Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/11/19
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Thanks to the many who offered opinions, comments or criticism, Specials thanks to the wonderful editors who sent on or off-list versions of my image, much appreciated (Prosit Douglas ;-) !). And very, very special thanks, merci, to Moose whose contribution/tuition (enclosed below if I may) will remain a cornerstone in the way I'll be viewing my takes in the future. Thanks all again. Bien cordialement de Metz Philippe, so lucky to share with such guys/gals as you all. *********************************************************************** Moose wrote : I like the image a lot. Although it has many faults, the palpable sense of engagement of the people with each other is wonderfully caught. The eye posiitn of the man in the middle is priceless. I like the crop better, although I believe there are others also better than the whole frame. Like Chuck, I find the arm on the woman's chair back very distracting. One of the strengths of your crop is eliminating that arm. I believe that looking at the strengths and weaknesses of an image first, before thinking about crops, can be beneficial. Here, the strengths I see are in the faces, especially the way they are animated and engaged with each other. A major weaknesses, for me is the way several elements are brighter than the primary subjects, particularly the woman. <http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/Others/Amard/Triangulation.htm> So I first dropped the arm waaay down. If one pays attention to it, the light on it is obviously wrong. However, if I am successful in moving attention to the people, that won't be a problem. The next problem is all the bright things that should not be central subject matter, but our eyes seem naturally to be drawn to the light. The wall lights, brightly lit wall itself and the tablecloth, which is a huge blob of bright white filling the whole foreground all are problems.. So I pulled down the highlights overall, and did a bit more for the big wall light and wall behind it. I also pulled up the shadows. this brought up the people, so that overall, and especially in their faces, they are able to compete with the now somewhat tamed other elements. Now it was time to consider crops. First, I just tightened up the basic subject, cutting down on the foreground and losing irrelevant surroundings. At least to me, the image immediately gains energy/intensity. The human interaction is intensified. Then I tightened up even more, intensifying the focus on the people. Now the problem arm becomes even less noticeable. It can't be eliminated without harm to the presence of the woman, but it's no longer an issue. As extraneous material is lost on the bottom and right, the painting, as both human and now the only other significant object, starts to become part of the group, so I gave it a bit more breathing room. I considered cropping right into the head on the left. it makes it more intense, but I know cutting heads in half bothers some people. If the painting weren't there, I would crop much more off the top, letting a strong horizontal form strengthen the connection between the people. Finally, I did a version of your crop, although, like Andrew, I thought it needed a bit more air on the right. Moose Philippe Amard wrote: > PAW 46 is up, but I'm still wondering if the crop > > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/Phileica/PAW-2009/2009-PAW-46-Triangulation-1140498.jpg.html > > > > is any better than the original shot. > > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/Phileica/PAW-2009/2009-PAW-46-Triangulation-1140498-2.jpg.html > > > > Thanks in anticipation for on or off-list input or feedback > > Best from Metz > Phx > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > NO ARCHIVE