Went down to Zuccoti Park to see "Occupy Wall Street"

filmtwit said:
Keep in mind that Zuccotti park is actually privately owned.
Click to expand...

In itself an interesting subject: the 'public/private' space, and the way the 'owners' object to some cameras and not others, cf. the 'Pink Vespa' case in Scotland. I put 'owners' in quotation marks because the park was, presumably, allegedly, built for 'the public', and 'the public' can be an intractable beast.

Those who believe themselves to be in control sometimes appear to have the wonderful fantasy that mobile 'phone pics aren't 'serious', but 'real camera' shots are dangerous.

Or even 'snapshot cameras' vs. 'real cameras'. Frances and I were shooting in Bluewater in the UK once. She was carrying a Contax SLR and was told she needed a permit. I was carrying a Bessa-L and no-onee took any notice of me. Few security goons can tell a point-and-shoot from a Bess-L from an M9 -- but they all know what a DSLR looks like (or even a film SLR, which is similar but usually smaller). I tried to clarify all this with the notoriously anti-photography London Eye once, for a photo magazine, but after an hour on the 'phone they said they didn't want to be quoted. I suspect that this was because they were unable to produce a coherent statement.

Cheers,

R.
 
Last edited:
I finally got my film on a reel... here are some shots from Occupy Buffalo Sunday on My Blog. Nowhere near as big as that in NYC, however. At most, there were 15 people at one point. Then again, the Bills have been playing pretty well this year, and it was 15 minutes before kickoff...

You did a much better job than I :). Not sure about all the fisheye shots, but some of them do work.
 
Last edited:
claacct said:
I would have to disagree, these fishbowl shots look very awkward and makes one feel dizzy.
Click to expand...

Well, I did say that it worked better than I would have thought possible, and that more editing would have been useful, not that it was perfect.

The question of dizziness/vertigo/nausea may however be very personal indeed. I find fish-eyes a LOT less unpleasant than extremely shallow depth of field in good light (ND filters and 1/8000 shutter speeds).

Cheers,

R.
 
I photograph at Zucchoti park daily (work in the area), and it's been hard to get something that doesn't look like everyone else's photos of this event. Nobody's given me any problems... but its hard to get past all of the cliche shots. It's an over-covered event.
 
Roger Hicks said:
Well, I did say that it worked better than I would have thought possible, and that more editing would have been useful, not that it was perfect.

The question of dizziness/vertigo/nausea may however be very personal indeed. I find fish-eyes a LOT less unpleasant than extremely shallow depth of field in good light (ND filters and 1/8000 shutter speeds).

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

This is exactly the event for those super fast lenses and bokeh shots, because of the nasty background clutter... Maybe an enterprising photographer needs to go there, with a plan on how to photograph it effectively and if possible beautifully.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
claacct said:
I would have to disagree, these fishbowl shots look very awkward and makes one feel dizzy.
Click to expand...

I don't agree. I do not feel dizzy.

As far as my use of the fisheye, I was not making any artistic statement. I bought a new oddball fisheye lens a few months ago. I wanted to play with it. That's all there is to it.

If I had a Coca-Cola bottle mounted on the camera I would have shot with that.
 
claacct said:
This is exactly the event for those super fast lenses and bokeh shots, because of the nasty background clutter... Maybe an enterprising photographer needs to go there, with a plan on how to photograph it effectively and if possible beautifully.
Click to expand...

I would argue that many find the background clutter more interesting than the subjects. As historical documents the ephemera provides more information than the actors. I'm not a big fan of "bokeh", it's a vastly overdone modern gimmick.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Here are a few Seattle photos (reusing this thread to avoid the creation of a thread per location).

I shot one roll as a series of portraits focused on the diversity of the protesters rather than more traditional protest imagery. I approached people and asked if I could take a photo. If they said yes, I took a single photo of whatever they did. Some posed, others continued whatever they were doing - no posing on my part.

Not all of these are wonderful shots but I had a reason for taking each of these pictures want wanted to show them as a series though some are stronger than others.

6235022988_10b80d7f29_z.jpg

http://www.flickr.com/photos/cannelbrae/6235022988

6234497925_51b57b5b9b_z.jpg

http://www.flickr.com/photos/cannelbrae/6234497925

6234496939_ebbdf5caff_z.jpg

http://www.flickr.com/photos/cannelbrae/6234496939

6234930324_2b4f4b434d_z.jpg

http://www.flickr.com/photos/cannelbrae/6234930324

6234929082_d96c64b980_z.jpg

http://www.flickr.com/photos/cannelbrae/6234929082

6234927930_e3c1605dc6_z.jpg

http://www.flickr.com/photos/cannelbrae/6234927930

6234253243_0ffd285647_z.jpg

http://www.flickr.com/photos/cannelbrae/6234253243

6234252153_c979d9a3d5_z.jpg

http://www.flickr.com/photos/cannelbrae/6234252153

6234775486_084369e4d3_z.jpg

http://www.flickr.com/photos/cannelbrae/6234775486

6234774296_c225ca1b22_z.jpg

http://www.flickr.com/photos/cannelbrae/6234774296

6234773086_e9f8bc9394_z.jpg

http://www.flickr.com/photos/cannelbrae/6234773086/

6234771970_e9cc51ba70_z.jpg

http://www.flickr.com/photos/cannelbrae/6234771970
 
Last edited:
back alley said:
are we straying from the w/nw concept?
Click to expand...

Is it possible for you mods to do that - set the thread so that only image links can be added?

(I suspect not - RFF must be built on top of some existing framework, and one doesn't see that flexibility out of the can.)

If it IS possible, that would be one way to quiet political commentary.

Randy
 
Thank you!

I think I was more excited about this roll than anything I've taken recently. I don't know if it was the feeling of having a plan and executing, approaching people about portraits which I don't often to or the happiness with the camera (second roll shot with the Super Speedex). I think the sense of shooting with a purpose and getting results close to what I wanted was really energizing.
 
claacct said:
This is exactly the event for those super fast lenses and bokeh shots, because of the nasty background clutter... Maybe an enterprising photographer needs to go there, with a plan on how to photograph it effectively and if possible beautifully.
Click to expand...

Well, there we are. I'd almost certainly find that dizzying and repulsive, which argues that it is indeed a question of personal perception. Besides, I agree with the OP's "I would argue that many find the background clutter more interesting than the subjects. As historical documents the ephemera provides more information than the actors. I'm not a big fan of "bokeh", it's a vastly overdone modern gimmick."

Cheers,

R.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom