Contest #41: Candid (CLOSED)

[Big_B]

Please make sure you have read and understood all the rules before submitting your photos.


Remember, everyone is welcome to join in. You don't need to be an expert or to have a fancy camera, this is all just about having fun and, through that, getting better at photography.

Just please make sure you've read all the rules before sending in your pictures.

As per usual, you may submit up to two photos for this competition.

Good luck everyone! :grin:




RULES


1) The contest will run for approximately two weeks and will end on 2nd May, 2006 at 8:00AM GMT.


2) You can submit up to two pictures, and change these if you wish up to the time that the competition ends.


3) Post processing - nothing that substantially changes the original composition of the image. Click here (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=96180)for clarification.


4) Photos must be no larger than 800 pixels at the longest dimension and a maximum of 200k. Click here (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?p=663519&postcount=26) for help on this.


5) No framing of pictures, text or copyright notices. This is to ensure anonymity but please remember that copyright continues to remain within the photographer.

6) This competition is a learning experience so we ask you, where possible, to take photos espeically for the contest.

7) At the end of the competition, a separate thread will be started to seek the votes of forum members over the period of 1 week. The person with the most votes will be declared the winner.

:cool: The winner will be recorded in the Hall of Fame (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=84118)

Please be patient with me if it takes one or two days for me to get submissions posted.


Finally, please ensure that you have read this post fully and understand the rules prior to sending


Submitting your photo

SEND PHOTOS TO: POTNContest at gmail dot com
Note: Please allow up to 48 hours for your photo to post. If it is not posted within this time frame please send me a note via this forum.
TITLE All e-mails "candid." If the e-mail subject is not titled as such, I will not open the attachment and you will not be entered into the contest!
Please submit photos in the format "username_0x.jpg", where x is the number of the submission (i.e. 1 or 2).
Please submit a TITLE with your picture along with the DATE it was taken.
Additionally a brief explanation if needed to emphasise how this photo meets the theme. VIEW PHOTOS AT: http://canondigitalphotographycontests.fotopic.net/ (http://canondigitalphotographycontests.fotopic.net/)

Note: The POTN Photographer of the Year contests are entirely separate from this one, so different rules apply.

[Big_B]

The first two photos are online :)

[back to black]

what exactly makes a photo candid, sorry i just don't wanna enter a non-candid pic.

[DreDaze]

what exactly makes a photo candid, sorry i just don't wanna enter a non-candid pic.

i'm in the same boat as you...i thought it was just a shot of someone who doesn't know their picture is being taken...i searched candid here though...and a lot of the shared photos that are labeled candid have the subject staring right at the camera...so far the first two go along with the not knowing the photos being taken idea...i'm just worried someone is going to think i'm a stalker if i get caught snapping a shot of them...

[ibdb]

First off - I'm by no means the ultimate arbiter of what is or is not a candid photo.

That said, here's the definition I'm working from: "Unposed pictures of people, often taken without the subject's knowledge. These usually appear more natural and relaxed than posed pictures." That definition happened to come from a Kodak site, but I would have written almost the same thing myself.

I know that there are some rather heated debates on some other sites about what constitutes a candid photo and what does not. I've looked through a number of my images, and I think that the "know it when I see it" definition sort of applies. There are some people in my family that I've never taken a good picture of that was not a "candid" shot. Anything that even starts to resemble getting them to pose or be aware of the camera, and they just tense up and look completely uncomfortable. There are others who I can capture in a very relaxed and candid moment, whether they're looking at the camera or not.

Could someone pose a shot to look candid? Yeah -- but why bother? I'm in this to learn and improve. Your interpretation of candid may differ from mine, and your shot could teach me something that would improve my photography. I've learned from the differing interpretations of the themes of the last contests, and hope to learn from this one, too.

[Big_B]

First off - I'm by no means the ultimate arbiter of what is or is not a candid photo.

That said, here's the definition I'm working from: "Unposed pictures of people, often taken without the subject's knowledge. These usually appear more natural and relaxed than posed pictures." That definition happened to come from a Kodak site, but I would have written almost the same thing myself.
.

I think that's a pretty good definition :D

[tommykjensen]

I think that's a pretty good definition :D

Me too.

[Sean-Mcr]

I don't see it that way the dictionary definition of candid is honest open and frank. Kodak also told people for years to always centre the subject in centre frame as their biggest market was people shooting their family at xmas and they just gave the blandest of advice for the mass market

Bresson considered himself a master at candid photography and was not interested if his subject knew or not, he was only interested in capturing the moment

If somebody can't shoot somebody with them being natural and relaxed if they know or not then that is a serious flaw in ability

[condyk]

I think Candid Camera defines the art! The people don't know.

[Big_B]

Sean, I'm not sure your view is at odds with the Kodak definition. It does say 'often without their knowlege' - I don't think that implies the candid would necessarily be better or worse either way.

[Sean-Mcr]

I think candid camera defined Jeremy beadle Dave that's about at all lol

If that's not candid http://www.pbase.com/sean_mcr/image/56655311 then i don't know what is. He was doing that before i shot him and he was doing that after i left.

Again, unposed but totally aware that i was there http://www.pbase.com/sean_mcr/image/56660526

Candid photography is not exclusive to people being unaware that they are being shot, its about being natural and its a common misconception that that can only be done when they are unaware. Not the case at all

[Sean-Mcr]

Ben, i'm not saying not to shoot people unaware, i do that relentlessly. But i often spend a while in some of the environments i shoot in, four or five feet at times from my subjects and i change lenses on tables shoot the hole world around me. It's has nothing really to do with them not knowing fine if that be the case, but what if it's really about is capturing somebody as they are.

[ibdb]

If somebody can't shoot somebody with them being natural and relaxed if they know or not then that is a serious flaw in ability

My wife's family likes to gather different family groupings (siblings, generations, boys, girls, etc.) together for posed sittings during large family gatherings. It's not formal in any way, but there is a concerted effort to get everyone sitting together and looking at the camera. It doesn't matter how wonderful the gathering has been, how much fun he's had, or what he's doing during the actual "sitting." 99 out of 100 shots of my father-in-law, no matter who's taking the shots, look lousy. His eyes close (flash or not, multiple cameras or single camera), he stiffens up, his smile automatically becomes forced.

The only way to capture him looking natural and relaxed is to take the picture when he's so involved in what he's doing that the presence of the camera no longer matters. For him, any awareness of the camera and you lose the shot. That's what the definition I cited means to me -- not necessarily that the subject is completely unaware of the camera, though that certainly applies in some cases (and absolutely applies in his case), but that the subject is more involved in being who they are than in paying attention to the camera. A couple of weeks ago I took one of my all time favorite shots of him, from about five feet away, with fill flash, of him holding his newest grandson. He certainly knew I was there, but it was one of those times where what he was doing outweighed the presence of the camera. After I took that shot, he looked over at me, and the next four or five shots all had his eyes closed (flash or not).

My kids, on the other hand, can be staring right at the camera, and still be caught in a "candid" moment. They could be talking to me about having their picture taken, and still be captured in a relaxed and natural way.

[Big_B]

5 More photos online

[Sean-Mcr]

My wife's family likes to gather different family groupings (siblings, generations, boys, girls, etc.) together for posed sittings during large family gatherings. It's not formal in any way, but there is a concerted effort to get everyone sitting together and looking at the camera. It doesn't matter how wonderful the gathering has been, how much fun he's had, or what he's doing during the actual "sitting." 99 out of 100 shots of my father-in-law, no matter who's taking the shots, look lousy. His eyes close (flash or not, multiple cameras or single camera), he stiffens up, his smile automatically becomes forced.

The only way to capture him looking natural and relaxed is to take the picture when he's so involved in what he's doing that the presence of the camera no longer matters. For him, any awareness of the camera and you lose the shot. That's what the definition I cited means to me -- not necessarily that the subject is completely unaware of the camera, though that certainly applies in some cases (and absolutely applies in his case), but that the subject is more involved in being who they are than in paying attention to the camera. A couple of weeks ago I took one of my all time favorite shots of him, from about five feet away, with fill flash, of him holding his newest grandson. He certainly knew I was there, but it was one of those times where what he was doing outweighed the presence of the camera. After I took that shot, he looked over at me, and the next four or five shots all had his eyes closed (flash or not).

My kids, on the other hand, can be staring right at the camera, and still be caught in a "candid" moment. They could be talking to me about having their picture taken, and still be captured in a relaxed and natural way.


I agree 100%

[B-Brother]

Mine are online now :D

[Big_B]

More photos online :D

[Sean-Mcr]

This is pretty much my bag, and i'm a great believer that a shot should be taken for a comp as it does encourage shooting. So i'm not going to use an archive, i'm sure i'll mange something in town by the 2nd

[Big_B]

More photos online

[tommykjensen]

Curious question to those that enter.

Do You look at the photos posted online before taking Your photos?

In the competitions I think I will enter a photo I do not look at the already entered photos until I have decided which photo I want to submit.

[Transportithere]

Question: Did I look at other posting before I post?

Yes, I did. Basically, to assure I understand the topic.

[Big_B]

Yeah, I normally look as well - it gives me inspiration :)

[tommykjensen]

Well Sam. How would You upload the photos without looking ;-)

Anyway doesn't looking in advance somehow lock Your mind in a certain direction?

[Big_B]

That's a good point Tommy! :o: I've just woken up and the coffee hasn't kicked in quite yet. :lol:

Actually I find looking at photos does the opposite. I form an idea of what I might shoot before I look at the picutres, then looking at what other people have done sometimes opens my mind to new possibilites. I can see your point though - it could easily go the other way.

[tommykjensen]

Well there is also another reason why I don't look. The quality of photos is so high that if I look before I get discouraged and don't try :)

[Big_B]

Yep, that's true too! :)

[Big_B]

A pile more photos online! :D

Also, please note clarification to the fifth rule on copyright notices.

[BillsBayou]

Wikipedia has no entry under Observer Effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observer_effect) for photography, but perhaps it should.

I see Candid photography as an attempt to photograph an event without changing the operating parameters of the event. If you're holding a camera and firing shots, your subjects should behave as if the camera were not there. Significant behavioral changes need not take effect to spoil the shot. The instant that someone wipes something from the corner of their mouth, straightens their clothes, fixes an errant tress, the shot is lost.

People in candid shots should be free to express their emotions, whatever they may be. Boredom to excitement, laughter to tears, all should take place without change when the lens turns their way.

Activities should be free of theatrics dedicated to capture on film. I would add at this point that theatrical performances would not qualify here as "theatrics" or "staged" photographs regardless of the presence of a theater or stage. :D I'm speaking more of the theatrics in which people engage in the presence of the camera. However, someone acting in a overtly theatrical fashion prior to the presence of the camera is fair game for a candid shot.

I dunno, I'm rambling....:lol:

[Big_B]

A bunch mroe photos online. Remember the contest closes tomorrow morning (2nd May)

[DreDaze]

well...i know i've got no shot at this contest...candid's are something I never try...but if i can get a single vote...it'll be a victory for me

[Big_B]

Contest closed and voting open!
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=165485

[Transportithere]

What a brain storm !! I just realized why Big_B uses the Big_B handle.
Look at his avatar... LOL I just noticed the picture.

And to think I gave up pot some 20 years ago....

At least I think I am correct ? Anyone??

[Big_B]

What a brain storm !! I just realized why Big_B uses the Big_B handle.
Look at his avatar... LOL I just noticed the picture.

And to think I gave up pot some 20 years ago....


:lol: :lol: