rbelyell
Well-known
Clint Troy
Well-known
I don't see what's decisive there.
anjoca76
Well-known
Me neither...sorry. Maybe I'm missing something.
PS: I like the color version better.
rbelyell
Well-known
well, the way i saw it, one fellow is putting a boot on what appears to be the other fellows car, and both appear agitated and are captured in mid-bellow. seemed like a decisive moment to me in the telling of that story...outside of physical violence, not sure what mightve been more decisive in this minidrama.
anyway thats the story this picture conveys to me. though after i took it i found the reality to be quite different, the fellow was actually removing the boot, and while both appeared angry to the bellowing point, it was in fact a civil conversation. so all in good fun and rather tongue in cheek from my part. but in my experience its pretty tough capturing a 'decisive' moment, so i was happy to have done so, even if it was for a story that didnt exist in fact!
tony
anyway thats the story this picture conveys to me. though after i took it i found the reality to be quite different, the fellow was actually removing the boot, and while both appeared angry to the bellowing point, it was in fact a civil conversation. so all in good fun and rather tongue in cheek from my part. but in my experience its pretty tough capturing a 'decisive' moment, so i was happy to have done so, even if it was for a story that didnt exist in fact!
tony
Clint Troy
Well-known
Shooting at an angle of 45 degrees denotes a very passive photographer. Across the street even more so.
For good street photography, to be unnoticed is the worst ingredient. You have to be in the action.
In this picture, being closer would have helped a lot. But it seems that you were more worried about being unnoticed then to have a stellar shot. And the result is a passive photograph.
I may sound harsh but if you really think about what I just said, you'll probably agree.
For good street photography, to be unnoticed is the worst ingredient. You have to be in the action.
In this picture, being closer would have helped a lot. But it seems that you were more worried about being unnoticed then to have a stellar shot. And the result is a passive photograph.
I may sound harsh but if you really think about what I just said, you'll probably agree.
thegman
Veteran
I prefer the colour version, I could almost not notice the boot in black and white, it stands out nicely in colour.
I have no problem with the composition, and I'm not much one for blanket rules like "for good ... you need to ...".
I have no problem with the composition, and I'm not much one for blanket rules like "for good ... you need to ...".
Clint Troy
Well-known
Me neither. But when you're documenting something, you better be into the action one way or another. Implication is key.
thegman
Veteran
I see what you mean, but respectfully, if you're documenting something, then would you not be better off *out* of the action, as the moment you're involved, you change what happens?
rbelyell
Well-known
we're all entitled to our opinion. i disagree. my philosophy is i distinctly do not want to be part of the action. if i were here, the subjects might very well be looking at me rather than at each other. i dont want that. i'm an observer not an actor. yvmv, thats fine. its only the absolute nature of your commentary that is off putting, not the substance of your commentary. differences of opinion are great, and this forum is a particularly wonderful place to hear and see varying points of view. one grows by being open, not by being doctrainaire.
Clint Troy
Well-known
No matter how you turn it, you are a part of the action: you are presenting it to us.
If you want to be extra passive, then let google street view take care of street photography. With some luck, some masterpieces actually are born. But only with luck. Zero implication.
If you want to be extra passive, then let google street view take care of street photography. With some luck, some masterpieces actually are born. But only with luck. Zero implication.
rbelyell
Well-known
turn down the testosterone there clint. save your agression for your street photography. as i said above, differences of opinion are imo to be encouraged on a forum like this. problem is one of the big drawbacks of the internet is it allows certain folks to engage others with a level of aggressiveness and belligerence they wouldnt dare engage in in-person.
Clint Troy
Well-known
Agression?
I certainly hope you are not serious.
But if I may go deeper in my analysis of your photo, i can see that, by the angle of the shot and the distance, you didn't want to "agress" them. You are probably overly sensitive to their feelings and yours. Which is not a bad thing in our society.
If it was me, I'd probably be in their face shooting the situation. They'd probably feel "agressed". I wouldn't care a lot abouttheir feelings as the action takes place in public.
So here's my answer: in person I'd be in their face. And in person I'd probably tell you the same as I've told you. All without agressiveness.
The fact that you feel agressed maybe has something to do with a sligh incapacity to accept criticism?
Regards
I certainly hope you are not serious.
But if I may go deeper in my analysis of your photo, i can see that, by the angle of the shot and the distance, you didn't want to "agress" them. You are probably overly sensitive to their feelings and yours. Which is not a bad thing in our society.
If it was me, I'd probably be in their face shooting the situation. They'd probably feel "agressed". I wouldn't care a lot abouttheir feelings as the action takes place in public.
So here's my answer: in person I'd be in their face. And in person I'd probably tell you the same as I've told you. All without agressiveness.
The fact that you feel agressed maybe has something to do with a sligh incapacity to accept criticism?
Regards