Over 1000 shots between the two of them, and what, 60 keepers? Most tourists do better than that... We all did, when we still shot film and had to pay for each picture :-)
Haven't read this book, but own McNally's other two. Both very good reads, so I have high hopes for this one, too. If you don't expect a manual, his writing tends to be very entertaining, and you still learn a lot without even knowing it.
ALFREDofAVALON: The objections really have nothing to do with patriotism, but quality - aesthetics, visual grammar, protocol and respect are enough, without even bringing up the subject of patriotism and/or your disdain for patriotism.
His work is not inspiring, indeed. And if any subject should be depicted in an inspiring way, new, fresh, unique or otherwise, it is these athletes who are the very tops in human athletic achievement.
Who the heck thinks they have the right to denigrate their achievement with debasing them as common, by way of humiliating photographic depictions, under the phony guise of "unique or fresh?" They are anything but common. They are heroes, whether you acknowledge that or not. These Olympians have proven their mettle. They are in a VERY exclusive club.
Olympic Portraits are not really the place for photographers (or art directors) to contemplate their navels with the drivel of "fine art" absurdism and purposely offensive imagery.
What's so special about running around in a circle, even if you can do it really, really fast?
Hmm. I didn't vote here, but maybe the low scores came from people who realized that this is a montage?
santamonica812 wrote: > Not only a great composition, it's one of the best examples of matching a photo to a particular challenge. A well-deserved win. I'd only like to see the identities of the 0.5 and 1.0 voters made public . . . astonishing votes and an embarrassment for them.> > Bravo again. My only wish re the photograph is that you had included some background information.