents of having the "borders" of this forum widened to encompass all candid photography. This shot is the reason why. It obviously fits here in a way that it would not in the People section but is not, technically, a street or PJ offering.

    Thanks Travis! That explains a lot. I didn't realize that candid photography was acceptable in the forum. That changes the water on the beans as they say.
    The use of a camera is similar to that of a knife. You can use it to peel potatoes, or carve a flute. ~ E. Kahlmeyer
    ... I'm still peeling potatoes.

    patti hinton photography
  • thoththoth Registered Users Posts: 1,085 Major grins
    edited March 4, 2010
    Patti wrote:
    Thanks Travis! That explains a lot. I didn't realize that candid photography was acceptable in the forum. That changes the water on the beans as they say.
    Richard really has the final say as to what belongs and what doesn't but some images just beg to be here and not there. If this was an ultra-sharp vibrant-colored candid headshot then it's probably going to belong in People. But, if there's a story being told, rather than just a pretty picture, I'd say this is the place.
    Travis
  • michswissmichswiss Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 2,235 Major grins
    edited March 4, 2010
    Travis has already given an excellent summary about why I've posted it in this forum. It is definitely a candid shot of strangers, albeit very intentionally produced. I don't know what other forum I'd post it in on DGrin. For what it's worth, I've been on the fence about the image for a couple of weeks and I knew I would be even when I decided to sit down and begin working the setting.

    It's a couple sitting on a lake engrossed in their relationship. The light was soft and the reflections beautiful. Rule of thirds (hate that) firmly in play. So. Very. Formulaic. But I really wanted to try and get something that had an arc to it and I felt there was a chance. I also felt happy at the time. I've found that my emotional state will impact how I see and photograph things around me and I wanted to see a comfortable, trusting relationship. But what I want to see and what others will see aren't the same.

    They weren't unaware that I was sitting next to them and I actually made eye contact and nodded to the young man at one stage. But they didn't take notice nor change behaviour. This is the frame of the many I took that I felt captured something of the essence of the two to each other.
  • PattiPatti Registered Users Posts: 1,576 Major grins
    edited March 4, 2010
    michswiss wrote:
    Travis has already given an excellent summary about why I've posted it in this forum, and I agree that it is definitely a candid shot. Albeit very intentionally produced. I've been on the fence about the image for a couple of weeks and I knew I would be even when I decided to sit down and begin working the setting before releasing the shutter the first time.

    It's a couple sitting on a lake engrossed in their relationship. The light was soft and the reflections beautiful. Rule of thirds (hate that) firmly in play. So. Very. Formulaic. But I really wanted to try and get something and I felt there was a chance. Sort of like the Pugg in the Art Gallery. They weren't unaware that I was sitting next to them and I actually made eye contact and nodded to the young man at one stage. But they didn't take notice nor change behaviour.

    This is the frame of the many I took that I felt captured something of the essence of the two to each other.

    Thanks michswiss. That helps tremendously. It is a beautiful shot.
    The use of a camera is similar to that of a knife. You can use it to peel potatoes, or carve a flute. ~ E. Kahlmeyer
    ... I'm still peeling potatoes.

    patti hinton photography
  • bdcolenbdcolen Registered Users Posts: 3,804 Major grins
    edited March 4, 2010
    Patti wrote:
    Thanks Travis! That explains a lot. I didn't realize that candid photography was acceptable in the forum. That changes the water on the beans as they say.

    I couldn't agree more with what Travis said about Candid photography - I, personally, would love to have this forum renamed "Reality." Frankly, there is virtually no photo journalism posted here, so PJ really has little to do with anything.

    However, that said, street photography is really about life in public - not necessarily in the street, and not necessarily in the city. It is as much an ethos, a way of seeing and capturing real life, as it is anything else. And if one accepts that, this photo really does fit. Here is a couple sharing a very private moment in a very public place. No street necessary. rolleyes1.gif
    bd@bdcolenphoto.com
    "He not busy being born is busy dying." Bob Dylan

    "The more ambiguous the photograph is, the better it is..." Leonard Freed
  • PattiPatti Registered Users Posts: 1,576 Major grins
    edited March 4, 2010
    bdcolen wrote:
    I couldn't agree more with what Travis said about Candid photography - I, personally, would love to have this forum renamed "Reality." Frankly, there is virtually no photo journalism posted here, so PJ really has little to do with anything.

    However, that said, street photography is really about life in public - not necessarily in the street, and not necessarily in the city. It is as much an ethos, a way of seeing and capturing real life, as it is anything else. And if one accepts that, this photo really does fit. Here is a couple sharing a very private moment in a very public place. No street necessary. rolleyes1.gif


    This really helps clarify, at least for me, what this forum is about. Reality is a good description and one I can easily wrap my brain around.
    The use of a camera is similar to that of a knife. You can use it to peel potatoes, or carve a flute. ~ E. Kahlmeyer
    ... I'm still peeling potatoes.

    patti hinton photography
  • damonffdamonff Registered Users Posts: 1,894 Major grins
    edited March 4, 2010
    Please rename it reality. Please.
  • damonffdamonff Registered Users Posts: 1,894 Major grins
    edited March 4, 2010
    Sorry...I forgot to mention that this shot is f&%$%^# gorgeous.
  • michswissmichswiss Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 2,235 Major grins
    edited March 4, 2010
    damonff wrote:
    Sorry...I forgot to mention that this shot is f&%$%^# gorgeous.

    Now that's a compliment. bowdown.gif
  • TonyCooperTonyCooper Registered Users Posts: 2,276 Major grins
    edited March 5, 2010
    I'm glad Patti brought this question up. Being relatively new in this forum I'm still trying to figure out what "street" is. One of my early submissions
    pulled the comment that it really belonged in People because it was more of a portrait than anything else. I've seen many photos in this forum that
    were not, in my opinion, "street" shots. Birthday parties and such. It can be confusing.

    I see a need to designate the type of shots to be in a forum, but I can't think of a designation that is much of an improvement. A photograph
    of Aunt Minnie's visit can be "candid", and it can be "reality", but it's only going to fit in this forum if there's something about it that has something in common
    with the other photographs that appear here.

    The best suggestion I could give anyone on what belongs here is for them to lurk and watch what has been posted until they gain a sense of what
    the common factors are and stay roughly in those confines. "Roughly" because the boundaries should be elastic enough to encompass good photographs that don't quite fit.

    My comments on this specific photo by Michswiss in a separate post.
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
    http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/
  • TonyCooperTonyCooper Registered Users Posts: 2,276 Major grins
    edited March 5, 2010
    michswiss wrote:
    Travis has already given an excellent summary about why I've posted it in this forum. It is definitely a candid shot of strangers, albeit very intentionally produced. I don't know what other forum I'd post it in on DGrin. For what it's worth, I've been on the fence about the image for a couple of weeks and I knew I would be even when I decided to sit down and begin working the setting.

    It's a couple sitting on a lake engrossed in their relationship. The light was soft and the reflections beautiful. Rule of thirds (hate that) firmly in play. So. Very. Formulaic. But I really wanted to try and get something that had an arc to it and I felt there was a chance. I also felt happy at the time. I've found that my emotional state will impact how I see and photograph things around me and I wanted to see a comfortable, trusting relationship. But what I want to see and what others will see aren't the same.
    I can't help but think that you are over-thinking this. It's a great photograph. I can't see anything about the composition
    that you'd want to be different. That it meets certain suggested compositional formula points is not something that you
    should feel uneasy about.

    To me, it's the photographs that don't work where I look for the compositional points that might have made the photo
    work and tuck away that thought for future shots. When the photo works - as this one does - can't you just run with it?
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
    http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/
  • michswissmichswiss Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 2,235 Major grins
    edited March 5, 2010
    TonyCooper wrote:
    I can't help but think that you are over-thinking this. It's a great photograph. I can't see anything about the composition that you'd want to be different. That it meets certain suggested compositional formula points is not something that you should feel uneasy about.

    To me, it's the photographs that don't work where I look for the compositional points that might have made the photo work and tuck away that thought for future shots. When the photo works - as this one does - can't you just run with it?

    Tony, thoughtful words and I appreciate it. I'm also pleased that you like the shot. I only added an exposition for this image to answer Patti's question. But yes, I tend to over think and struggle with pretty much every image I decide to post here.
Sign In or Register to comment.