In Groups of 3

Printable View

13th September 2011, 06:10 PM
manthos

In Groups of 3

A step closer to street photography?

http://i56.tinypic.com/10cqgdv.jpg
14th September 2011, 04:39 AM
Sahil

Re: In Groups of 3

Hi Giannis,

A very interesting shot.
I love the look on the face of the old man looking at the kid in pram.
Also, I like how the stairs lead your eyes throughout the scene.
If I were you, the only thing I would have tried would have been cloning out the lady who is alone (Immediate left to the old man in front)
14th September 2011, 09:56 AM
manthos

Re: In Groups of 3

Thank you Sahil.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sahil

If I were you, the only thing I would have tried would have been cloning out the lady who is alone (Immediate left to the old man in front)

The whole of her?:eek:
Well, I believe that there is a connection between her and the other two women in the middleground. That's a reason why I named the image "In groups of 3". I may be wrong though..
14th September 2011, 09:59 AM
Sahil

Re: In Groups of 3

Well, you may be wrong, but I am definitely wrong. Feeling kinda stupid :o
I didn't/couldn't relate her to the other two women.
14th September 2011, 10:16 AM
manthos

Re: In Groups of 3

Maybe it's not that obvious. Don't worry about it!:)
14th September 2011, 10:19 AM
hoffstriker

Re: In Groups of 3

Giannis:

I hope you don't mind me giving you my impression. In terms of "street photography" I don't believe this truly is. I think you tried a little too hard on capturing a combination landscape/street photo. The emphasis seems to be more on the beautiful view behind the people than the people themselves. My idea of "street photography" is to "first and foremost" capture the peoples expressions. It doesn't have to be their facial expressions nor even a person but it has to tell a story. Your photo is telling way too much IMO. The exposure is for the steps and landscape and you have three different groups of people that are over exposed. This makes it hard to tell what I should be seeing. Where should my eyes be looking?

I think Sahil was right, but he should have said not just the woman alone, but also the two women she is looking at. A shot of that would be more interesting because it makes the viewer wonder what is going on. Of course, this would mean you would have had to be in the water, but that's just for this particular exposure. Do a google search of Henri Cartier-Bresson and view some of his images to get a really good idea of street photography. He was a master.

Hope I didn't offend you, and feel free to recant anything I have said. I am wrong quite a bit of the time. At least, that's what my wife tells me... :D
14th September 2011, 10:52 AM
manthos

Re: In Groups of 3

Thank you Chris. I appreciate your comment and it is not offending at all.

This is just a first try into street photography. It's very possible that I may get it all wrong about the genre. In fact it is quite vague in my head. It's all about telling a story and I understand this. But it's not about having other things going on? Or better, other things should only be used to enhance the primary story? If that's it, then maybe you're right.

I know Cartier-Bresson (how could I not?) and his work is very inspiring.:)
14th September 2011, 11:28 AM
paul17

Re: In Groups of 3

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoffstriker

Giannis:

I hope you don't mind me giving you my impression. In terms of "street photography" I don't believe this truly is. I think you tried a little too hard on capturing a combination landscape/street photo. The emphasis seems to be more on the beautiful view behind the people than the people themselves. My idea of "street photography" is to "first and foremost" capture the peoples expressions. It doesn't have to be their facial expressions nor even a person but it has to tell a story. Your photo is telling way too much IMO. The exposure is for the steps and landscape and you have three different groups of people that are over exposed. This makes it hard to tell what I should be seeing. Where should my eyes be looking?

I think Sahil was right, but he should have said not just the woman alone, but also the two women she is looking at. A shot of that would be more interesting because it makes the viewer wonder what is going on. Of course, this would mean you would have had to be in the water, but that's just for this particular exposure. Do a google search of Henri Cartier-Bresson and view some of his images to get a really good idea of street photography. He was a master.

Hope I didn't offend you, and feel free to recant anything I have said. I am wrong quite a bit of the time. At least, that's what my wife tells me... :D

I am afraid I would have to agree with the comments, it just to busy, an not sure where or what I should be looking at. It may have been better to use a longer lens and isolate subjects or move in closer, some times it is about what we leave out :)