#151 Rejects

grandmaR

I think this a really interesting challenge, although I hope it doesn't have to be in b&w. I've been going through my photos and picking some possibilities, and I find myself second guessing myself. I've picked about 50 photos and I have weeded down to 16. I rejected immediately all photos of photographers as I figured everyone would have those.

These are the ones I have put in the reject pile for various reasons. I have two picked, and I have to pick one of these as the third one.



I rejected this one because the photo is from the back instead of the front.



I like this one a lot but figure everyone will have police



This photo just doesn't grab me



This is an old slide that was digitized and is a little pixilated or something

The man closest to us has his back to us

I guess everyone will have musicians

This one just isn't quite in focus


I rejected most of the ones of children


This one also isn't quite as sharp or as close to the people

This one of a pedicab driver just doesn't work for me


This guy is depressing


I didn't know whether this was enough of a clue (he was a guide in NOLA who took us to the cemeteries and is explaining them

This one wouldn't work as well in b&w but it doesn't seem as sharp and clear as I would like


Rejected because he is not looking up

puzzledpaul

<< and I have to pick one of these as the third one >>

??

Sorry, but I can't see the logic in this.
You don't have to enter 3 pics and if you've already decided they're rejects for some reason or other ...

pp

grandmaR

I'm to OCD not to enter 3 if 3 is possible to enter. Just like I can't not answer the phone, even if I'm pretty sure it is a robo-political call or that lady about credit cards, and I can't NOT read an email even if I'm pretty sure the person sending me the email is going to be nasty. What I'm asking basically is - have I been too picky and would one of these be OK



I also eliminated this one because you can't see her face. Although the back view is very expressive.

dnie

Grandma R,
I see you have already entered yours in the mini, but I thought I would answer your questions anyway. This is just my viewpoint, others may think different.
First off, for this one, keep in mind it is just the mini. No pressure there. Just having fun. Sometimes it is fun to see the one that, while it may not be technically perfect, it fits the theme wonderfully. It may be something hilarious, yet right on theme, that you wanted to share.
As for if you are being too picky... It is up to you what you like or don't. I will tell you that some of the reasons you gave for rejection were not reasons (IMHO-in my humble opinion) that they should be rejected. Not being able to see the face, well, it depends on what you are going for, but in the photo above (gas station), it works great not seeing her face. It wouldn't look natural if she was looking at you. The same goes for the ones above that you rejected because they weren't looking at you or looking up. The one not in focus, that probably is a good reason to reject. If it isn't pleasing to you (the leaf blower and the pedicab) that is a good reason. You have to be happy with it yourself.
The biggest things you need to watch for (again, IMHO) are the basics. Focus, Lighting, Composition, and does it fit the theme. After those are met to your satisfaction... Do YOU like it? Those are some of the things I try to keep in mind when I enter any contest anywhere.

grandmaR

Thank you - that is so helpful. I like the woman in the gas station (they also sold worms), but it was a little bit 'muddy' in color (it was a cloudy day). I think the woman herself is priceless. BTW that photo was taken in 1964, not in 1932 (the car is a 1932).

I always thought I was laid back, calm and relaxed. Then I started editing a newsletter (back in the 80's) and found that I was really impatient and hot-headed. Oh Well.

linyangchen

Hi grandmaR and others,

Thanks for posting these shots and for the interesting discussions and stories alongside. People don't usually publish 'negative results' (especially in scientific journals), yet I find them really valuable and important as learning points. The photo of the gas station woman is interesting to me because she is facing away, and because of the historical context (it is almost two decades more before I am born). It gives me the feel of everyday life in the 60s, something I'll never experience myself.

In response to your comment that you rejected photos of photographers, I concede that there are many photos of photographers, but I believe that there is one situation in which photos of photographers are relatively rare. This is when you have some iconic event like the Olympics where almost all the photographers are concentrating on shooting the event itself. By standing back a little, I have found it possible to get interesting environmental portraits of photographers with something significant in the backdrop, like Olympic rings. Of course the composition and lighting etc. still matter and are what really make a portrait stand out.

Best regards,

Yangchen

grandmaR

That is definitely true. A lot of the photos I have of photographers they are trying to take a photo of me (and sell it to me), like

And his picture of me never appeared, so I guess I spoiled his shot. Or maybe he just realized that I wouldn't buy it. This is a photographer trying to line a group up for a photo.


This is my favorite photographer photo taken in 2006



I was sitting waiting for the cruise embarkation people to fix the booking that they had screwed up, and I was sitting right beside where the photographers were waiting to trap the boarding passengers.

This one was another one that I rejected


(It is a stunt man demonstration on a studio tour c 1965). This one I rejected because I didn't think it would be obvious that they were stunt men - I didn't think we were supposed to explain the photo.

grandmaR

linyangchen wrote: »

Hi grandmaR and others,

Thanks for posting these shots and for the interesting discussions and stories alongside. People don't usually publish 'negative results' (especially in scientific journals), yet I find them really valuable and important as learning points. The photo of the gas station woman is interesting to me because she is facing away, and because of the historical context (it is almost two decades more before I am born). It gives me the feel of everyday life in the 60s, something I'll never experience myself.

Yangchen

Negative results are helpful as you say, and they should be published - especially in scientific journals.

The picture of the woman in the gas station was anachronistic in 1964 - it is not at all like most everyday life in those days. The car in the photo is 30 years old.
About the only thing that would still be the same is that they still sell Conoco gas out in the west.

This is the same gas station as we were leaving (Bob is in the door after paying for the gas)