Mini challenge #216 - worker(s) in action - The results.

puzzledpaul

Although I started writing this at the ’24 hrs to go’ stage, to save time, I will, of course, take into account any entries added during the last day.

I’ll deal with the pics in the order they were posted.

Whilst this lark (photography) as we all know – is a very subjective matter, and we all have our own ideas about what constitutes a ‘good’ (whatever that is) pic, I’d hoped for a somewhat different selection of pics from those (in the main) that ended up in this MC.

Did everyone read all of the challenge guidelines / remit …I ask myself?

Alans Grins made this comment in his results summation of the previous MC, 215

<< At competitions I often hear judges say – “What has the photographer added”,
i.e. more than simply recording something that was there, and anyone can press the shutter. >>

I think this is as good a way of dealing with things as any …and in circumstances such as an MC … where there is a definite topic to ‘shoot to’, it possibly takes on even greater significance /weight? …

HMs and place positions will be next to the appropriate pic, this time round.

Cavalier
Tent washer – for me, this topic, too bright /colourful …and would’ve liked to see his face ,rather than rear – but it is an ‘action’shot
Unsure that the fg ‘clutter’adds to the shot …or the bit of flag in TR corner?
Fire truck washer – considering what (and where) these guys n gals do, when they’re actually ‘in action’ …some bod washing a truck doesn’t do it for me, sorry.
Air ambulance – without your text, I’d not have a clue …other than a group of people standing around some chopper …where’s the action?

GrandmaR
St Louis arch – I like the blur – shows movement /action(sorta) …but what’s this ‘action’ about …reaching for a pencil /erasing a mistake /getting his sarnies?
Nothing – as I see it, to show where he is … other than your text? …an HM(just)

Well diggers – I mentioned ‘individual’ twice in the guidelines, and made a comment about what I’d be looking for in an ’overhead group shot’ … but at least, it’s a shot of some guys doing something practical

Costa Rica shot - to me, without the description, just a random shot of some traffic and a few blokes that’ve been given a ‘gee up’ from their boss, maybe.

Thelensspot
All three shots depict an individual worker, rather than a group, so these are getting closer to the remit, imo
Suspect 1 and 3 are of the same person, but not sure … and the scene + light has potential.
To my eyes, a shot framed tighter than 1, but looser than 3 – from a lower pov … with the guy using (not posing with) the blower (leaves in air?) and a decent background …would’ve been something to aim for? HM for 3

2 is way too busy (to me) …too many distracting elements in frame.

Sdways01
Mechanic – an individual in action … so well done for that. Again, wonder if a (slightly?) lower pov would’ve got a bit more of his face, +extra drama – and maybe framed a bit tighter to concentrate viewer on main action?3rd place

Window washer – too far away imo. Dunno if possible / practical, but different angles might have offered something extra?

Radio tower … sorry, but just a ;record’ shot – to me.

Jeroen
Sunbeam cutter
I’ve no idea whether you took this shot for the MC because of my comments in the guidelines –or you’d already ‘got it in the bag’? … not that its pedigree matters, of course.
Epitomises the sort of shot I was looking for, though.
Couple of comments … I wonder if a slight crop (off top to reduce light window area eyepull and rhs to get rid of random guy + thing with 10 on) … wouldfocus things even more?
And ..can’t help thinking what the shot would’ve looked like if taken when he’d actually cut thro’ to the side nearer cam? …Always assuming he was going to do that anyway, and not just ‘notch’ the workpiece. 1st place


Travelways

Sorry, but – for me – none of these really fit the specifics of this particular topic.
Whilst you’ve framed an individual engaged in some form of activity, I don’t think any of the individuals (and what they’re doing) are anything like close to the type of workers /activity described in the first post?

Btw, I think the strongest pic is the first – fewer distracting elements in frame, better angle …closer to her level – but I wonder if (these days) showing her underwear might concern some people, and chopping her right foot in half?

GSPep

Three ‘group activity’ shots … which depict what was happening at that moment, from a particular standpoint.
What else is a photo supposed to do, I hear you ask?
I’d have to refer you back to my reference to Alan’s comment in the first post here.

Would /could you have got more drama /interest / specific focus if you’d changed your position / focal length /aperture, waited for the light to change / different poses of the people /machinery etc?

Pegelli
Painters …I quite like this shot … yes, the subjects are pretty small and I’m not so sure I’d have known they were painting … as opposed to cleaning - or drilling holes /whatever … but none of this really matters, imo, because the shadows (lighting), texture and composition make it worth a second look.

I wonder if ‘losing’ the sky in top left corner … by maybe a slightly different angle – or them being a bit lower would’ve made it even better? 2nd place

Oven painter
Interesting shot of an ‘individual’ at work, but can’t help but wonder about a shot other than a rear view? HM

Train driver … Is this working / in action … or posing?

Eldon Shea

Only allowed 3 pics,so will only comment on first 3.
Schuff steel
Interesting colours /textures in this – with possibly a touch of the ‘Where’s Wally’ feel about it?
The main problem (maybe asset, to you?) is the thing that’s being lifted – it’s somewhat of a large ‘eyepull’ imo. If your intention was that that should be the subject of this pic, then you’ve definitely succeeded.
Unfortunately, I’m having difficulty seeing a crop that gets rid of it and makes some sort of sense (because of the lifting cables)
I also wonder if you’ve considered cropping out the sky down the rhs,as that is also something of an eyepull, considering the colours and tones in the rest of the pic? HM for the colours /textures.

Background in 2and 3 is too busy for me, and is he engaged it ‘work related action’ ? …the jury’s definitely out on 2 … and unsure about 3.



Although this tip 18(of 20) from Peter Cairns’ is specifically related to wildlife photography, it’s obviously valid elsewhere..

<< Understand Light It’s an old cliche but it really is all about the light. Watch it, study it and learn how to make it your friend; treat it with indifference and your images will suffer. It’s not just about light direction, it’s about quality of light. Look at many of your favourite images and most of them will not be down to subject choice but light >>

NB – In making my comments I’ve tried to use the same approach as when I view my own efforts … including referring to shots that deserve the term - ‘record’ shots (as I referred to 2 of my own pics in MC 215)

Over to you, Jeroen, for 217


20 Wildlife tips
http://blog.northshots.com/2013/12/20-nature-wildlife-photography-tips/


pp

Earache

PP... Having read the first post in the MC thread stating your theme, viewed all the images in the MC, and read your comments/feedback above, I have some feedback on this MC...
I did not enter this MC and have no skin in the game, so, as these are just my opinions, please take 'em or leave 'em as you wish.

While not explicitly required in the "unofficial" rules, you did not include customary example images of the concepts you were expecting to see in the participant images.
In this case, given that you seemed so disappointed with the images submitted and were pointedly critical of compositions, content, etc., perhaps samples would
have been very valuable in conveying your ideas, and so, assisted the folks with their submissions.

Your comments/critiques communicate expectations and details far in excess of what could be - imo - reasonably deduced by reading your directions in the MC thread...
especially in light of your question posed above - "Did everyone read all of the challenge guidelines / remit …I ask myself?" I think it's safe to say they did, and then submitted using their best judgment and understanding.
Given the general subjectivity of photography, the differences in individuals' interpretation and style, it's quite normal for MC submissions to vary in exact conformation to a theme.
Edit: grandmaR's observation about "equivocating in the directions" is - imo - spot-on and goes directly to my point.

The nature of the subject matter, and in fact many of the images submitted, required an at-the-moment, candid, documentary, spontaneous, style of photography... i.e. perhaps, a "record".
The amount of woulda', shoulda', coulda' in your feedback is - imo - a completely unrealistic set of expectations that convey a basic misunderstanding of the nature/objectives of candid photography.
Wondering about/expecting different angles, views, lighting, etc. from un-posed, un-planned "street-type" images is, in practical terms, also unrealistic - most of the shooters here are very good,
but they are not professional photo-journalists.

While I disagree with the content of most of your comments and feedback, I do assume you meant them to be constructive criticism... as I do mine.

Eric

grandmaR

A tough group.

I have seen previous contests where what I thought was wanted wasn't what other people were posting, and I allowed them to sway me into posting something different from what I thought the parameters required. And then it turned out that I had been correct originally. There are some kinds of photos that I just don't like and if I am picking, I would tend not to pick those type of photo unless it was clearly outstanding. So there is nothing wrong with having personal taste come into it.

I knew my pictures were snapshots and did not expect them to be one of the top ones. I do agree with Eric, though. I think some illustrations would have helped, and it would also have helped to have a much more explicit directions. For instance what you apparently wanted was a fairly close-up photo of a person strenuously working at a menial task where you could see their face and also the task they were doing. There was a good bit of equivocating in the directions which meant that not everybody got the idea.

The comments you made were quite fair and were the ones I would have made myself. I do agree (at least for my photos)

Except that from a practical point of view it would have been physically impossible for me to make the photos better in the way that you suggest. It is one thing to suggest cropping. But...

Especially the workers in the St. Louis Arch. The photo was taken about 10 years ago. They were in the floor of the viewing room. There was no way I could have gotten an angle that would have showed that it was anyplace except the floor of some room with machinery under it. We were really high up at the top of the arch and they seemed to be doing something with some machinery. Were we going to be stuck up there? I know there are steps, but I'd never be able to climb down.

For the well diggers, I have some photos which show their faces but also did not show them actually working. They were sitting on a lift truck or just standing around. I thought the idea of them actually doing something physical was more important than seeing their faces. If I had been at ground level I still would not have been able to show what they were doing, and since most of them were stooped over, facing the ground, I'm not sure that even a ground level shot would have worked for that. (Also there is the point that I did not want to distract them as I had a vested interest in them doing a good job). That photo was taken in 2008.

Cavalier

PP - Fair comments, but I must make one point. Your comment on the shot of the American Wildfire Base Camp worker - "Fire truck washer – considering what (and where) these guys n gals do, when they’re actually ‘in action’ …some bod washing a truck doesn’t do it for me, sorry."

Just need to point out that if it weren't for the Base and Spike Camp workers behind the scenes working to support the heroes on the line, there would be no heroes on the line. It takes a "city" of workers to support the fire fighters on the front lines - food supply, warehouse supplies, medical, transport, laundry services, sleeping quarters, etc. And that 'truck' being washed is actually an 'engine'.

puzzledpaul

Eric, thanks for taking the time to respond in the way you did – I’m aware that time is a valuable commodity.

Sample photos – yes, they’re typically used, and would save the tradional 1k word alternative to get over the message / requirement … but also, no – because that can lead people down particular garden paths and I chose this latter route to see how people would interpret the ’brief’.

For this topic, I may well have some (probably rubbish) pics from the (mainly film) days when I used to wander around just about everywhere with a camera and take ‘streetish’ pics of stuff that ticked one box or another.
Whilst I’m not a pro photo journalist (or pro any other genre of snapper), I’ve been in situations where – as you suggest – there is very little control of the scene / situation / environment etc available to the snapper.

I’ve also been in situations similar to some of those depicted in this MC … and I’d suggest that there can be significant differences, such that the snapper may well start off by taking a first (grab) shot – so they’ve got at least a record – but then, as the situation plays out in front of them, other opportunities for a more considered shot present themselves.

Obviously, practical considerations – eg little time, physical constraints of the environment, ‘being told to ‘move along’ etc come into play.

If circumstances do allow, then this is surely where the difference between a ‘snapper’ and someone who wants to get a little ‘extra’ can be exploited?

If the scene was considered ‘snapworthy’ in the first place, then surely it’s worth exploring other photo opportunities associated with it?

To take a few examples in this MC.
To my eyes, Thelensspot/TLS had seen the potential presented by ‘leafblowerman/LBM’ and the environment that the guy was working in.
As mentioned, this activity is a regular / continuous one and thus could offer a range of photo ops, especially if there was some sort of accord / rapport – as there seemed to be, to me.

If leaf cleanup carries on for a while in autumn – as I suspect it might – and the snapper considers the scene worth their time (otherwise why bother in first place?) .. then maybe not only try to exploit the scene during a single day – but try again another day, using experience gained from previous encounter(s).

Whilst nothing’s certain in this life, I could imagine all manner of outcomes if TLS had taken a really different / dynamic shot of LBM – and given him a print – rather than the what’s (presumably) on his ID card?

Equivocating in the directions…
If I’d been more prescriptive / tighter in what I’d asked for – ie single individual, actually engaged in practical work, for a utility Co (and listed only valid ones), taken in a dynamic manner, etc … I can well imagine the comments that would’ve garnered too

Neither the Schuff Steel (HM) pic or the Wall painters (second place) pic would have fitted this remit … and – although I obviously don’t know the circumstances of each shot, I suspect that there may also have been opportunities – in both cases – for taking other frames (if snapper had time) … they probably weren’t ‘split second and they’re gone’ scenes …?

In the case of the Schuff Steel pic .. it obviously depicted an instant of what was in front of the viewer … work would presumably have continued and thus offered other ‘shots’ … yes, by definition they’d have been different … but we won’t know if better / same / worse, since they’re not available.

Whilst I can see the attractionn of this particular frame – from an activity aspect – ie a big ‘lump o gear’ being hoisted, what would a shot without it in frame have looked like?
(From a w/life togs pov, I generally don’t bother taking the shot if there’s a significant ‘eyepull’ in frame that’s going to destroy the pic … ‘cos I know I’ll invariably dump it)

That both of these pics got a thumbs up from me, is evidence – as far as I’m concerned, anyway – that someone took notice of my comments about decent light for group shots v individuals beavering away ?

So, yes, I agree that ‘candid’ photography can impose a specific range of constraints, over which the snapper has little – if any – control … but, I’d also suggest that there are different levels of constraints around too.

Ie not all ‘candid’ scenarios are ‘born equal’ … some allow for exploration / exploitation


GrandmaR
I feel that I’ve covered your points elsewhere here, but if you feel otherwise …




Cavalier
Thanks for correcting my truck / engine mistake – I didn’t appreciate the difference between the two, and it certainly wasn’t meant in a derogatory manner.
Not that I’m an expert on such kit (or particularly interested in vehicles etc), but our local ‘fire engines’ look totally different from that shown in your pic ...

Yes, I’m familiar with the importance that such people play in our lives, and that was part of my thinking for this MC.

However, I did also make reference to ‘the ‘usual emergency services personnel’ … so, presumably I’m guilty again for my lack of clarity / equivocation in the guidelines?

Revisiting that particular pic, with Eric’s comments about ‘candid’ photography in mind … I’d also hazard a guess that the ‘engine washer’ took a few mins to complete his job … which then makes me wonder if there were any other shot possibilities available and did you take them?

I again, have zero idea of your degree of access to such a scene … but wonder if a side shot – with back lit spray (for instance?) might have been on the cards … and again, possibly taken from a different (and, as you’d expect me to say?) lower angle, maybe?

Again, as in the guidelines ‘Dramatic, moodily lit shots … etc ‘?



Generally
<< While I disagree with the content of most of your comments and feedback, I do assume you meant them to be constructive criticism... >>

Yes, indeed - I make such comments on the basis that they might be of some use to someone in the future, rather than just as a comment on these particular pics.

pegelli

Thanks for the effort and all the comments puzzledpaul. I'm also very happy I got a 2nd place and HM out of taking part for the first time. I really joined this forum recently to complain about some removed functionality in SmugMug but decided that alone was too negative so joined some of the picture challenges to counterbalance the negativity.

About your comments. In the first one I have many tries from all kind of angles and this one still captured the light the best. The piece of sky is indeed a bit distracting but overall it works I think. I have printed that image on 16" x 24" and there it really shines. The second one I had to choose between seeing more of the painter's face but then losing the painting, so it didn't really work from a different angle. A valid comment but unworkable any other way (at least for me at that moment). The third was a semi posed shot. The driver was at work with filling the tank with fresh water but when he saw me he took this nonchalant pose. As soon as the camera was down he was back to work. But you're right, the moment of the shot he was idle and not working.

If the subject suits me I'll join the next one and see what I can do there. It's nice to give some of my pictures a semi-serious goal by participating over here.

puzzledpaul

Thanks for your feedback, your comments re trying different angles for the 'painters' shot is in line with some comments in my response about making other shots etc ... if one can, that is.

bet the print looks good, btw

<< If the subject suits me I'll join the next one and see what I can do there ... >>

This comment of yours also has some resonance (imo) with the 'discussion' in this thread ...

pp

grandmaR

Equivocating in the directions…
If I’d been more prescriptive / tighter in what I’d asked for – ie single individual, actually engaged in practical work, for a utility Co (and listed only valid ones), taken in a dynamic manner, etc … I can well imagine the comments that would’ve garnered too

I don't think so -- You can be specific about what you are looking for and still be open to alternate interpretations (and you can say so in the instructions). Why do you think being specific about what you wanted to see would be a problem? By not being specific and but judging the offerings on unexpressed standards you were asking us to guess and some people guessed wrong. You said utility workers and I actually did take a photo of a man in a manhole in England in March, but you couldn't see what he was doing as I took the photo to show the warning sign in front of him. I have pictures of people welding and also of people buffing out the finish on guitars, but they were taken with a point and shoot film camera at least 20 years ago and were crappy photos. I didn't want to enter them. Plus I didn't think they fitted the 'utility worker' theme. I have a picture of window washers inside the ferry terminal in New Orleans, but wasn't sure they would be considered utility workers.

I think what I disagree with the most is that you insisted on the photo telling the story without words instead of considering the enhancement added by the words. I think you were seduced by the 'cutting sunbeans' title. And incidentally that was one photo which I did not agree with your critique.

Earache

Thank-you Paul, for your thoughtful and detailed response - it makes for an interesting discussion.

And, lest they get lost in the shuffle... Congrats to the winners!!! I really like the 1st place winner, "Sunbeam Cutter"... nice work Jeroen!

Cavalier

Thanks for reminding me, Eric - I should have congratulated Jeroen, Pegelli, and Sideways for their winning shots. Looking forward to the next one Jeroen.

puzzledpaul

grandmaR wrote: »

...

I think what I disagree with the most is that you insisted on the photo telling the story without words instead of considering the enhancement added by the words. I think you were seduced by the 'cutting sunbeans' title. And incidentally that was one photo which I did not agree with your critique.

Which post in the challenge thread stipulated this requirement?

However, if it was left up to me ... and if I'd thought about it at the time I set this MC, I would've done it - I would've said 'No titles, no text... just pics, please, this time ... for a change'

If a pic's supposed to be equivalent to 1k words, why should we need words ?

As regards my comments about the winning pic, I invariably reduce the browser window size so that I can move the pic around inside it and try to get some idea of what a crop would look like - if that's what I'm suggesting ... do you do this?
Idont make comments like this out of thin air, just because I feel like it ... if I think there's a chance the pic would be improved then that's what it's all about, surely?

Seduced by the title?
Well ... if titles are required, as they seem to be, then imo it's a good one ... but if the pic doesn't live up to the title ... and there's certainly lots of those around ... especially in 'Fine art' galleries ... then the only response they'd get from me is a 'oh yeah ... you wish' ..

As already mentioned before ... it's all about the light, less so the subject in many cases, imo ... so if your window washers shot(s) had captured what they were doing in an attractive /dramatic / different etc way, then whether their actual job fitted the theme (or not) would've been irrelevant ...

pp

Thelensspot

Earache wrote: »

Thank-you Paul, for your thoughtful and detailed response - it makes for an interesting discussion.

And, lest they get lost in the shuffle... Congrats to the winners!!! I really like the 1st place winner, "Sunbeam Cutter"... nice work Jeroen!

An interesting discussion with lots of "food for thought" here. Like Eric and Jo, I want to congratulate the winners for some very fine work. "Cutting Sunbeams" was my choice as well.
PP, you put a lot of work into the MC and added some thoughtful discussion in your "Results" announcement thread. Thanks for the HM in regards to the leaf blower. In that third shot, I intended to catch him in better light with leaves blowing up in the background but I caught his attention in the attempt and as you noted...it turned out to look like a posed picture. Thanks again for all your efforts.

Now we all anxiously await to see what Jeroen has in store for us.

grandmaR

puzzledpaul wrote: »

Which post in the challenge thread stipulated this requirement?

However, if it was left up to me ... and if I'd thought about it at the time I set this MC, I would've done it - I would've said 'No titles, no text... just pics, please, this time ... for a change'

If a pic's supposed to be equivalent to 1k words, why should we need words ?

As regards my comments about the winning pic, I invariably reduce the browser window size so that I can move the pic around inside it and try to get some idea of what a crop would look like - if that's what I'm suggesting ... do you do this?
Idont make comments like this out of thin air, just because I feel like it ... if I think there's a chance the pic would be improved then that's what it's all about, surely?

Seduced by the title?
Well ... if titles are required, as they seem to be, then imo it's a good one ... but if the pic doesn't live up to the title ... and there's certainly lots of those around ... especially in 'Fine art' galleries ... then the only response they'd get from me is a 'oh yeah ... you wish' ..

As already mentioned before ... it's all about the light, less so the subject in many cases, imo ... so if your window washers shot(s) had captured what they were doing in an attractive /dramatic / different etc way, then whether their actual job fitted the theme (or not) would've been irrelevant ...

pp

Yes it was not in the original parameters - I got that from your comments. You said several times the equivalent of 'if you hadn't told me what this was, I wouldn't have known it was anything special'.

Sometimes a title or line of description adds to the context of a photo -sometimes we even need two photos to give context. I personally don't think that is wrong. My opinion is that a photo without a title is kind of naked and a good title adds a lot to it. I really liked the title of the winning photo - the man was obviously cutting steel and not sunbeams. I think you were impressed with the lighting in this photo - which the title called attention to. You did say kind of at the end that you wanted dramatic lighting.

I had no idea that I could reduce the browser window size to see cropping possibilities. I do sometimes expand my own photos to see what they would look like cropped but I would not think of doing this to another person's photos. (I sometimes do think it that stuff should be cropped but there's no formal process that I go through)

The photos that you selected were deserving and (although it may not seem like it to you), I think you did very good work on the challenge and taught us (or at least me) something and opened up a good discussion.

puzzledpaul

grandmaR wrote: »

I really liked the title of the winning photo - the man was obviously cutting steel and not sunbeams. I think you were impressed with the lighting in this photo - which the title called attention to. You did say kind of at the end that you wanted dramatic lighting.

Several things here.

Yes, as I've already said, I agree it was a well chosen title, and yes, I liked the way that Jeroen had used light in the pic ...but I wouldn't agree that it was the title that drew my eye /attention to the lighting, because how any image has been lit is invariably one of the first things I look for / at when viewing a pic.

It's what - imo - makes or breaks any pic ... and is the first element on my pic taking 'mantra' (which I thought was 'spot on' when I first saw it mentioned by Zoomer in the people forum) ie
Light
Background
Composition
Pose

I've said many times here (mainly within the w/life forum) - and on endless occasions IRL, that in my particular area of photographic interest - wildlife - I'd much prefer a decent pic of a 'boring, common, everyday etc subject, than a boring, technically good, 'ID' pic of an exotic species.

Obviously, use of light plays a critical/ primary role in creating the 'decent' bit of the pic.
And yes, this time I can supply you with a sample of what I'm talking about, because I know it's on DG, so it's easy to find

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=210909&highlight=scooting

(the two shots here demonstrate the difference the stuff from the sun makes ...)

Btw, I suspect it wasn't steel he was cutting ...

Re Dramatic lighting - yes, I did mention it at the end of my first post here ... but - more importantly, it was mentioned in the guidelines ...and was thus available from the start of the MC.

<< Dramatic, moodily lit etc shots of an individual, going about their daily grind (possibly literally in the instance of a road worker using a petrol powered cutter?) - or similar - is more likely to get my attention than an overhead shot of a group of bods doing stuff on a large scale construction site >>

I went on to mention light again,with respect to how a group shot would have to be taken ... to get my attention.

grandmaR wrote: »

The photos that you selected were deserving and (although it may not seem like it to you), I think you did very good work on the challenge and taught us (or at least me) something and opened up a good discussion.

Thanks, much appreciated ... makes all this yakking worthwhile if it's going to help / be of use to ... someone, sometime, somewhere.

pp

grandmaR

I'm not a good enough photographer to do 'dramatic moodily lit'. It's just beyond my capabilities, especially for a photo of a person. I'm lucky if I can get it to be in focus and exposed so you can see what I'm taking a photo of. So I concentrated more on the subject matter rather than the lighting.