Thanks for your reply. I think your right about the second one. Although, it’s very tricky. If I leave out the adult’s head in the shot the photo looks messy. There’s lots going on with no particular or obvious subject. I figured the child was more amusing so I cropped it down to her but I wanted to show the pigeon on the adult’s arm. Actually, the mother (I think it’s the mother) is taking a photo at the same time I am. I dunno now. Maybe i’ll give less cropping on this one and see again what its like.
Thanks for your feedback. It’s tricky to decided. Maybe I’ll come back when I have more time and post the orginal and you guys can crop it?
This is more of a portrait than something that would fit within the street genre-
posed, direct, not something grabbed on the fly, something made out of nothing-
I suppose your right. I guess I posted it as it was a stranger on the street.
As a portrait, it’s over-processed-
the colour is over-done, and not very respectful to your sitter,
who seems to have been made into a caricature-
unless he actually is that colour-
I’d say it’s a bit of both. There’s about 3 layers mergeg here abs naybe I didn’t compinsate for the extra saturation it has given. Although, he was red faced from what I believe is his addiction to alchohol.
As a portrait, the interesting thing is his face-
the little scraps of background don’t really add anything meaningful,
except for implying exterior, night…
Or, interior, flash- I don’t know-
Exterior flash
The distance suggests an unwillingness to get up close,
although that’s only my opinion-
and the homeless thing-
is the picture telling me anything about his address,
and is that the point of the portrait?
A famous photographer said something like; If your photo isn’t good enough – you’re not close enough! Maybe this rings true here, but I tried. I saw him as I arrived out of the pub. He looked lonely, sad, drunk and withered from the life he’s living. I wanted to capture that.
If it is, I don’t think it works-
it doesn’t really tell me about his condition,
other than that he’s perhaps to be seen as an easy target in a public place-
In college, we just touched on documentary style photography. Some photos inividually make no sense until you read the story behind it. Maybe I should of got some info from him. I’ll bare that in mind next time.
I think a less extreme, or cartoonish, processing might make this into a better picture-
as would getting closer- and getting the flash off the camera
My first time processing in this way. I’m gonna try again. With all things new that I’m learning it’s easy to go a little overboard with it.
Thanks for your feedback and good, constructive criticism. I’t a big help :)
and getting the flash off the camera-
i really like all of them. i have to say, great captures and with the debate on the whole invasion of privacy thing, i’d be very much on the side of “they’re in a public place” but in saying that, i don’t have the balls myself to snap away like this. gotta get over that!
Thanks very much.
Well, I used a 300mm zoom lens. It helps alot. Lately I’ve just been trying to build up my confidence by just doing it and hoping for the best. Sometime I get funny looks most of the time it’s ok.
Wow, it’s nice that my photo sparked some debate and I thank you all for contributing. Taking candid shots is what I really enjoy and it’s great to have some debate covering this area.
I’d like to add that, I hope it’s obvious by the shot, that it was taken because I wanted to capture a beautiful moment. It was taken at the Spire on O’Connoll St. They were definately a couple as just before they were kissing. I hope for them and the person(s) not in this picture, that it isn’t an affair. If it is, that’s there problem. Should they be having an affair in the first place? Well, I’m not to judge that am I? I was just capturing a sensual moment. (or at least trying)
Expresbro wrote:
I wouldn’t worry about stuff like that after the fact. I’d be more worried about some nutcase hitting me over the head with a bar to be honest.
And hopefully somebody would have a camera and catch it for posterity.
The first shot: Ther girls face looked over exposed as there was direct sunlight on her very milky face. I feathered and turned down the exposure to take the hit off it. Maybe I went too far?
The last one: Well, maybe I’m not close enough to the subject. I’m not sure the problem is fixable after. I think If I got clser I may have been able to get a more interesting shot.
Thanks again for your reply. You’ve given me a bit more confidence.
I’ve browsed a few shots in this forums and I really like this one.
I like the compisition, the blurred grass in the forground etc…
You’ve caught a great time when the light is unique. Afterall, you mentioned you done the ‘safe’ shots beforehand and so I don’t see why it’s a problem to capture a more artistic shot of the couple. If you see the opertunity – take it! And you did. Well done.