Hi!
But I'd be real curious if anyone likes the crops better. And which crop do
you like?
FIRST CROP:
http://members.aol.com/eactivist/PAWS/pages/space1.htm
The forward arrows take you to the next crops.The back arrow on the first one
takes you to the original (however, the forward arrow on
In a message dated 10/12/2005 5:58:21 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think that the first crop is the best of the three. The second one is
too tight and the third one seems to be simply a fragment really. Also
the third one seems to be too small a crop so that the limits
(Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 12. oktober 2005 16:54
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: PESO - Personal Space Revisited/Closeness (3 Crops)
In a message dated 10/12/2005
On 10/10/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes. It's a contrast and a dilemma. How do you provide intimacy that street
photography seems to require when you are trying to portray isolation? ;-)
street photography doesn't require anything, other than that it be
(more or less) taken
On 12/10/05, frank theriault, discombobulated, unleashed:
sometimes it's intimate:
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3125114size=lg
Cropped rubbish.
sometimes it's not:
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3739186size=lg
Blurry cropped rubbish.
-- ;-)
Cheers,
Cotty
In a message dated 10/12/2005 2:35:29 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 10/10/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes. It's a contrast and a dilemma. How do you provide intimacy that street
photography seems to require when you are trying to portray isolation?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
FIRST CROP:
http://members.aol.com/eactivist/PAWS/pages/space1.htm
of the new crops I like this best, I suggested a
less drastic one...
I like looking at the shot without the title
because visually I think it is more
interesting structurally...
I'd like
On 10/12/05, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 12/10/05, frank theriault, discombobulated, unleashed:
sometimes it's intimate:
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3125114size=lg
Cropped rubbish.
sometimes it's not:
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3739186size=lg
Blurry
On 10/12/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip Actually, not to be inflammatory or anything, but I don't see
much connection
between intimacy and shooting people one doesn't know (in the street or
elsewhere). Appearances of intimacy in those situations would be illusionary
to my
On Oct 12, 2005, at 7:27 PM, frank theriault wrote:
On 10/12/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip Actually, not to be inflammatory or anything, but I don't see
much connection between intimacy and shooting people one doesn't
know (in the street or
elsewhere). Appearances of
In a message dated 10/12/2005 7:17:50 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'd like to see more of the shadows that were in
the original... just clipping
out about the bottom, um 6th ? of the photo...the
lightest part in the foreground.
hope this is helpful but probably isn't :)
In a message dated 10/12/2005 7:28:35 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
can't type enough to properly discuss, but i often feel great intimacy
with certain of my subjects, even ones that i didn't interact with at
all, except to photograph in a fleeting moment. don't know why,
In a message dated 10/12/2005 7:41:18 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
We can drop into the long running war between photography and art now.
;-)
Godfrey
==
No thanks.
Marnie :-)
Okay, Bob wants more meaningful discussion. :-) So please indulge me.
I got curious and I am testing a thesis.
Practically no one liked Personal Space but me. I think the wastebasket and
the bottom should be cropped, but I liked it.
http://members.aol.com/eactivist/PAWS/pages/man1.htm
Ooops, the url for the original is:
http://members.aol.com/eactivist/PAWS/pages/man2.htm
Sorry, I had man1 in the last post.
Marnie aka Doe
On Oct 10, 2005, at 12:07 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
FIRST CROP:
http://members.aol.com/eactivist/PAWS/pages/space1.htm
...
Anyone have a stronger emotional reaction to any of the crops? Like
any of
them better?
The original capture is too target center for me and doesn't give me
the
In a message dated 10/10/2005 12:31:04 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The original capture is too target center for me and doesn't give me
the sense of space/distance. The first crop is much better ... it
provides that sense of distance and isolation that the title is
On 10/10/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED], discombobulated, unleashed:
FIRST CROP:
http://members.aol.com/eactivist/PAWS/pages/space1.htm
The forward arrows take you to the next crops.The back arrow on the
first one
takes you to the original (however, the forward arrow on the original does
not return to
On 10/10/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED], discombobulated, unleashed:
Ooops, the url for the original is:
http://members.aol.com/eactivist/PAWS/pages/man2.htm
Sorry, I had man1 in the last post.
First time I've seen that.
I prefer crop 1 from previous post. Mono works well for me too.
Cheers,
In a message dated 10/10/2005 1:01:47 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
First time I've seen that.
I prefer crop 1 from previous post. Mono works well for me too.
Cheers,
Cotty
==
Thanks Cotty. According to what Godfrey said, though I may be proving nothing
with
I don't think street photography does require you to provide intimacy. If it
requires anything, it is that you treat the subject appropriately, and this
is true for all photography.
There are several ways you can convey the feeling that someone is alone in a
large space. Consider, for example,
You can also use colours and composition to make a sense of isolation. Here's
a non-perfect example:
http://foto.no/cgi-bin/bildekritikk/vis_bilde.cgi?id=195401
DagT
fra: Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I don't think street photography does require you to provide intimacy. If it
requires
Hi Marnie
I do not like the cropped versions here.
The original, while a bit busy in the background, remains the best shot for
me because the surrounding area helps me to understand what happened. That
gets completely lost in a tight crop.
greetings
Markus
FIRST CROP:
On Oct 10, 2005, at 3:59 AM, Cotty wrote:
It shows that there are
no rules in photography, just preferences.
Mark!
I missed this shot earlier. I quite like it but wish I could see a bit
more of the subject's face. The light is great, and the composition is
very nice. The original crop is by far the best.
Paul
On Oct 10, 2005, at 6:48 AM, Markus Maurer wrote:
Hi Marnie
I do not like the cropped versions
On 10/10/05, Paul Stenquist, discombobulated, unleashed:
On Oct 10, 2005, at 3:59 AM, Cotty wrote:
It shows that there are
no rules in photography, just preferences.
Mark!
LOL.
You sure i said that?
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|
Coming out of lurk mode - I've not commented before, content to try to
learn off other's comments. However...FWIW
Crop 1 does it for me. You've eliminated the empty space between you
and the subject and to the right of the subject which add nothing to the
photo, while still holding onto the
Marnie,
I don't know what it is, but I often find people ~want~ me to photograph
them. It may be my carefree demeanor while walking about, my charming and
disarming smile - who knows. People often invite me in. Once in, it's
easy to talk with them and photograph them. However, what I want to
I like the first crop the best - not quite so distant but still in
keeping with your original idea. All in all, a pretty good idea. I'm
sure I would not have thought of something like that.
--
Best regards,
Bruce
Monday, October 10, 2005, 12:07:41 AM, you wrote:
Eac Okay, Bob wants more
Absolutely, I like a feeling of intimacy in street photography, when
I want to express moods of warmth and commonality, the closeness of
urban streets.
When I'm looking to express moods of distance and isolation, of scope
and context, I step back and/or use longer focal lengths. Longer, in
In a message dated 10/10/2005 7:33:49 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
http://home.earthlink.net/~sbelinkoff/images/motherchild.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~pdml-pics/nflguy2.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~scbelinkoff/puppet-woman.jpg
However, there's no reason why you
In a message dated 10/10/2005 3:06:55 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
You can also use colours and composition to make a sense of isolation.
Here's a non-perfect example:
http://foto.no/cgi-bin/bildekritikk/vis_bilde.cgi?id=195401
DagT
==
Interesting, Dag. I like
I like this one a bit better, I didn't comment before because I had
little constructive to say.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ooops, the url for the original is:
http://members.aol.com/eactivist/PAWS/pages/man2.htm
Sorry, I had man1 in the last post.
Marnie aka Doe
--
When you're
On 10/10/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED], discombobulated, unleashed:
I don't mind if I am not cut out for street photography, I was just
trying to
see if the closer is better premise worked or had limits or anything. A
rather nonscientific test because the photo may not have been the best
for that. So
In a message dated 10/10/2005 10:12:06 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Er, your 'street photography' is fine. Crop 1 is a good shot and stands
up well to anything I've ever seen. It's not any better or any worse than
a photograph of a person (obviously) at close proximity to
35 matches
Mail list logo
