Color. Definitely color.
bdcolen
Registered Users Posts: 3,804 Major grins
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
"He not busy being born is busy dying." Bob Dylan
"The more ambiguous the photograph is, the better it is..." Leonard Freed
0
Comments
Political or photographic?
"He not busy being born is busy dying." Bob Dylan
"The more ambiguous the photograph is, the better it is..." Leonard Freed
A bit of both.
I like the evening light, but there's not much there other that some young people hanging and protesting in an accepting community. Is the Au Bon Pain still there and the chess tables?
I don't want to get into politics, but some research and a lot of reading can bring ambiguity to something of a celebrity cause. Of course, ambiguity is a good thing as it should result in balanced discussion. Maybe worth taking to the "Big Picture"?
Or not. I just like the light and the colors. No political statement intended one way or t'other. And look at the yellow triangle at the bottom of the tree on the right and you'll see the answer to your OBP question - still there, along with the chess players, the tourists, and the homeless.
"He not busy being born is busy dying." Bob Dylan
"The more ambiguous the photograph is, the better it is..." Leonard Freed
Ah, the Coffee Connection. Almost forgot about them. The great thing - maybe
"He not busy being born is busy dying." Bob Dylan
"The more ambiguous the photograph is, the better it is..." Leonard Freed
- The sun peeking underneath the sun on the flag: very cool connection there.
- Sun shine isolating the word "China" on the placard. Yes, I see it in a political sense, which is what makes this shot special, in my eyes.
- Vibrant colour of the street, instead of the boring B&Ws that kill street realism.
- Framing is good too. At first glance, cropping out the portion of the flag @ top-left seemed like a good idea, but that would compress the expanse of the scene, which is core to this picture.
Good work!
I always appreciate compliments, but for the record, while the image may be well composed, it's well composed nothing. I took it simply because I liked the color and light. And I posted it because I like the color and light. Otherwise? Bunch of people standing around with flags and signs. Period. No statement. No special meaning. I happen to think the black and white photo of the skull-tattooed guy with the dog, which has some ambiguity and irony, is a much stronger image.
As to black and white killing street realism, so much for Walker Evans, Henri-Cartier Bresson, Eugene Smith, Bruce Davidson, Helen Levitt, Gary Winogrand, Lee Friedlander, Robert Frank and on and on and on.
A street photo doesn't have to be black and white to be a good street photo, but most great street photos happen to be black and white.
"He not busy being born is busy dying." Bob Dylan
"The more ambiguous the photograph is, the better it is..." Leonard Freed
Just out of curiosity, who are those street photographers whose color work compares to the black and white of Cartier-Bresson, Robert Frank, and Winogrand?
"He not busy being born is busy dying." Bob Dylan
"The more ambiguous the photograph is, the better it is..." Leonard Freed
Capturing a powerful colour image is a challenge. However, if done right, it is more powerful than a B&W conversion. On the contrary, I find that B&W is the "easy way out", to quickly lessen distraction of the subject at hand and .. well make the scene "black and white", simplified. I prefer the challenge of shooting in colour whenever I can, as it preserves the scene as-is, for the most part. Cheers.
John Smith.
Photography is such a subjective thing that I don't think it's a valid comparison/argument to say "This person's work is better just because his name is famous".....It has to be looked at on a case to case basis.
There are TONS, I mean, TONS of people that can take picture than any one of the above people (including John Smith).
Let's just accept Sabesh's compliment and move on......I find it funny that you are looking for compliments on pictures that look flat out boring/pointless (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=166764), and calling this interesting picture of yours "uninteresting". You have a very "unique" taste - I think you are better than "Cartier-Bresson, Robert Frank, and Winogrand" - Again, my definition of "better" is different than yours...
Well, a., I don't post because I'm looking for compliments, and I am well aware of the fact that my work does not appeal to all tastes. In terms of the image in question, I posted simply because I liked the color and light. As I said, I think Jen's comment was spot on.
And two, to suggest than any John Smith is better than the three photographers I mentioned is the equivalent of saying, as some people do, that a kid in elementary school can produce a Jackson Pollack.
"He not busy being born is busy dying." Bob Dylan
"The more ambiguous the photograph is, the better it is..." Leonard Freed
Right, and you tend to get defensive when people's comment doesn't go "your way". Your way = what I said above.
Right, and there's nothing wrong with that. Is there?
You can be a prize winning by shooting ONE amazing picture, but that doesn't make you capable of shooting amazing picture at ALL time. This is the truth. With that said, I don't doubt that the people you've mentioned are good, great and amazing at what they do. However, there has to be one or more picture(s) that someone out there does that are "better" than one of theirs. With that said, I don't know what you are trying to compare here:
It's like saying "Do you like the styling of my long hair over the styling of your short hair?" and you respond - "Of course my short hair, because I am famous for my hair". It's not logical.
With that said, there's no intention of me changing what you think. Everything in art is very subjective.
Well, it's hard to respond this way. But...
In terms of whether it's "wrong" to suggest that a third grader can do what Jackson Pollack could do...No, it's not "wrong," it's simply uninformed, and shows an utter lack of understanding of art and the artistic process.
As to the comparison of hair styles....What's your point?
And finally, can any one of us through a combination of whatever talent we have and sheer luck produce an image that may be better than one of Cartier-Bresson's lesser images? Probably? Does that mean that we are in the same league with a Cartier-Bresson? Of course not, because while we might produce our one image, he produced thousands, certainly dozens if not hundreds of which are among the best ever produced.
And yes, it is a fair question to say, point to street photographers who shoot in color whose work is as good or better - as street photography, as photography - as that produced by the photographers I mentioned. I'm not saying compare the color and the black and white and tell me which you like better, I'm saying compare the image - the framing, the composition, the emotional or intellectual impact. Certainly there are color photographers among the greats of photography. But when it comes to street photography, the great bulk of outstanding work has been done in black and white. That's not my opinion; it's reality.
"He not busy being born is busy dying." Bob Dylan
"The more ambiguous the photograph is, the better it is..." Leonard Freed
I for one, prefer colours, as I see the world in colour. Dwindling it down to B&W for the sake of "mood" and to "eliminate distraction" is another way of saying "I can't bother trying harder to get a colour picture to look good" (well, in most cases, at least). Give yourself a challenge: Shoot the world in colour as it is & see if you can convey that reality into a meaningful picture.
Also, is it really necessary to throw around other photographers' names in order to sustain a discussion? It really doesn't make that much of a difference to some of us, as we are not really fans of some photographers that you've mentioned. Cheers.
I've already said it. If you don't get it, that's fine. Let's move on..
Who says that his stuff are always better than any one of the members on dgrin? Is there a scale that I can put the picture on?
It's nice to give encouragement to others when referencing to famous people. However, with your usage, it sounds more like discouragement because in your books, there's no one going to be better than those guys due to:
1) We don't like B&W as much as they/you do
2) Because they are famous
Pathetic.
Why do you have to be so stubborn? Show me a book that said "Street photography should be taken in B&W".
Oh, my world is in color. I can understand if you have a condition with your eyes where you can only see B&W - I hope not, and if it is, I am sorry that I've offended you B.D.
Most of the people on this forum are glad to hear BD and others discuss the masters of street photography and have learned a lot from those discussions. Perhaps this is not the right forum for you.
Hi Richard,
I tend to agree. It's like if I am not into NHL, a hockey star is not going to mean much to me.
With that said, I also believe that we all have to understand that photography is a very subjective thing. No one in this universe can tell you that what a "street photography" HAS to be. I think that's where the sparks happened. As an amateur, I would love to hear what an old timer like B.D. shares with us and teaches us, but at the same time I don't appreciate for someone to "almost" try to force a thinking in my head. He needs to know when to back off.
Of course, I am a new member here...my words might not have much power to it but I am voicing out what my feeling is in this situation. I hope this clears up my position - I am definitely NOT trying to start an argument
To be honest, in the future if I were to post up pictures for criticism, I would love to have experienced photographers like B.D. to comment on them (but not to force me to believe in his thinking).
14-24 24-70 70-200mm (vr2)
85 and 50 1.4
45 PC and sb910 x2
http://www.danielkimphotography.com
…how else would we know that the sign-writer ran out of black ink?
- Wil
Otherwise in B&W what do you got ...............
Oh yeah B.D. already said you got
My Galleries
Flicker
G+
http://behret.smugmug.com/ NANPA member
How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
Always go with the version you prefer. Folks always have their preferences. Now to view a preference as bias might be construed as going ballestic.
http://behret.smugmug.com/ NANPA member
How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
BD has strong opinions, as do quite a few other people who regularly post here. But I don't believe that BD or anyone else wants to force you to think anything. He and I disagree about some things, but I find his opinions stimulating even when our ideas clash.
Indeed this discussion has become "pathetic:"
*I have NEVER, anywhere, said that street photography must be black and white. Ever. Anywhere.
*You don't have to like black and white; you don't even have to appreciate it. It goes without saying that you are free to like what you like, shoot what you want to shoot, and refuse to appreciate what you refuse to appreciate.
*I see color, and I shoot color. I appreciate color. I just happen to think that the best street photography has been, and generally continues to be, shot in black and white. Clearly we disagree.
*I don't give a rat's behind whether someone is "famous." There are any number of photographers - including some who shot almost exclusively in black and white - who are among the most famous to have ever lived, who I would argue are either grossly overrated, or whose work I have real problems with.
*I find it sad that someone would feel discouraged by knowing that there are people in photography, or in any other field, whose work they can never hope to equal. Do I discourage you by telling you you will never write a symphony to equal the lowliest of Beethoven's work? That you will never do anything with a paint brush to be discussed in the same breath with the work of Cezanne? Will never write a line to compare to those that Gordimer erased? Then why should I be discouraging people by pointing to people whose work is sublime?
On second thought...Pathetic.
"He not busy being born is busy dying." Bob Dylan
"The more ambiguous the photograph is, the better it is..." Leonard Freed