Wow - thanks Stan, that's a really good critique and I will spend a lot more time digesting it and taking note. Much appreciated.
> So why don't you hop over on Saturday and take such a shot? Are you a > dedicated photographer or not? > Just at the moment I don't really have time to get over there - I have to buy some new lens caps on Saturday, and if that's not dedication I don't know what is. However, I might have some of the locals brought over here and have them be candid for me while I get the right shot. > Final caveat: I would like to think that I could come up with an > equivalent set of images in the same time period if I were to travel > there, but I don't have a Leica. Or your good eye. I didn't take the Leicas with me, but I guess it's enough just to have them in my safe back at home to make me the photographic great that I am! Bob > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Stan > Halpin > Sent: 22 October 2008 03:09 > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Subject: Re: Fez - candidate essay for the RPS. Opinions please. > > A few thoughts. First, again with the caveat that I am not familiar > with the photo-essay concept as might be interpreted by the > distinguished learned judges, I have been uncomfortable with the two- > part structure you have selected since you first mentioned it. > Without narration (as in a live slide show) (assuming that the essay > needs to stand on its own) then what ties the two halves together? > Looking at this version, I am left with the same question. > Taking the two parts separately, I think the tannery portion is good. > Good images, it tells a story, it starts wide, comes into details, it > ends with an exclamation point. I struggled to find a theme in the > second portion. At first I thought it was about commerce in the > streets. Oh, no, it is about cats. No, it is about the people in > everyday life. I guess. > > My suggestions would be: a) flip the two halves; b) for the street- > scenes portion, mix the order a bit so that, for example, you move > from commerce to normal people and back to disabuse the viewer that > there is any theme but the variety of street life. My specific > ordering, using current ordinal numbers from the site, would be 8, > 10, 11, 14, 9, 12, 13, 15, 1-7, 16. This sequence would have you > starting with a wide shot to establish the locale, zooming in to wide > angle street scenes, then further in to tighter shots, then back out > (with #1) to a subset of the city, then into the gritty details of > the tanning operation, ending with a tight exclamation of color (#7), > then back out to the afternoon light over the larger city to put it > all back into context again. #1 becomes the answer to my question > about what ties the two halves together. And this sequence or similar > would keep #9, but would bury it deeper; as a first detail shot in > the sequence it is too jarring, but as a middle shot it fits into the > context established. > > The ordering of the halves is almost a glass half-empty vs. glass > half-full proposition. My way says: Isn't this a nice interesting > city with friendly exotic looking people going about their daily > lives. But in the background we have this nasty work that is done to > produce items of beauty. Your way says: Look at this nasty work to > produce a fine product (sub-text: and we unrepentant colonizers never > think about this side of life), but oh by the way the city does have > its charms as well. Putting the street scenes first lets the viewer > put the tannery into that context, but putting the tannery first > forces the viewer to put it into their own context. Which may be out > of synch with the second half of the essay. E.g., the second half > could just as well be street shots in London or Paris with details of > gents' shoes and ladies' handbags and schoolboys' leather day packs. > > One other thought. Following my sequence and my story line, it would > be nice to have the last shot in the first sequence be another street > scene, but one with leather goods for sale in the background. I think > this was mentioned before, and you said you don't have such a shot. > So why don't you hop over on Saturday and take such a shot? Are you a > dedicated photographer or not? > > Final caveat: I would like to think that I could come up with an > equivalent set of images in the same time period if I were to travel > there, but I don't have a Leica. Or your good eye. > Thanks for asking for our input. > > stan > > > On Oct 17, 2008, at 6:07 PM, Bob W wrote: > > > Here's another draft of the slideshow, incorporating some suggestions > > people have kindly made: > > http://www.web-options.com/ARPS2/ > > > > Comments solicited. > > > > Thanks, > > Bob > > > > > >> > >>> > >>> From: "Bob W" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> Whatever their other qualities, the RPS judges just won't even > >>> consider them if they have gross technical faults. > >> > >> How very middleagedwhitemale of them. Don't they know art > >> (sorry, Art) when they see it? > >> > >> Outraged of Notting Hill > >> > > > > > > -- > > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > PDML@pdml.net > > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above > > and follow the directions. > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
