[Leica] La Barceloneta, a BAR

[jhnichols at lighttube.net (Jim Nichols)]

Philip,

I like your pictures.  The first would have been more attractive if the 
framing gaps were the same for both the vertical and horizontal frames.  The 
narrow top and bottom gaps are a distraction.  The composition and exposure 
are very good.

Jim Nichols
Tullahoma, TN USA
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Philip Clarke" <nod at bouncing.org>
To: "Leica Users Group" <lug at leica-users.org>
Sent: Saturday, April 18, 2009 3:46 AM
Subject: Re: [Leica] La Barceloneta, a BAR


>I found them, I've only taken two pictures in the last year (that may
> even be 3 years), they are there
>
> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/Philip+Clarke/images/
>
> They are really badly done in photoshop, the first is with a ricoh
> compact. These are not excuses I accept the blame for the mis-printing.
> They fulfill the criterea for my three rules (and Tina should remember
> these from ten years ago)
>
> a) make sure the background is not distracting
> b) come back with something different
> c) always know when to break the rules
>
> My timing was off with the Ricoh on the blow up the little girl's feet
> are not on the bench but that is 100% my responsibility as I should have
> compensated more for the shutter lag. Note the date, I do not know if it
> was an April fool's the camera is my wife's. The woman's t-shirt had
> blown highlights and I've done a bad job of bringing it down, but the
> colour fringing is the camera. The burning in is quite subtle in other
> areas, if you look you'll see there is less density of stone chips in
> the concrete between the two bench and at the end of the girl's, so it
> is lighter in real life, so it's been taken down to match the rest,
> although I suppose I could have cloned it. I chose the wide end of the
> lens. I saw the picture before I held the camera, moved and chose the
> appropriate lens. Telephoto compression was not desired.
>
>
> The woman is in focus, on the RAW version her jumper is certainly, but
> at 1/6th of a second she may have moved her eyes, all credit to image
> stabilisation though, at 60mm (equivalent 12.8mm in the exif data) in
> "the old days" I'd have been sharp handheld at 1/15 but 1/8th would e
> shaky territory.This is jpeg off the camera with work done. If you look
> at the glasses you'll see the restaurant has spot lights, this led to a
> bright patch on the wall, so it was taken down. Off the right of the
> frame is a door window and a waiter, so the camera could not move any
> further around, I may remove the bottom plate on a crop. I don't think
> I've altered her skin tone. I suspect she is not a customer as she does
> not have a napkin on her table, but people tend to think of her as
> lonely. I will probably also tone down the two furtherest napkins on the
> right. The line of the door on the right irritates me and I won't do a
> bartlett border the next time. When I've got to grip with capture one
> and the concept of "extra headroom" I will "re-print" it.
>
> So that's two pictures that illustrate leading lines, multiple focal
> points of interest, "darkroom" work, timing, focal length, ambient
> light, removing colour casts, oversharpening a jpeg; yes I do practise
> what I preach, and I don't do it with any pretension my pictures taken
> on compact cameras are just as criticised as when I used M6's.
>
>
> George Lottermoser wrote:
>> May we see some examples of your waiting and moving, Philip?
>>
>> Regards,
>> George Lottermoser
>> george at imagist.com
>> http://www.imagist.com
>> http://www.imagist.com/blog
>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist
>>
>> On Apr 17, 2009, at 7:54 PM, Philip Clarke wrote:
>>
>>> All of these pictures could be improve by waiting or moving.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
>