Two from NYC

bdcolen

Richard

Love the first one.

lizzard_nyc

I agree #1 is great--but #2 really works for me with the oblivious female texting, the disembodied boy, the taxi and the buildings in the background which seem kind of distorted. Is that St. Patrick's Cathedral on the left there?

I also like the conversion on both.

and one final thing--frames!?

bdcolen

lizzard_nyc wrote: »

I agree #1 is great--but #2 really works for me with the oblivious female texting, the disembodied boy, the taxi and the buildings in the background which seem kind of distorted. Is that St. Patrick's Cathedral on the left there?

I also like the conversion on both.

and one final thing--frames!?

! Well, I always put a .3 black line around my images, but given how black the first one was...

As to the St. Patrick's question...it was 5th in the 50s. Probably around 54th? The blond and the boy were together. Don't know whether she was a Mom or sister. But #1 is it for me too.

photosthatgive

The first one is awesome. Great composition and execution. The second one is scary - the boy's face. It almost looks superimposed. Can you remove him? I think that would make the shot much stronger.

bdcolen

photosthatgive wrote: »

The first one is awesome. Great composition and execution. The second one is scary - the boy's face. It almost looks superimposed. Can you remove him? I think that would make the shot much stronger.

That last question is a joke, right? Not the part about the face being scary, but about the shot being stronger with out?

Okay, sarcasm aside...This is exactly - EXACTLY - what I was talking about in my post about postings, comments, and street photography. Granted, this shot may not work at all. Some will like it, some will not. Fine. I'm much more attached to number one. BUT...Look at number 2. With the weird boy the image is a bit weird, it's got some edginess to it, it's ambiguous; it's downright strange. Without the boy? It's a blond looking at a cell phone. God save us.

Forgive my snarkiness - please. But...

michswiss

bdcolen wrote: »

That last question is a joke, right? Not the part about the face being scary, but about the shot being stronger with out.

It might be a joke, but I can see why the comment was made. The head is just weird in placement and in the processed result. It feels "dropped in." I see this in some of my shots too, but mostly if the original capture wasn't exposed well.

The first is seriously special.

StueveShots

I really like the first ....makes me think of that moment of walking out into the world each morning and entering all the other stories going on outside my own...

The double reflection--floor and wall--is great also!

As to frames...is there something not "street" about it? I kind of like it and have been doing it myself more and more...it seems a white frame or a black frame allows me to better control what the viewer will see, regardless of what color background the website I've posted to has. (Not all can be controlled as easily as dgrin...and not all viewers value a neutral backdrop for viewing photos.)

I haven't participated in this forum much yet, but I want to try...so I ask so that I can learn!

MileHighAko

#1 is wonderful to me. The man and dog facing eachother make it so interesting. As does the image you can see through the top windows. So much to see here. Thanks for sharing.

bfjr

Richard wrote: »

Love the first one.

nope :nono
the
second one

lizzard_nyc

bfjr wrote: »

nope :nono
the
second one

yes!!!
and here I thought I was going crazy.

Great minds Benjamin .

Mr_Beach_Bum

Not sure if #2 works for me exactly, but I do keep looking at it... Just can't figure out where the head came from or where it's going. Is the woman about to run into the head? I run into all sorts of stuff when I'm walking-while-texting (WWT) but never a head. It also helps that the head looks like a young version of Steve Buscemi.

bdcolen

Mr_Beach_Bum wrote: »

Not sure if #2 works for me exactly, but I do keep looking at it... Just can't figure out where the head came from or where it's going. Is the woman about to run into the head? I run into all sorts of stuff when I'm walking-while-texting (WWT) but never a head. It also helps that the head looks like a young version of Steve Buscemi.

That's precisely the point. And those are the kind of reactions, questions, street photography should elicit. (Okay, "I freaking LOVE THIS would be preferable to "not sure if...works for me exactly," but you get the point. )

And P.S. I printed it yesterday and as a print I FREAKING LOVE IT.)

bdcolen

StueveShots wrote: »

I really like the first ....makes me think of that moment of walking out into the world each morning and entering all the other stories going on outside my own...

The double reflection--floor and wall--is great also!

As to frames...is there something not "street" about it? I kind of like it and have been doing it myself more and more...it seems a white frame or a black frame allows me to better control what the viewer will see, regardless of what color background the website I've posted to has. (Not all can be controlled as easily as dgrin...and not all viewers value a neutral backdrop for viewing photos.)

I haven't participated in this forum much yet, but I want to try...so I ask so that I can learn!

There aren't really any "rules" - about anything. I always - if I remember - put a think black line around my images, if nothing else I guess as a homage to printing 35 using a slight bigger carrier than negative, which left a black band indicating that the image was full frame. I don't usually use a white border, because it looks snapshotty to me, and light areas at the edge of a frame tend to bleed into it. But it's all a matter of taste/vision/personal quirk.:D

anonymouscuban

1 is great. Like that the darkness frames the shot. It's well exposed. I like how th dog looks to be himself.

2 on the other hand, does nothing for me.