CIRCUS

SHOT THE OTHER DAY

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Thats a COOL shot. I like how the spotlight behind Her gives the photo depth. Is she a jugler? (I noticed the three balls.) or an acrobat, or maybe both?
-Bruce

Technically good shot. However, if you're going to shoot performing arts, you should photograph the activity which is being done. Here it is left unclear what she does and why she has that pose. If I were to shoot circus acts, I'd make it my goal to take shots that make the viewer go "wow, she must be really good at what she's doing".

this is what she does have many thought the first one was just a good shot and really didnt need to show what she does

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Not necessarily. Not every shot needs to tell a complete story, especially if it's one of many in a set.

I really like that first shot!

I guess what I said came out a bit wrong (sorry about that, I'm tired). What I basically meant to say is that since you seem to know how to make technigally sound pictures in low light conditions, you should put your attention to watching for The moment - something I myself am still learning. My comment was directly related to sharing just one picture - what Curtis said is definitely true, I also try to take a few shots of the singer without any singing going on and without a single microphone in the frame. The shot definitely works better now that I see a second picture. Thanks for sharing.

My opinion is that the first shot is good but is a portrait rather than a Performing Art shot and I agree with Kalle. Its like in the Sports Forum where there is a title "XYZ Football Game" and there is a head shot of some guy with some sweat or mud ... perhaps a good shot but not even a Sportrait. What I would like to know is why both images weren't posted initially? Or why the first was not posted in People? I don't mean to suggest that I object to the posting here (which I don't) but I am curious since knowing what happened may help to guide others in the future.

Dwight -
Take another look at that first shot.
The makeup
The costume
The aparatus in front of her
The lighting
The backlit sillouettes of the audience

It's pretty obvious to me, she's "performing."
I think it's similar to a shot of a singer in front of a microphone. You can't tell for sure that she's singing, but if the shot captures the mood, the lighting, the expression of the performance, then it's a "performing arts" shot to me.

I still go with the first image. Notice in my first post here that I had it pretty well figured out what She does? I just like the atmosphere portrayed in that photo. I have to agree with Curtis.
-Bruce

I'm sorry, Curtis, I didn't realize it was a guessing game!

I really like both shots....I am glad to see the second one, as that is an interestering way to perform! I would never have guessed it from the first shot. Yes I see her make up etc. and I know she is a performer, but my questions are resolved in the second shot.

Both images are very nice. Crisp, sharp and show lots of depth. Thanks for sharing.

In the first image, she is clearly moving her arms and hands, as if to perform something. Most portraits I've seen have the subject as still as possible. This lady is definately performing something in image #1 and image #2 shows us what.
Good captures.

you are all right i guess when i posted the first one i wasnt thinking about everyone else since none of you were there. i assumed that everyone new what she was doing .should of posted the second one first. next time

Thanks! And, yes, we are all right ... excellent observation.