Composition and all that Arty stuff - discussion thread.

airfrogusmc wrote in post #16566708
Happy New Year EVERYONE!!!

Good to see you posting here Mike...

Thanks, Allen, back at ya. I just picked up a Sinar F1 so hopefully will have something worthwhile to contribute in the coming months.

airfrogusmc wrote in post #16576824
4 images I thought worked together well and in this sequence. What do you all think? Just throwing it out there. Not married to anything.

the divorce in this case should be uneventful. not enough depth to make these much more than snapshots of a fuzzy concept. something a 1st semester art student might make while learning how to use a camera.

jetcode wrote in post #16579628
the divorce in this case should be uneventful. not enough depth to make these much more than snapshots of a fuzzy concept. something a 1st semester art student might make while learning how to use a camera.

Joe I would beg to differ on that comment.
I will address the stronger of the images in my mind.

The first one is all about timing. If it were merely a snapshot then the stride, subject placement see the sing in the background wouldn't have come into play. The light play between the light subject and dark background wouldn't have been a consideration and the dancing light leading to the subject also wouldn't have been in the consideration. But it clearly was. Also the diagonal lines from the building over the subjects head lead to the subject.

# 2 there is a very strong triangular composition but an image thats not my fav.

# 3 is all about stripes. The stripes on the shirt and the stripes on the pavement.

The last one is about the textures, tones, shapes and the stride.

The first and the last are clearly my favorites.

Now Joe whether you like the work or not is certainly understandable I I would never argue that you should but these are not just snapshots and I really doubt someone that first picks up a camera would consistently see those things in real time and have the technical skill to capture it.
Please feel free to disagree or agree or whatever. But I do take exception that these are just snapshots.

Allen I've seen your work. Would you put any of these images in a book? I honestly hope not. What you see and what is reasonable for an audience who does not know your work are two very different things. In these images your mind is making up for what my eye fails to see even as you describe the elements that drew you to the image. There is so much mediocre work in the world. Why promote it? Now that may be a jaded perspective but indeed if there are only so many minutes in a lifetime I certainly don't want to wade through images that may appeal to the photographer but have limited appeal to me. I am the consumer here.

I disagree that all of this work is mediocre. Joe you are not the customer. Thats why I do personal work. The work I do during the week is for Clients. If I let customers drive my vision then I would always do the safe things and make images that everyone likes. Thats what most do and that is truly what is mediocre.

Again whether you like the work or not is totally cool but to say they are just snapshots is just not true and whether they wind up on the cutting room floor or not is also, in my opinion, irrelevant. If you want to talk about how those visual elements I mentioned are not working then state that. The first and the last image I feel are strong. I prefer to look at things I don't like to see if there is something there that I missed at first. In many cases there is. Some don't think that these kind of things are important but i would argue that they are and I think history would be on my side.

Rarely is good work the product of immediate gratification but it is usually work that has some of the elements I mentioned that unfold the more you look. Staying power. Images that give you immediate gratification are the ones you look at say yeah I get it and move on. Now I'm not saying that any of this is great or has any of what I just discussed but I am saying they are much more than just snap shots and time will tell what winds up on the cutting room floor so to speak.

jetcode wrote in post #16579628
the divorce in this case should be uneventful. not enough depth to make these much more than snapshots of a fuzzy concept. something a 1st semester art student might make while learning how to use a camera.

Oh, no. There's all the geometry.

airfrogusmc wrote in post #16579724
I disagree that all of this work is mediocre. Joe you are not the customer. Thats why I do personal work. The work I do during the week is for Clients. If I let customers drive my vision then I would always do the safe things and make images that everyone likes. Thats what most do and that is truly what is mediocre.

Again whether you like the work or not is totally cool but to say they are just snapshots is just not true and whether they wind up on the cutting room floor or not is also, in my opinion, irrelevant. If you want to talk about how those visual elements I mentioned are not working then state that. The first and the last image I feel are strong. I prefer to look at things I don't like to see if there is something there that I missed at first. In many cases there is. Some don't think that these kind of things are important but i would argue that they are and I think history would be on my side.

Rarely is good work the product of immediate gratification but it is usually work that has some of the elements I mentioned that unfold the more you look. Staying power. Images that give you immediate gratification are the ones you look at say yeah I get it and move on. Now I'm not saying that any of this is great or has any of what I just discussed but I am saying they are much more than just snap shots and time will tell what winds up on the cutting room floor so to speak.

You are entertaining a fantasy in your mind. It is a fantasy. I can elect to view your images and tell you exactly how I feel about them. Whether that maps to your vision or truth is your business. I like the rest of the world are the consumer of your images. If you want to do personal work without critique keep your images for yourself. If you put them out there they will generate a wide variety of response. Do not be offended by this. You are well beyond taking any of this personal.

I had a teacher who said "If you can't make it good make it big". I would add "If you can't find a compelling subject shoot the geometry". The point is simple photography in my world needs to be immediately engaging, harbor a mystery, and recede with a smooth finish and a feeling of satisfaction. It's rare I will state that up front. But from what I've seen in modern galleries absolutely essential in this day and age. Doesn't mean every image is a masterpiece either but in general no one who hangs a show worth seeing is hanging less than masterpiece grade art.

Here's an example:
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/rupertv/
http://www.blurb.co.uk​/books/4554161-man-on-earth

Clearly this is a strong portfolio. I think we are long past catering to lesser works because there may be some causal relationship between elements. At least this is where I am at and believe me I have a catalog of lesser works that will never go public.

Yep I just love that fantasy creative world Joe. I didn't say I didn't want critique and if you read I have been saying keep to the work which you still haven't addressed. Now give some real critique. I wouldn't be worth anything if I first didn't know what my work was about and second couldn't defend it when I think a statement about it is not right. Again I am not arguing whether you should or shouldn't like the work but rather whether it is a snapshot or not. If you let others drive your vision then it is no longer your vision and it will become mediocre very quickly. So lets talk about how the lack of visual elements are keeping the images from being more than snap shots.

I think most would put the context of a snapshot as an image that has no thought of composition, background or any other relevant visual elements. It is just a photograph taken without any regard for those elements.

jetcode wrote in post #16579773
I had a teacher who said "If you can't make it good make it big". I would add "If you can't find a compelling subject shoot the geometry". The point is simple photography in my world needs to be immediately engaging, harbor a mystery, and recede with a smooth finish and a feeling of satisfaction. It's rare I will state that up front. But from what I've seen in modern galleries absolutely essential in this day and age. Doesn't mean every image is a masterpiece either but in general no one who hangs a show worth seeing is hanging less than masterpiece grade art.

Here's an example:
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/rupertv/
http://www.blurb.co.uk​/books/4554161-man-on-earth

Clearly this is a strong portfolio. I think we are long past catering to lesser works because there may be some causal relationship between elements. At least this is where I am at and believe me I have a catalog of lesser works that will never go public.

Joe, that's his strong portfolio not mine. I like some of the work but I have no desire to copy his vision. I say really strong work can be about geometry. Geometry is only one element that I look for and tend to see when I work. Some photographers have made careers out of geometry. Bresson, Lewis Baltz, Steven Shore are just three that come to the top of my mind.

airfrogusmc wrote in post #16579775
Yep I just love that fantasy creative world Joe. I didn't say I didn't want critique and if you read I have been saying keep to the work which you still haven't addressed. Now give some real critique and I wouldn't be worth anything if I first didn't know what my work was about and second couldn't defend it when I clearly when I think a statement about it is not right. Again I am not arguing whether you should or shouldn't like the work but rather whether it is a snapshot or not. If you let others drive your vision then it is n longer your vision and it will become mediocre very quickly. So lets talk about how the lack of visual are keeping the images from being more than snap shots.

I think most would put the context of a snapshot as an image that has no thought of composition, background or any other relevant visual elements. It is just a photograph taken without any regard for those elements.

Here's my critique:
There is little here that engages me. I can stand on a street corner and get all that without having to view anyone's images. Why are these considered beyond the ordinary? Because there is some intersection of light and pattern in the photographers mind?

The snapshot is taken because there is immediate draw. The difference between an amateur and a pro is awareness around the frame and relation to whatever subject may be captured. This does not denigrate the snapshot because in fact the subject may be engaging even if the rest of the image is less important or proper.

But in this case say your first image, I cannot differentiate between what an amateur might see and what a pro might see. A man walking by and some shadows. Where's the engagement? Where's the drama or draw into the scene? How is this different than just standing there watching life go by? As a viewer I want bang for my buck not a street scene I can get while sitting in a cafe. Street life itself is far more engaging than a still of a particular event unless the event has a real draw or drama to it that makes it special.

airfrogusmc wrote in post #16579798
Joe, that's his strong portfolio not mine. I like some of the work but I have no desire to copy his vision. I say really strong work can be about geometry. Geometry is only one element that I look for and tend to see when I work. Some photographers have made careers out of geometry. Bresson, Lewis Baltz, Steven Shore are just three that come to the top of my mind.

I find his work engaging and your 4 shots above not engaging. Why? Because there is a strong sense of drama in the vision. There is plenty of geometry in his work so geometry is not the issue here. Photography is the medium but vision rules. That's all I am telling you. Now perhaps you want to hang a portfolio of ordinary (by my eye and standard) shots that is your choice. I have done it to mixed reviews. I recommend hiring one or more seasoned art directors to critique your portfolio. It may prove to be useful. I may be totally hosed here but this is where I am at these days.

Pro/amateur might not be the best terms to use in this case. But thats the entire point of street work as Meyerowitz so eloquently has put "it's finding clarity in chaos." . The clarity in image 1 that a entry level photographer and someone that is just taking snap shots would probably miss is:

I'll repost so we don't have to bounce back and forth.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

If you have to analyze why a image works it doesn't.

Perhaps a print will drive my point home better. If indeed timing is the KEY to your image make it obvious to some degree. For me it's still a shot of a guy in shorts and a hat walking by a parking garage. Now in street circles this may be a great shot. I am not a street shooter.

jetcode wrote in post #16579899
If you have to analyze why a image works it doesn't.

Perhaps a print will drive my point home better. If indeed timing is the KEY to your image make it obvious to some degree. For me it's still a shot of a guy in shorts and a hat walking by a parking garage. Now in street circles this may be a great shot. I am not a street shooter.

Sorry Joe but isn't that what critiques are all about? Isn't that what this thread is about?

Leading lines are important to the way I put photographs together visually. It is the way I see.

airfrogusmc wrote in post #16579928
Sorry Joe but isn't that what critiques are all about? Isn't that what this thread is about?

Not sure what you are apologizing about but in fact what hits the eye first precedes an intellectual interpretation. Only after the initial take can we discuss the dynamics of an image and understand what made it work. The same with music. Only after the piece has entered the ear can it be evaluated and often in the midst of evaluation we become lost among interesting and arcane facts.

The way you see is for you. I am not seeing the leading lines (vague and subtle) until of course you paint big yellow arrows and I've been rather serious about photography for a while now. I can only imagine how lost a beginner is in seeing what you are seeing. I think you need to make more obvious statements. All that space does very little in my eye except create drama less imagery. Give me some eye candy son!