Framed

puzzledpaul

Came upon this during a junk cull session.

pp

Richard

Nicely framed, indeed. I don't much care for the red band, which commands more attention than it deserves. I think you could crop it and still have (just) enough space at the bottom.

DonRicklin

or just desaturate the red some or nearly.


Don

Sent from my HTCEVOV4G using Tapatalk 2

puzzledpaul

Thanks guys - yes, you're right re the red - interesting really, because if it'd been something so obvious on my w/life stuff it most certainly would've been dealt with.

pp

bdcolen

But then if it's "dealt with," it really ceases to be true "street photography," doesn't it, because it becomes a manipulated version of reality. ;-)

puzzledpaul

bdcolen wrote: »

But then if it's "dealt with," it really ceases to be true "street photography," doesn't it, because it becomes a manipulated version of reality. ;-)

So cropping's unacceptable?

pp

bdcolen

No, cropping to get an image within the original image is acceptable, though the goal is to crop with the viewfinder. (Cropping to get rid of a particular part of an image, and therefore create an illusion of reality is not acceptable - i.e., cropping out a person whose presence would cause the photo to tell the 'true story,' rather than the one an editor wants to tell.) What I am talking about is cloning out distracting elements to make it seem as though you took photo of a scene that really wasn't there. HOWEVER, I am not the Image Police. I'm just telling you what I think - the standards I apply in my classes and workshops. I have reasons for applying them, and I hardly am alone in adhering to them. But obviously you or anyone else can do any damn thing you are they care to do. :-)