Girl in Trouble
Jan 9, 2019 14:38:54 #
Wrong-key-itis
Had to change Fiat 150 (a tractor for pulling trailers) to intended Fiat 500 (the mini-car).
Took fingers to back room for a good talking-to.
Had to change Fiat 150 (a tractor for pulling trailers) to intended Fiat 500 (the mini-car).
Took fingers to back room for a good talking-to.
Jan 10, 2019 06:46:09 #
That's the problem: The photograph lacks a clear central subject. Talk cannot correct this deficiency.
jaymatt wrote:
But then the story is gone and the whole point is lost.
Jan 10, 2019 07:13:52 #
anotherview wrote:
That's the problem: The photograph lacks a clear central subject. Talk cannot correct this deficiency.
I see your point. Yet I feel all the people are necessary for the photo. A thought: perhaps the shot is too tight. Imagine this scene as, say, one-fourth of the entire shot, where it could more easily be grasped as a single item. Would that cure it?
Jan 10, 2019 09:01:42 #
Voss wrote:
I see your point. Yet I feel all the people are necessary for the photo. A thought: perhaps the shot is too tight. Imagine this scene as, say, one-fourth of the entire shot, where it could more easily be grasped as a single item. Would that cure it?
How about a 'Google from space' shot?
I will admit that at times I look at shots as I would apply them to a stage setting. Usually there is the core setting, to which additional sub settings are put in to define that core further. The additional subs can be be inches from the core activity to segments being from other parts of the world. I have heard the term "relational" used to describe the activity of the participants in the subs. In other words, the pieces are connected by the overall story arc.
Street photography are excised vignettes, so to speak, from a larger canvas. It can be considered akin to using a microscope on a macrocosm. And they contain all the needed players to present that vignette.
IMO, Voss has shown a knack for seeing the "relational" in his street views. And this is what makes writing "stories" for his shots so easy.
Jan 10, 2019 10:12:48 #
jaymatt wrote:
But then the story is gone and the whole point is lost.
And a new story would be told😊
Jan 10, 2019 11:08:36 #
Jan 10, 2019 12:41:38 #
Jan 10, 2019 13:00:54 #
What you "feel" respecting your photograph stands alone apart from the perception of a viewer of it.
For example, on first viewing your photograph, my eyes went straight to the small group of skinny girls near the storefront. My perception decided for me the most interesting aspect of your photograph and did so wordlessly, automatically.
The ticket-writer would have to have a similar visual weight in order to induce a relation between this figure and the girls. This functional relation does not exist here. The figure appears more like a distraction.
Yes, maybe if the photograph contained more visual information, the it could succeed on its own terms.
For example, on first viewing your photograph, my eyes went straight to the small group of skinny girls near the storefront. My perception decided for me the most interesting aspect of your photograph and did so wordlessly, automatically.
The ticket-writer would have to have a similar visual weight in order to induce a relation between this figure and the girls. This functional relation does not exist here. The figure appears more like a distraction.
Yes, maybe if the photograph contained more visual information, the it could succeed on its own terms.
Voss wrote:
I see your point. Yet I feel all the people are necessary for the photo. A thought: perhaps the shot is too tight. Imagine this scene as, say, one-fourth of the entire shot, where it could more easily be grasped as a single item. Would that cure it?
Jan 10, 2019 17:05:18 #
anotherview wrote:
What you "feel" respecting your photogra... (show quote)
At what or whom is the girl with the broom looking? I would say that it is a major cue for the relational line.
Jan 10, 2019 17:24:29 #
Jan 10, 2019 17:37:37 #
Jan 10, 2019 17:39:42 #
Jan 10, 2019 18:43:31 #
Doesn't matter. The eye naturally goes to the human face in a photograph.
A simplified photograph performs better than a busy one.
Any relation at all between the figure to the left and the girls remains a supposition, not an obvious one.
In fact, the photograph takes one more interest and carries itself without the distraction of the figure.
See cropped version of the photograph below.
A simplified photograph performs better than a busy one.
Any relation at all between the figure to the left and the girls remains a supposition, not an obvious one.
In fact, the photograph takes one more interest and carries itself without the distraction of the figure.
See cropped version of the photograph below.
Stephan G wrote:
At what or whom is the girl with the broom looking? I would say that it is a major cue for the relational line.
Girls Outside Shoe Store
Jan 10, 2019 22:56:33 #
anotherview wrote:
Doesn't matter. The eye naturally goes to the human face in a photograph.
....
....
My apologies. You are correct. It does not matter when there is no meeting of the mind or the eyes.
Jan 12, 2019 08:52:01 #
anotherview wrote:
Doesn't matter. The eye naturally goes to the human face in a photograph.
A simplified photograph performs better than a busy one.
Any relation at all between the figure to the left and the girls remains a supposition, not an obvious one.
In fact, the photograph takes one more interest and carries itself without the distraction of the figure.
See cropped version of the photograph below.
A simplified photograph performs better than a busy one.
Any relation at all between the figure to the left and the girls remains a supposition, not an obvious one.
In fact, the photograph takes one more interest and carries itself without the distraction of the figure.
See cropped version of the photograph below.
I got it, anotherview. And I appreciate your taking the time to explain it.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.