[SI] Cinema Vérité Critiques, LH through GT
Gordon Moat
This is the second part of my critiques for this assignment. Since I
left off with Bob Hickey on the last posting, this one will start with
Lisa Horton, and make it through the last image.
Lisa Horton:
This images works well for the CV concept. The selective focus engages
the viewer, as does the closeness of the subjects, and viewing angle.
The viewer is involved by the placement of the main subject directly in
the centre of view. It is confrontational and cinema in it's aspects.
With the editing aspect, I think the image could be stronger by cropping
some of the right side, though that would result in an almost square
image, and less of a cinema feel to the scene. Another choice could have
been even more selective focus to blur the figure in the background
more. Overall, this is a very strong image, and it would be tough to
improve it.
Nick James:
One of my favourites from this series. Really invokes a Robert Frank
idea of imagery. The close view involves the viewer. The scratched words
on the phone engage the viewer further, though a look at the larger
image is needed for that, since the thumbnail loses that detail. The "B"
and arrow create eye movement off the image, and that tells a story, and
gets the cinema feel. This is stark truth and confrontational realism,
and works well as a monochrome image. It also has the feel of the era of
movies that defined CV, as well as the older still photography of early
Magnum shooters. Really a strong and sophisticated image, with nothing
to improve. You choose quite well, so I am less concerns about editing
skills. Well done.
Jim Kramer:
Tough choice of subject. Those viewers with children are more likely to
be engaged by the image. The viewer is involved by the close nature of
the subject. There is not much to hold the attention, nor tell much of a
story, and I think this image could be improved upon in later works.
While placing a subject in the centre can draw attention to the subject,
it makes it tougher to hold that attention. Something more seems needed,
though I am having trouble trying to state exactly what. A tighter
panoramic crop might reinforce the image more. I would be interested in
seeing your other choices, and I am curious to know why this was chosen
over your other images. While it is a nice image, I am still not sure if
it was your best choice for this assignment.
Steve Kramer:
Everything works in this image. The subject alone engages the viewer,
while the eyes and stare involve the viewer. The selective focus also
helps, and I really get the feeling that I am there. There is just
enough information in the image to tell a story, and not too much to be
cluttered. This is cinema at it's best, though you took the
confrontational part a bit too seriously. Glad to see you made it home,
and you are another one who did not seem to take my warning about not
getting too close to your work. ;-) Damn strong image, and good
enough that no cropping would change the impact. The editing is less of
an issue, since this image is definitely strong enough. Well done.
Lionel Lauer:
Another centred and symmetrical image, though it works well. Again, the
close in aspect of including the entire subject in the frame involves
the viewer. At first this simple image did seem to involve the viewer,
though the camera she is holding accomplishes that. That other camera,
and the pack of cigarettes, give enough information to tell a story, and
create the cinema feel. It is a set-up shot, though the truth is readily
apparent. Good use of colour, and selective focus.
Mike Marty:
The thumbnail does not do it, and it is necessary to view the larger
image. At first I though it was too centred, but the figure on the right
reinforces the composition. That also involves the viewer. The
expression conflicts with the appearance, which engages the viewer,
though that also gives the cinema aspect. The thumbnail makes one think
this is a cheesecake shot, but the sour expression tells another story,
only really apparent on the larger view. The crop as is works, and I am
not concerned about your edit choices. This image fits all the ideas.
Vic Mason:
Chris Birkett, Ken Cashion, you, and myself, all choose a longer crop in
true cinema style. While not a necessary aspect of the assignment, these
choices make these images stronger. This was a good editing choice. The
layout engages the viewer, and the inclusion of the street gives the
viewer the impression fo being there (involvement). The confrontational
nature and truth are there for the viewer to see. The interest lies more
in what comes next, rather than what is before the viewer. Well done.
Gordon Moat:
Not wanting to comment on my own image, all I will say is that it fits
the assignment criteria. There are better images here, and possibly in
my other choices as well. The crop helps the image, though this may not
have been my best choice. I will let others state more on this, if they
like.
Dennis O'Connor:
The thumbnail does not do it, though the larger image shows enough
detail to engage the viewer, especially all the eyeballs. The image is
less successful at involving the viewer, or telling a story. Also on the
details, the truck in the background is a distraction, though more
selective focus could have solved that. Cropping the top and bottom
would help this image. I am curious about the edits, and your other
choices. It is a fun image, and captures initial attention well.
Doug Payne:
Action, drama, and the set-up of cinema feeling, all in one image.
Really fits the assignment well. It may have been possible to get a
stronger image by having a more out of focus background, and reinforce
the actors in this drama. Regardless, a nice edit choice, and a strong
image.
Rich Pos:
I continue to be impressed by your work. There is a feeling that
indicates development of a style, and this seems to get better each
week. The sign writing reinforces the image, as does the choice of a
very wide view up close. This places the viewer in the scene, and
involve the viewer in the action. The diagonal aspect of the composition
engages the viewer, and lots of details tell a story and hold attention.
The is cinema at it's finest, and the stark reality of truth. Well done.
Simon Stanmore:
Really a strong image, and even the thumbnail engages the viewer. This
is a modern Koudelka, and the view just manages to involve the viewer,
and get away from an observing, or documentary approach. Sensitive
appearing situation that was handled well. I wish I could add something
to provoke more thoughts and ideas for you on this. About all I could
consider would be to crop some of the lower detail, and place the more
more on a level with the characters, though that really is a minor
change to an already strong image. Definitely one of my favourites. Well
done.
Michael Stevens:
My first thought on the thumbnail was "not a sports image", since that
can be too observing, and less involving. However, the closeness of the
subjects near the floor brings the viewer onto the floor, and into the
action. This is a telephoto shot that really works, and proves that a
wide or normal lens was not needed to meet the assignment. The depth of
focus, and selective focus, isolate one player well enough to freeze an
expression, and engage the viewer. The other details tell the story, and
complete the cinema. No crops needed, and this image just works. It is
apparent that this was not just a random image, so good work on the
editing choices.
Glenn Travis:
Glad to see you submitted an image, and thanks for joining in. The
subject engages the viewer, and the closeness of the subject makes one
feel a part of the image. There is a unreal enough aspect to the image
that the imagination of the viewer is provoked, and the selective focus
helps. It definitely seems more cinema than documentary, and more than
mere observation. Since this is from your archives, good effort on the
edits. The character on the background on the right is slightly
distracting, and not complementary of the main character, though a
simple crop would fix that. Very little to change in this image, and it
fits the assignment well.
Okay, so I hope I got to everyone. Please ask questions, or add
comments. I look forward to reading more. Also, I will go through the
other posts about this assignment, and reply individually on each thread
where it may add some insight.
I really want to thank all of you who contributed. The images really fit
together well in the gallery. None of you did badly, and I think all of
you learned a little. I was also glad to learn a little about the
individual vision of each of you, and that is what makes photography.
Ciao!
Gordon Moat
Alliance Graphique Studio
<http://www.allgstudio.com>
Dennis O'Connor
"Gordon Moat" <mo...@attglobal.net> wrote in message
news:3F7BF1C5...@attglobal.net...
> This is the second part of my critiques for this assignment.
> The thumbnail does not do it, though the larger image shows enough
> detail to engage the viewer, especially all the eyeballs.
Well, it was posted because it was the only shot I made in the CV time
period that would remotely fit the topic, and because I had my arm gently
twisted to post it anyway...
Anyway, there is no editing, zero, zilch, nada... There is a long history
about that driveway, and the sentinels - but suffice it to say that I felt
it prudent to take the picture, leaning to my right and holding the camera
out the passenger window by one hand as I went by on the road, without
stopping.. It is a true snap shot...
Denny
Steve Kramer
> Steve Kramer:
> Everything works in this image. The subject alone engages the viewer,
> while the eyes and stare involve the viewer. The selective focus also
> helps, and I really get the feeling that I am there. There is just
> enough information in the image to tell a story, and not too much to be
> cluttered. This is cinema at it's best, though you took the
> confrontational part a bit too seriously. Glad to see you made it home,
> and you are another one who did not seem to take my warning about not
> getting too close to your work. ;-) Damn strong image, and good
> enough that no cropping would change the impact. The editing is less of
> an issue, since this image is definitely strong enough. Well done.
Thanks! I had a rough day today and it was nice to come home and find
something positive about my work. Although the situation along the
Burmese border is 'difficult' at best, I find I do my best shooting
under difficult situations. Besides, I'm an adrenaline junkie and this
sort of think really gets me going.
The soldier was polite enough (why not, I wasn't trying to kill him!)
and didn't mind posing at all. I really would have preferred if he
hadn't handed off his rifle to one of his squaddies, but I wasn't going
to argue with him. I did get several other shots of other soldiers
brandishing their weapons, but they were smiling too much, had new
uniforms, and obviously hadn't yet seen any combat. If you'll notice,
the guy in my photo is holding his grenades onto his belt with rubber
bands... a VERY convenient way to access them quickly when needed, and
has all his pockets crammed full of rifle clips. This guy has seen TOO
much combat. The eyes tell it all.
Thanks again for your critique.
Steve Kramer
Chiang Mai, Thailand
http://www.photoenvisions.com
--
"The voyage of discovery lies not in seeking new horizons,
but in seeing with new eyes." - Marcel Proust
Doug Payne
> Doug Payne:
> Action, drama, and the set-up of cinema feeling, all in one image.
> Really fits the assignment well. It may have been possible to get a
> stronger image by having a more out of focus background, and reinforce
> the actors in this drama.
As opposed to the out-of-focus subjects? :-) I really blew the focus on
that one; as I said in a previous posting, it was a really quick grab
shot, and the movement of the characters and the crowd precluded
re-shooting it. Not my style of photography, purely luck. No "edits";
this was the only shot I took, not because I felt that a single shot was
part of the mandate, but just because I really didn't set out to shoot
anything at that particular event. I had a whole 'nother idea in mind
but it wasn't possible because of weather conditions.
> Regardless, a nice edit choice, and a strong image.
Thanks for the commentary, for all the shots, not just this one. I wish
I had the time and energy (and talent) to do likewise.
jimkramer
> Tough choice of subject. Those viewers with children are more likely to
> be engaged by the image. The viewer is involved by the close nature of
> the subject. There is not much to hold the attention, nor tell much of a
> story, and I think this image could be improved upon in later works.
> While placing a subject in the centre can draw attention to the subject,
> it makes it tougher to hold that attention. Something more seems needed,
> though I am having trouble trying to state exactly what. A tighter
> panoramic crop might reinforce the image more. I would be interested in
> seeing your other choices, and I am curious to know why this was chosen
> over your other images. While it is a nice image, I am still not sure if
> it was your best choice for this assignment.
>
Michael Stevens
>My first thought on the thumbnail was "not a sports image", since that
>can be too observing, and less involving. ...
Looks like I conveniently forgot about the "involving" part, eh?
I had a good idea, and yes, only ONE idea, for the CV assignment but
the training schedule of a local fire department got changed at the
last minute so I couldn't get the shot(s) I wanted. But, it was
probably for the better since this week's assignment is Night People
... can anyone guess what my next submission will be?
I didn't really want to submit my CV shot because, even though it
engages the viewer and makes them sense the urgency with which #10
wants her teammates to get the ball, it really isn't what I consider a
"documentary-type" image. It's engaging but doesn't really tell a
story. I had another image that would've worked as well as what I
submitted but was shot back in August (you'll probably have to paste
the link back together):
http://www.wideopenphotography.com/photos/avp/manhattan_03/rock_star/pages/avp_manhattan_08-08-03_13.40.07_E82C9970.htm
All in that one photo you have happiness, dismay & anger ...
Which leads us to my admitted shortcomings. When the first assignment
came through and either you or Alan posted comments I thought "Jeeze,
no wonder I suck. I couldn't possibly look at a photo and
analyze/critique it the way you guys do.
As an example, on my Motion Assignment
http://www.pbase.com/image/21321641
you or Alan commented on it and mentioned something about the red not
being too distracting. I read that and thought to myself, "What the
hell is he talking about ... red? There's no red in that photo." So I
loaded it up and there's that red sunshade in the background. I never
noticed it before. Don't ask me how I failed to notice it 'cause now I
can't get around it.
This assignment is definitely the most difficult one for me 'cause it
made me TRY to think outside MY box. I'm a more structured-type
person. I look at artists this way: There are those that draw & paint
crazy abstract things that make it hard to imagine the frame of mind
that conceived it. Then there are the straight and narrow kind, like
me, that could draft a house perfectly on paper to 1/64th scale but
couldn't make something abstract to save their lives.
Give me a camera, a light meter, a person, and some light and I will
give you a perfectly exposed portrait ... that will probably not be
terribly interesting to look at. Ask me to try to take a photo that
tells a story? Not gonna happen ... on purpose anyway. That's why I do
mainly sports. You shoot it and know instantly if you got the shot. No
interpretations needed ... Some might think I'm too hard on myself
but, as Harry Callahan once said, "a man's got to know his
limitations."
Both the CV shot and Motion shot were lucky frames from hours of
shooting. Actually, most of my good shorts are blind luck ...
Of the CV shots posted the only ones that do anything for me are:
AL DENELSBECK: Even though it's not a "perfect" photo it puts you
there because of the framing of the shot through the window.
STEVE KRAMER: I like it because it's a perfect expsosure of an
obviously seasoned soldier. I don't know that it really tells ME a
story but it's a great photo.
GLEN DAVIS: I like this simply because the look on the girl says "what
the fuck are you lookin' at?" and that makes me want to know more.
That is not to say that the others are bad photos, just not appealing
to my lame brain.
See ya,
Mike
> ... However, the closeness of the
>subjects near the floor brings the viewer onto the floor, and into the
>action. This is a telephoto shot that really works, and proves that a
>wide or normal lens was not needed to meet the assignment. The depth of
>focus, and selective focus, isolate one player well enough to freeze an
>expression, and engage the viewer. The other details tell the story, and
>complete the cinema. No crops needed, and this image just works. It is
>apparent that this was not just a random image, so good work on the
>editing choices.
----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
Nick James
> Hello again, and thank for sticking with the comments threads,
> Nick James:
> One of my favourites from this series. Really invokes a Robert Frank
> idea of imagery. The close view involves the viewer. The scratched words
> on the phone engage the viewer further, though a look at the larger
> image is needed for that, since the thumbnail loses that detail. The "B"
> and arrow create eye movement off the image, and that tells a story, and
> gets the cinema feel. This is stark truth and confrontational realism,
> and works well as a monochrome image. It also has the feel of the era of
> movies that defined CV, as well as the older still photography of early
> Magnum shooters. Really a strong and sophisticated image, with nothing
> to improve. You choose quite well, so I am less concerns about editing
> skills. Well done.
Thank you Gordon, your words are more than generous. Regarding the "B"
and the arrow, I'm often uncertain with including details that lead the
eye out of the frame and as a rule try and avoid that - I guess rules
are there to be broken.
I think my favourite photo of this weeks mandate is Garry
Ashton-Coulton's. To me it seems as if we are about to approach the girl
and interupt her moment of quiet contemplation
The fact that the photographer had to venture onto the "wrong" side of
the river to get the shot show a dedication beyond measure :)
The biggest grower for me is Ken's shot. At first viewing it didn't
really do anything for me. Now I've revisited the gallery a number of
times I'm really starting to like it. The umbrella *now* seems to
include me where as at first glance I think it just distracted me.
I also very much like Matt Clara and Steve Kramer's photo's, although if
I'm being hyper critical (and why not!) I find the cropping of the
soldiers left arm just a touch severe. Not enough to take away from a
really powerful portrait though.
Thanks also to everyone else who submitted a photo. It was, once again,
enjoyable to view a strong set of images from what was a challenging and
enjoyable mandate.
I'm off to find some 'Night People' :)
Nick
Annika1980
>I'm off to find some 'Night People' :)
Night People?
Oh crap, I thought he said "Nice Poodles."
Gordon Moat
> Gordon Moat wrote:
>
> > Steve Kramer:
> > Everything works in this image. The subject alone engages the viewer,
> > while the eyes and stare involve the viewer. The selective focus also
> > helps, and I really get the feeling that I am there. There is just
> > enough information in the image to tell a story, and not too much to be
> > cluttered. This is cinema at it's best, though you took the
> > confrontational part a bit too seriously. Glad to see you made it home,
> > and you are another one who did not seem to take my warning about not
> > getting too close to your work. ;-) Damn strong image, and good
> > enough that no cropping would change the impact. The editing is less of
> > an issue, since this image is definitely strong enough. Well done.
>
> Thanks! I had a rough day today and it was nice to come home and find
> something positive about my work. Although the situation along the
> Burmese border is 'difficult' at best, I find I do my best shooting
> under difficult situations. Besides, I'm an adrenaline junkie and this
> sort of think really gets me going.
>
> The soldier was polite enough (why not, I wasn't trying to kill him!)
> and didn't mind posing at all. I really would have preferred if he
> hadn't handed off his rifle to one of his squaddies, but I wasn't going
> to argue with him.
I think in many ways, not having the rifle avoided a cliché image. This one
made a much better story.
> I did get several other shots of other soldiers
> brandishing their weapons, but they were smiling too much, had new
> uniforms, and obviously hadn't yet seen any combat. If you'll notice,
> the guy in my photo is holding his grenades onto his belt with rubber
> bands... a VERY convenient way to access them quickly when needed, and
> has all his pockets crammed full of rifle clips. This guy has seen TOO
> much combat. The eyes tell it all.
This guy is very engaging, and looking right at the viewer in the image. It
would be nice to see a large print of this image, and I think it would have
even more impact.
>
>
> Thanks again for your critique.
My pleasure, and thanks for participating.
>
>
> Steve Kramer
> Chiang Mai, Thailand
> http://www.photoenvisions.com
>
> --
Ciao!
Gordon Moat
> http://www.pbase.com/image/21824490
>
> >My first thought on the thumbnail was "not a sports image", since that
> >can be too observing, and less involving. ...
>
> Looks like I conveniently forgot about the "involving" part, eh?
>
> I had a good idea, and yes, only ONE idea, for the CV assignment but
> the training schedule of a local fire department got changed at the
> last minute so I couldn't get the shot(s) I wanted. But, it was
> probably for the better since this week's assignment is Night People
> ... can anyone guess what my next submission will be?
>
Perhaps night volleyball . . . . ;-)
>
> I didn't really want to submit my CV shot because, even though it
> engages the viewer and makes them sense the urgency with which #10
> wants her teammates to get the ball, it really isn't what I consider a
> "documentary-type" image. It's engaging but doesn't really tell a
> story. I had another image that would've worked as well as what I
> submitted but was shot back in August (you'll probably have to paste
> the link back together):
> http://www.wideopenphotography.com/photos/avp/manhattan_03/rock_star/pages/avp_manhattan_08-08-03_13.40.07_E82C9970.htm
> All in that one photo you have happiness, dismay & anger ...
If it was cropped to reinforce the guy on the left of the image, then perhaps. I still think the one you submitted was
better.
>
>
> Which leads us to my admitted shortcomings. When the first assignment
> came through and either you or Alan posted comments I thought "Jeeze,
> no wonder I suck. I couldn't possibly look at a photo and
> analyze/critique it the way you guys do.
Well, I only felt it appropriate for me to critique an assignment that I gave. Others are free to do more, though I will
rarely comment on other images.
>
>
> As an example, on my Motion Assignment
> http://www.pbase.com/image/21321641
> you or Alan commented on it and mentioned something about the red not
> being too distracting. I read that and thought to myself, "What the
> hell is he talking about ... red? There's no red in that photo." So I
> loaded it up and there's that red sunshade in the background. I never
> noticed it before. Don't ask me how I failed to notice it 'cause now I
> can't get around it.
With the work I do, colour is everything, so I can tend to notice that more than other aspects. That one is a really good
image. I would have liked to see the faces a bit more exposed, though the action is definitely interesting.
>
>
> This assignment is definitely the most difficult one for me 'cause it
> made me TRY to think outside MY box. I'm a more structured-type
> person.
That was a bit of my hope. I wanted people to try something different. This was even different compared to the imagery I
usually create, photographic or other.
> I look at artists this way: There are those that draw & paint
> crazy abstract things that make it hard to imagine the frame of mind
> that conceived it.
I do not do abstract well at all. With my paintings, I always try to tell a story, though I think the canvas is more open
to that sort of thing. With photography, it is often tougher.
> Then there are the straight and narrow kind, like
> me, that could draft a house perfectly on paper to 1/64th scale but
> couldn't make something abstract to save their lives.
Many of my instructors in college came out of the 1970s and 1980s era of abstract images. Their training attempted to
influence our work (graduated 1998), but I was more rebellious of that influence. There is quite a bit to be learned from
the past, but I think that art that is only understood, or appreciated, by other artists, loses impact.
>
>
> Give me a camera, a light meter, a person, and some light and I will
> give you a perfectly exposed portrait ... that will probably not be
> terribly interesting to look at. Ask me to try to take a photo that
> tells a story? Not gonna happen ... on purpose anyway. That's why I do
> mainly sports. You shoot it and know instantly if you got the shot. No
> interpretations needed ... Some might think I'm too hard on myself
> but, as Harry Callahan once said, "a man's got to know his
> limitations."
"There is no 'decisive moment', you have to create it." - Robert Frank
Remember that the camera does point both ways. The choices you make in images convey your vision.
>
>
> Both the CV shot and Motion shot were lucky frames from hours of
> shooting. Actually, most of my good shorts are blind luck ...
Which comes down to editing. That was the other skill that I tried to emphasize, and many of the posters got a feeling of
that.
>
>
> Of the CV shots posted the only ones that do anything for me are:
>
> AL DENELSBECK: Even though it's not a "perfect" photo it puts you
> there because of the framing of the shot through the window.
>
> STEVE KRAMER: I like it because it's a perfect expsosure of an
> obviously seasoned soldier. I don't know that it really tells ME a
> story but it's a great photo.
>
> GLEN DAVIS: I like this simply because the look on the girl says "what
> the fuck are you lookin' at?" and that makes me want to know more.
>
> That is not to say that the others are bad photos, just not appealing
> to my lame brain.
They all engaged you in a way that made you think a little more. When an image holds your attention, that can be enough to
make it compelling.
>
>
> See ya,
>
> Mike
Thanks for participating in this.
Gordon Moat
> Gordon Moat wrote:
> > Hello again, and thank for sticking with the comments threads,
> <snip>
> > Nick James:
> > One of my favourites from this series. Really invokes a Robert Frank
> > idea of imagery. The close view involves the viewer. The scratched words
> > on the phone engage the viewer further, though a look at the larger
> > image is needed for that, since the thumbnail loses that detail. The "B"
> > and arrow create eye movement off the image, and that tells a story, and
> > gets the cinema feel. This is stark truth and confrontational realism,
> > and works well as a monochrome image. It also has the feel of the era of
> > movies that defined CV, as well as the older still photography of early
> > Magnum shooters. Really a strong and sophisticated image, with nothing
> > to improve. You choose quite well, so I am less concerns about editing
> > skills. Well done.
>
> Thank you Gordon, your words are more than generous. Regarding the "B"
> and the arrow, I'm often uncertain with including details that lead the
> eye out of the frame and as a rule try and avoid that - I guess rules
> are there to be broken.
Depends upon whose rules they are, though often elements that lead the eye
off the canvas can work to continue an idea, or story. It would not work for
all images, but then no "rule" is all inclusive.
>
>
> I think my favourite photo of this weeks mandate is Garry
> Ashton-Coulton's. To me it seems as if we are about to approach the girl
> and interupt her moment of quiet contemplation
> The fact that the photographer had to venture onto the "wrong" side of
> the river to get the shot show a dedication beyond measure :)
>
> The biggest grower for me is Ken's shot. At first viewing it didn't
> really do anything for me. Now I've revisited the gallery a number of
> times I'm really starting to like it. The umbrella *now* seems to
> include me where as at first glance I think it just distracted me.
>
> I also very much like Matt Clara and Steve Kramer's photo's, although if
> I'm being hyper critical (and why not!) I find the cropping of the
> soldiers left arm just a touch severe. Not enough to take away from a
> really powerful portrait though.
I noticed the crop, but like you, felt that it did not detract from the
image.
>
>
> Thanks also to everyone else who submitted a photo. It was, once again,
> enjoyable to view a strong set of images from what was a challenging and
> enjoyable mandate.
>
> I'm off to find some 'Night People' :)
>
> Nick
I had to do an archive shot for this. It is an unpublished image from a paid
shoot this year.