The Decisive Moment - Assessment Piece

I have a photography assignment for university that I am completely lost with. I'm not trying to cheat, I just need tips or suggestions, because I have absolutely no idea where to go with it. I am required to "capture a series of six images that best demonstrate the decisive moment, captured from within your surrounding environment." We aren't allowed to set up any shots either, everything has to be spontaneous Could anyone offer any help, please?

I'm guessing you have researched Cartier Bresson for this?

Superguitarbitch wrote in post #12950330
I have a photography assignment for university that I am completely lost with. I'm not trying to cheat, I just need tips or suggestions, because I have absolutely no idea where to go with it. I am required to "capture a series of six images that best demonstrate the decisive moment, captured from within your surrounding environment." We aren't allowed to set up any shots either, everything has to be spontaneous Could anyone offer any help, please?

And that is the idea of the decisive moment. They are observations on life and therefore cannot be staged.

Yes, we spent some time in class looking at his work. I've also read a little bit about him.

Ok, that's good. So to shoot you don't particularly want to get tight portraits, your shot needs to tell a story and for that the viewer will need to see something of the environment to get an idea of the overall picture. Then within this overall picture there should be a sub story being played out.

Hmm, I haven't got very much time left to complete it, so I'll have to figure out what i'm doing soon. This has definitely been a step forward though, thank you

Example- go to airport or train station and photo a homecoming, family waiting, returnee steps off train or plane, finally hugs for everyone. Facial expressions will tell the story and the decisive moments. Same could be done with someone leaving. Decisive moment is a shot of the departing persons face through the train window as they leave. Military personnel are perfect for this type of scene.

Go to a very busy part of your city watch and wait for things to happen.

Also look at the work of Garry Winogrand, Lee Friedlander, Joel Meyerowitz and Robert Frank. Heres a little sump'm on Frank.
http://www.youtube.com​/watch?v=mHtRZBDOgag

Winogrand
http://www.youtube.com …1&list=PL76A0ED​DA5F74A4C2

It aint easy to do well. Its not about motor drives and blasting through the moment. Its about being able to see the moment and having ability to capture that moment in a fraction of a second and it takes practice, practice and more practice.....

Henry Cartier-Bresson's seems to me as if he found a "frame" or location and waited for the subject to enter. He captured the moment with a single click. He was a hunter of images and knew well both his subjects and the environment in which they were found. To get six quick images in this style will be difficult, unless you settle for the repetitive.

Cheers

Sports shots seem like they'd be a natural for decisive moments. The batter, the pitcher, the goalie, the shooter - all contain split-second decisive moments.

Mike wrote in post #12950371
Ok, that's good. So to shoot you don't particularly want to get tight portraits, your shot needs to tell a story and for that the viewer will need to see something of the environment to get an idea of the overall picture. Then within this overall picture there should be a sub story being played out.

Look at Bressons work. Its rarely about telling stories because as Winogrand was saying in his interview photographs can't tell stories. They can't tell stories because there is no beginning or end. They might be a sentence and great photographs can ask questions, make you think. The viewer is the one that tells the story with his own lifes experience and understanding of the visual language. Thats why different people can get something much different from the same image.

Also if one image could tell a story no need for documentary photographer to work large series or in bodies of work.

In Bressons work (and Winogrands or any great photographers work) its about repeating shapes, texture, implied motion, form, shape and any or all of those elements working together to support the image.

Heres a little sump'm about the visual language. Over simplified but a good read and might help you in putting images together visually.
http://char.txa.cornel​l.edu/language/introla​n.htm

airfrogusmc wrote in post #12950641
Look at Bressons work. Its rarely about telling stories because as Winogrand was saying in his interview photographs can't tell stories. They can't tell stories because there is no beginning or end. They might be a sentence and great photographs can ask questions, make you think. The viewer is the one that tells the story with his own lifes experience and understanding of the visual language. Thats why different people can get something much different from the same image.

Also if one image could tell a story no need for documentary photographer to work large series or in bodies of work.

In Bressons work (and Winogrands or any great photographers work) its about repeating shapes, texture, implied motion, form, shape and any or all of those elements working together to support the image.

Heres a little sump'm about the visual language. Over simplified but a good read and might help you in putting images together visually.
http://char.txa.cornel​l.edu/language/introla​n.htm

Yeah, I've always loved Winogrand's comment on the photograph's inability to 'tell a story,' as it so provocatively spits in the phase of photographic convention. Sure, it's highly debatable, and one in which I'm not going to engage thoroughly.

However, it makes sense in many ways; as while stories can be created in the viewer's mind, they are largely inferred more than explicitly verified; hence the potential propensity to take so many supposedly 'straightforward' shots out of context. This, in part, is why captions can in fact be beneficial, and that it's flawed to assume that a great photo is one that should stand on its own. True, visually this might be the case, but its deeper significance might need some supplemental form of explanation or clarification:

Here's a photo of a woman back in the day.

So?

It's your great grandmother.

As for me, I don't feel that I am telling any story other than that I was out taking snaps when I photographed this. I took it because it grabbed me.

Why did it grab me…segueing into the decisive moment. Actually, Allen nailed it, but just to reiterate, Cartier-Bresson's was referring to all of the graphical elements, not just the ability of capturing the ball just as it hits the bat. In fact, there does not need to be any notable movement involved, with the exception of how the photographer is positioning himself/herself to frame the photograph.

The convergence of the subject with lighting, lines, shapes, angles; all of these, coming together, with each one complementing the other. It's the composition and its elements that can create the movement.

The ability to recognize this 'moment' can be learned, but some folks like Bresson-Cartier are freaks; having a special knack for it. Sure, he took lots of subpar photos…lots, and lots, and lots, and lots, and lots, and lots, and oh so many lots of them. But then so have I. Unlike him, though, he took an exceptionally high number of great ones (even while doing a commercial photo-shoot at a bank of all things), so he was perhaps blessed with some natural ability.

I think that the war photographer Larry Burrows was similar; I don't think he was thinking much about the 'art' while under fire (maybe he was), but his composition was often simply artistic.

Back to the story bit; if photos, or at least a series of such, can tell a story, then Burrows' "Yankee Papa 13" series certainly ranks as one of the better tales---but even here, captions contribute to the drama and clarity of events (http://www.life.com …th-yankee-papa-13#index/0). Of note, should you check out the link, photos #17 & #18 (Trying to Save a Life II & Trying to Save a Life III), the mortally wounded pilot's face was not covered in the original photos…

sjones wrote in post #12952697
Yeah, I've always loved Winogrand's comment on the photograph's inability to 'tell a story,' as it so provocatively spits in the phase of photographic convention. Sure, it's highly debatable, and one in which I'm not going to engage thoroughly.

However, it makes sense in many ways; as while stories can be created in the viewer's mind, they are largely inferred more than explicitly verified; hence the potential propensity to take so many supposedly 'straightforward' shots out of context. This, in part, is why captions can in fact be beneficial, and that it's flawed to assume that a great photo is one that should stand on its own. True, visually this might be the case, but its deeper significance might need some supplemental form of explanation or clarification:

Here's a photo of a woman back in the day.

So?

It's your great grandmother.

As for me, I don't feel that I am telling any story other than that I was out taking snaps when I photographed this. I took it because it grabbed me.

Why did it grab me…segueing into the decisive moment. Actually, Allen nailed it, but just to reiterate, Cartier-Bresson's was referring to all of the graphical elements, not just the ability of capturing the ball just as it hits the ball. In fact, there does not need to be any notable movement involved, with the exception of how the photographer is positioning himself/herself to frame the photograph.

The convergence of the subject with lighting, lines, shapes, angles; all of these, coming together, with each one complementing the other. It's the composition and its elements that can create the movement.

The ability to recognize this 'moment' can be learned, but some folks like Bresson-Cartier are freaks; having a special knack for it. Sure, he took lots of subpar photos…lots, and lots, and lots, and lots, and lots, and lots, and oh so many lots of them. But then so have I. Unlike him, though, he took an exceptionally high number of great ones (even while doing a commercial photo-shoot at a bank of all things), so he was perhaps blessed with some natural ability.

I think that the war photographer Larry Burrows was similar; I don't think he was thinking much about the 'art' while under fire (maybe he was), but his composition was often simply artistic.

Back to the story bit; if photos, or at least a series of such, can tell a story, then Burrows' "Yankee Papa 13" series certainly ranks as one of the better tales---but even here, captions contribute to the drama and clarity of events (http://www.life.com …th-yankee-papa-13#index/0). Of note, should you check out the link, photos #17 & #18 (Trying to Save a Life II & Trying to Save a Life III), the mortally wounded pilot's face was not covered in the original photos…

Perfectly articulated...

airfrogusmc wrote in post #12953494
Perfectly articulated...

Gotta love those Marine hover lovers and those old CH 34s

S/F