Love.....and laughter

PCthug wrote in post #7583255
Love the second one.
I feel the first would look better without the other couple in the frame, (just shows, your never too old for a manbag, lol).

I think both couples in the frame work perfectly here. Such great photos.

snyderman wrote in post #7584498
freakin' BRILLIANT. Those might be two of the nicest pics I've seen ... EVER! Can you share with us a percentage estimate on how much the camera/lens is responsible compared to your PP efforts to achieve such incredible images?

The reason I ask is because my other hobby (paid, thankfully!) is music. I play guitar and sing in a sucessful regional hippie 60s act. I go to painstaking lengths to duplicate guitar tones from the 60s during performance. I know however that much of the magic of (for example) Roger McGuinn's 12-string Rickenbacker tone on Hey, Mister Tambourine Man was created in a studio with a LOT of help. Trying to pull off his signature tone live is always going to fall short. Close, but not like you hear on the recording itself.

I hope this makes sense and you can let me know how much 'studio magic' was performed on your images and how much was the image captured by the camera itself.

thanks for posting those masterpieces! They set the bar really high.

dave

Gosh, such memories, I was a angst ridden, hormone rumbling 14 year old when the Byrds released this in the 60's, I was on a camping trip with a group of pals in the Yorkshire Dales when I first heard it (someone had a transistor radio), the radio station played it a lot, and we'd all gather round listening whenever it was on, it had such an impact on us impressionable youngsters.

Apologies for being distracted , back to the image, apart from the B&W/sepia toning, most of the work is done in camera, particularly the use of narrow apertures (f2 in the first and f2.8 in the second).

The jury seems to be out in respect of the second couple (in the first image), and I had similar doubts , not sure if it worked or not and would be a stronger image without them?, although I did feel it gives the image a smidgen more depth with them being there, conversely they could distract from the main subjects.

I do notice a bit of bad editing on my part, bottom rightish, there was a couple of walking sticks jutting in the frame (from two gents sitting on a bench to the right of the image), I can see I've done a poor job of cloning them.

Many thanks for everyones kind words and critique, it is genuinely appreciated.

Lovely images, Les.

Personally, I like the second couple in the first photo. To me, it's an reflection on the passage of time, it's telling us that the subject couple will still be as close many years on from now - they might be older, but they'll still be together.

Even if they pass on from this world, this will be how they are in the hereafter - so having them blurred in the background is like their future ghosts (words fail me, but I know what I mean).

The second couple is also an indication that old age isn't a lonely existence - companionship and friendships endure.

Without the second couple, I feel the emotional composition would weaken, become darker.