Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/04/03

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Nathan's PAW 13 - a trip to London,and not a shot of Big Ben...
From: Nathan Wajsman <wajsman@webshuttle.ch>
Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2002 21:55:16 +0200
References: <3CAA249A.2077A9F4@webshuttle.ch> <003401c1dab1$7ca773a0$633f4d18@gv.shawcable.net>

Ted

Thanks for the insightful and helpful comments, as always. Regarding the alt5
picture, I had noticed that occasionally the singers would look up at the
gallery and I waited for her to do so. So the picture is not an accident, and
accordingly I claim the credit. Having said that, this is the only picture in
this set which is cropped to any significant degree. There was a lot of garbage
on the right side of the frame which I cropped away. The other six shots are all
pretty much full frame images.

Nathan

Ted Grant wrote:

> Nathan Wajsman wrote & showed:
>
> > http://www.wajsman.com/2002_13.jpg
> > http://www.wajsman.com/2002_13alt1.jpg
> > http://www.wajsman.com/2002_13alt2.jpg
> > http://www.wajsman.com/2002_13alt3.jpg
> > http://www.wajsman.com/2002_13alt4.jpg
> > http://www.wajsman.com/2002_13alt5.jpg
> > http://www.wajsman.com/2002_13alt6.jpg
>
> Well done Nathan,
> Nothing like a quick two shilling tour of London . ;-)
>
> Editing: >>partly because I am a lousy editor <<<<<
>
> Editing our work is the most difficult, because we our emotions and physical
> involvement often cloud our choice of picture, rather than KISS....."look at
> it photographically - is this one of my 10 best ever pictures? If not, out!"
>
> Add in a touch of, "any doubt it's out!"  And the editing becomes
> methodical, cold and often damn right misery! ;-) We can create more reasons
> for the picture being used than there are in a box of corn flakes, flakes.
>
> There are the, "oh but gee whiz they wont notice... I love it, I know
> there's a little tilt, I broke my ankle getting this, it's in!"  :-) And the
> "to leave it in" reasons go on forever. But in reality, we must always edit
> by cold hearted ruthless "if in doubt out!"  Otherwise we place our ability
> as a photographer in jeopardy by showing a less than super shot each time we
> use a photograph.
>
> Realizing you wished a tour series, I'd have said right off this is what it
> is with captions Then we'd have looked at it as a photo essay using frame 6
> as the lead photo and building the others around it as a magazine layout.
>
> Pats and whacks! ;-)
> 1/ The arm at first was a distraction, however on second look, it adds to
> the crowded effect adding to the depth effect. Slight whack.
>
> 2/ I like this better because it's open and allows the viewer to see into
> the car and more of the readers and riders and variations of people.  slight
> pat.
>
> 3/ A moment's wait, and catch the clerk looking eye ball to eye ball with
> the customer then you'd have captured a communication factor with eyes open.
> Nit picking. However, that's what makes it work better. Even a slight move
> to your left going over the head of the boy allowing a slight move of the
> clerk off centre possibly seeing his hands when handing over tickets or
> money. Open another "communication action moment."
>
> If you look at this photo as, "Light - Eyes - Action"  Then you understand
> what I mean and how those little things make a difference. slight whack.
>
> 4/ Scalper:  It works because it all balances right across the frame. Pat!
> ;-)
>
> 5/ book store. It works and I'd not do much differently. It's great shooting
> people when their minds are in action and involved doing something making
> them completely unaware of the rest of the world. Pat. ;-)
>
> 6/ Sorry this doesn't do anything, as it looks like a quick over the balcony
> shot. However! A bonus point if you shot because the singer turned her head
> and you reacted to that action! If you didn't, and it just happened to be
> that angle when you shot. Then a whack for that not being the reason of the
> exposure. If you come back and tell me the turn of her head was the
> triggering factor, then it's a Pat on the back, but just a small one.
>
> 7/ This is a big pat. Good angle and light use to enhance the body lines.
>
> Thanks for the tour. :-)
> ted
>
> Ted Grant Photography Limited
> www.islandnet.com/~tedgrant
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

- --
Nathan Wajsman
Herrliberg (ZH), Switzerland

e-mail: wajsman@webshuttle.ch
mobile: +41 78 732 1430

Photo-A-Week: http://www.wajsman.com/indexpaw2002.htm
General photo site: http://www.wajsman.com/index.htm




- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

Replies: Reply from Ted Grant <tedgrant@shaw.ca> (Re: [Leica] Nathan's PAW 13 - a trip to London,and not a shot of Big Ben...)
In reply to: Message from Nathan Wajsman <wajsman@webshuttle.ch> ([Leica] Nathan's PAW 13 - a trip to London, and not a shot of Big Ben...)
Message from Ted Grant <tedgrant@shaw.ca> (Re: [Leica] Nathan's PAW 13 - a trip to London, and not a shot of Big Ben...)