Three Women

michswiss

1)

2)

3)

AceCo55

I love the POV of #1 - although the male competes for my attention. I really like the glimpse of just part of her face. Not sure about quite so much of the seat.
I think #3 is brilliant. The lighting on her face and hat is super and I love the mystery of a) the background ... and b) what she is looking at.
Love the expression of lady #2 - I wish the gentleman with the phone wasn't there as he is closer to the camera and competes for the focal point of the image. Her expression and the gentleman behind her are really intriguing - what are they thinking? What is causing them to look like that?
Thanks for sharing - I really enjoyed them

RSL

+1. All three are very good, Jennifer, but #3 is special.

michswiss

Hi Ace, always nice to see another person from Australia on the forum.

Thanks both for the comments.

rainbow

#1 has nice textures between the seat and her sweater; I would have liked a little more of her face.

#2 I like the two-headed guy looking toward (but probably not at) her.

#3 is beautifully rendered: Lighting, processing, bokeh... However, I don't know what to think of her (I am perplexed by what mood/personality she might have or the photo might convey).

damonff

nice, nice, nice

Ed911

Nice shots...but, three should be in a book somewhere as an example of how to do it right.

Nmahooch

I love the lighting on #3. Is it raining or snowing?

Nice BnW conversion. Great job getting sharp focus on her face.

beleinho

Subject of great

lizzard_nyc

I swear for a brief moment I thought #3 was a bench statue.

I love #3--wow. Though I like the entire set.

bdcolen

Okay - Different take. Number one is intriguing. Number three is a beautifully lit image of an attractive young woman. But...The world is over-stuffed with beautifully lit photos of attractive young women, and this image really tells us nothing about this particular young woman. But number 2? That is a killer street image - especially in black and white, which I would be happy to post if you'd like me to. It looks like a scene out of some 1950s horror movie, especially with the trolley and older buildings in the near background. But WHAT is that woman looking at, and has that guy in the middle seen the same thing? Or is he looking that way at the woman? Is Mothra approaching? Wow!

RSL

BD's a reporter, and he's right from a reporter's standpoint, but it depends on what you're looking for. #2 is reportage. #3 is fine art. Jennifer caught something very subtle and significant in the kid's face in #3. It takes an artist to do that. Art is rare in reportage unless Gene Smith is doing the reporting.

bdcolen

No, number two is not "reportage." It has nothing to do with journalism, photo or otherwise. It is street photography, pure and simple, and very good.

And Gene Smith has been dead for quite some time, and outstanding photo journalism didn't die with him. And the reality is that while he was a genius, many of his images were set up, either via lighting, extreme darkroom work - which is completely unacceptable by today's photo journalism standards, or flat out posing. That doesn't make them any less artistic, but it does make them less "journalistic," and also makes it virtually impossible to make comparisons with today's photographers who would be fired for doing the same things.

RSL

Right, BD. Gene's been dead quite a while but his pictures live on. That's the way it is with fine art. Life is short. Art is long.

bdcolen

RSL wrote: »

Right, BD. Gene's been dead quite a while but his pictures live on. That's the way it is with fine art. Life is short. Art is long.

I see. So Eugene Smith (alas, I did not know him so won't refer to him as Gene), was a fine art photographer? I did not know this. Nor did any of his biographers, or the legions of documentary photographers who follow in his footsteps.

damonff

#2 is fantastic.