C&C: Outstanding

Hi all:

This is pic #16 from my "Plaza Mayor" little SP project (18 pics in all, unposed candids all of them).

There's some texturing applied to it which is only noticeable when viewing at the 1024px size.

Larger (1024 pixel) size and details here



Any comments and criticism welcome and appreciated.

T.

See my best pics at http://www.flickr.com/photos/mirepapa/

Street Photography album

They are snapshots without any artistically applied framing, composition or any main subjects to speak of, nor applied capture of interaction between said subjects and a street context.

Just my personal opinion. I'd do some research of SP going back from Bresson onwards and then swear to yourself to never take shots if they do not have the elements that the photos in your research show and take it from there, developing your own style one day.

That might sound harsh but it's either that or end up being Oxzy or whichever alias he's under nowadays.

Otherwise it's Kind of like trying to do a painting without knowing nay art history....

I don't feel bad saying that as I am not afraid of admitting that I myself am only slightly above mediocre.

If you shot from eye level there would be more interaction and more immediacy.

The only figure alive here is the central figure, and she is good. The rest are dead.

There is a geometric potential in the diagonal line going down to the lower right, but it is cut off arbitrarily.

--
Frank
http://sidewalkshadows.com/blog/
Photos look better in Original Size
Shot in downtown Manhattan, unless noted

I like that you got her to look at you. However she is a bit too far away so you are not bringing the viewer's focus to her. There is too much space and other stuff.

I also looked at your flickr stream. Most of the photos are OK. May be some more post can help you draw people to the focus of your shots.

Hi, Frank: (my highlights)

fad said:

If you shot from eye level there would be more interaction and more immediacy.

Click to expand...

.

Thanks for your kind comments, much appreciated. Matter of fact, this pic was shot from eye level.

.

fad said:

The only figure alive here is the central figure, and she is good. The rest are dead.

Click to expand...

.

That was exactly my intention and why the pic is titled "Outstanding". I thought at the time that she was luminous, utterly standing out from the elder women, the bored subject, the asleep fellow, etc.

If you care to see the pic at the larger 1024-pixel size you'll notice that everything and everyone in the frame is extremely grainy, pointillist-like, except her, which is absolutely soft, grainless. This, of course, was intentional P&P on my part to have her stand out even more from the rest of boring, grainy characters and surroundings.

The grainy effect can be properly noticed only in the 1024-px larger size. I have another version where everything and everyone is grainless but she's the only one in colour, everything else being monochromatic B&W. It's really stunning and makes her stand out even more.

.

fad said:

There is a geometric potential in the diagonal line going down to the lower right, but it is cut off arbitrarily.

Click to expand...

.

You're probably right but I wasn't caring about the potential diagonal at the time, what caught my attention and the thing I wanted to portray was just how much she stood out from the otherwise nondescript people and surroundings.

Thanks again for your comments, really appreciated.

T.

.
See my best pics at http://www.flickr.com/photos/mirepapa/

Hi, gavin: (my highlights)

gavin said:

I like that you got her to look at you. However she is a bit too far away so you are not bringing the viewer's focus to her. There is too much space and other stuff.

Click to expand...

.

Thanks for this kind comment. Actually, I don't think she was looking at me at the time, it's just a coincidence that I happened to be near her line of sight.

As I told to another comment by Frank (fad) above, I saw her and thought she was absolutely standing out over everyone else nearby and so quickly framed and captured the image, her gaze and the overal composition only lasted for a split-second.

If you care to see the pic at the 1024-pixel size you'll notice that I've postprocessed the image so that everything is extremely grainy, except her, which is absolutely grainless, so she stands out even more from the dull, grainy environment.

This separation by grain can only be noticed in the 1024-px size. Besides this highlighting by grain-grainless I have another version where the separation is accomplished by having everything B&W in the shot but her, who's rendered in pastel-like colours making her stand out even more.

.

gavin said:

I also looked at your flickr stream. Most of the photos are OK. May be some more post can help you draw people to the focus of your shots.

Click to expand...

.

Thanks a lot for looking. I've replied there to your kind comments, all three of them, if you care to read my replies. I'll look at your pics and duly reciprocate this next weekend, when I'll have enough free time.

Regards.

T.

.

See my Lumix ZS3 (TZ7) pics at http://www.flickr.com/photos/mirepapa/

I did take a look at full size. She stands out slightly as she is brighter than the rest of the photo. For my taste I would get much closer and may be vignette to highlight her more. But thats a personal thing. Just so you know i delete most of my photos and I take a lot of photos all the time. Even the ones I keep I only share a small % of it.

May be find someone's whose style you like and try to do something similar and then you can develop your own style after that?

Hi again, Gavin: (my highlights)

gavin said:

I did take a look at full size. She stands out slightly as she is brighter than the rest of the photo.

Click to expand...

.

Well, the idea was that she'd stand out because she's the only sharp element in the picture, everything else being very grainy, noise-like, but judging from your comment it seems to me that the lack of graininess doesn't work to highlight her as I expected.

Perhaps this all-sharp (no grain), pastel-coloured version works better to make her truly stand out:


Colour version where the main subject is highlighted by being the only element rendered in very subdued (pastel) colour on a monochrome background.

.

Member said:

For my taste I would get much closer and may be vignette to highlight her more.

Click to expand...

.

It would be next to impossible to get much closer without actually intruding and thus changing her expression and pose, as she actually did a few seconds later (this was a fleeting moment, shoot it or lose it).

As for vignetting, I wanted the other people to be visible for contrast: old vs. young, male vs. female, asleep vs. aware, apathetic vs. lively, etc. These various people are what really make her stand out, not grain or colour, but for those not getting it I thought this would help.

.

Member said:

But thats a personal thing. Just so you know i delete most of my photos and I take a lot of photos all the time. Even the ones I keep I only share a small % of it.

Click to expand...

.

Good. I don't take many photographs at all and most of them just when summer-vacationing, Xmas, and certain singular events (Airshows, parades, classic cars concentrations, etc). And like you I only share a very small percentage, about one picture in a hundred or so.

.

Member said:

May be find someone's whose style you like and try to do something similar and then you can develop your own style after that?

Click to expand...

.

Good advice. Thanks again for your interesting and useful comments, have a nice weekend.

Regards.

T.

.

See my best pics at Trensamiro

Street Photography Album

Thanks for clarifying your intentions and the means you used to try to bring them across.

I think she is only somewhat interesting as a subject, at least in the photo. So perhaps it is not a bad frame, but not a great frame.

The usual means to bring her out would be some separation around her (not possible here), shooting a little closer, making her lighter than the other figures, and improving her relative contrast.

Perhaps you did use it, but the radial filter in LR is a good way to play with different effects for her and the rest of the image.

Selective desaturation effectively never works (ie works so very, very rarely as to be best forgotten about.) It is the classic technique that draws attention to itself as a gimmick and separates the viewer from responding to the image.

Using brightness, contrast, composition, field of view, and saturation are much more natural ways of achieving the same effect.

--
Frank
http://sidewalkshadows.com/blog/
Photos look better in Original Size
Shot in downtown Manhattan, unless noted

Hi again, Frank: (my highlights)

fad said:

Thanks for clarifying your intentions and the means you used to try to bring them across.

Click to expand...

.

You're welcome, it's the least I could do. I usually let the image stand (or fall) for itself, without additional words other than the title, if any, but occasionally a little explanation does help.

.

fad said:

I think she is only somewhat interesting as a subject, at least in the photo. So perhaps it is not a bad frame, but not a great frame.

Click to expand...

.

The fact that she embodied all at once the exact opposite features & stance of all other people nearby was what I found interesting and eye-grabbing at the time.

.

fad said:

The usual means to bring her out would be some separation around her (not possible here), shooting a little closer, making her lighter than the other figures, and improving her relative contrast.

Click to expand...

.

Good advice, I'll keep it for future photo opportunities. Thanks for it.

.

fad said:

Perhaps you did use it, but the radial filter in LR is a good way to play with different effects for her and the rest of the image.

Click to expand...

.

No, I didn't, I don't own LR nor am I fond of doing PP at all, most of my production is as is, with no PP other than cropping/resizing with a very old, simple automated drag'n'drop utility which also adds the inconspicuous watermark in the corner. For this (my first) SP project I've also converted all colour originals to monochromatic (B&W, sepia, dark indigo) and rarely added some simple effects (e.g.: grain/selective colour in this one).

Other than that, I do no PP, I spend all my time & effort before capturing the image, next to none afterwards.

.

fad said:

Selective desaturation effectively never works (ie works so very, very rarely as to be best forgotten about.) It is the classic technique that draws attention to itself as a gimmick and separates the viewer from responding to the image.

Click to expand...

.

I concur that most of the time it looks gimmicky and matter of fact this is the first time I've used it, but I think that in this case the soft pastel colour shades left in the girl really draws the attention to her rather than to the effect itself.

.

fad said:

Using brightness, contrast, composition, field of view, and saturation are much more natural ways of achieving the same effect.

Click to expand...

.

Perfect, I understand, thanks for the useful, detailed advice, which I'll duly heed in my next photographic endeavours, much obligued for it.

Thanks for your excellent comment and have a nice weekend.

Regards.

T.



See my best pics at http://www.flickr.com/photos/mirepapa/