Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/07/02

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: RE: [Leica] Re: decisisve moment question on PAW ?
From: Jeffery Smith <jls@runbox.com>
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 08:48:17 -0500
References: <01c2218f$18ce2c00$00007ac3@mz>

I'll try not to be quite so blunt, but it also seemed like a snapshot to 
me. When Firkin praised it, it caught me a bit off guard, as I've had 
images rejected from FOM2 based on their not have been taken with a Leica. 
If the intoxicated guy *is* FOM2-quality material because it *was* taken 
with a Leica, then I doubt that I will ever submit another image to FOM2, 
as I am clueless. Or perhaps I should submit *everything* I have *ever* 
taken with a Leica.

Jeffery Smith

At 08:18 AM 7/2/02, you wrote:
>Okay - Time to be blunt.:-0 (As we all know, we post photos asking for
>honest comment and criticism)- (Sorry, Rob)
>
>This is not a "GOOD" photo. It is not, by any stretch of the imagination an
>HCB "decisive moment." And it certainly isn't an FOM photo - I, II, or C. It
>is an improperly exposed party snap. Period. As Ted pointed out, the light
>from the flash is dumped onto the foreground, blowing out the light colored
>items and leaving both the woman and the man underexposed. All the photo
>tells us is that the man isn't feeling well - one assumes he's drunk - or is
>very tired, and the woman is looking at a little flag, or is waving it. So
>what? We don't see anything in the photo indicating that it has anything to
>do with soccer, the World Cup, the Invasion of the Faulklands, or the
>election of Margaret Thatcher. Nothing, in other words, to give it any kind
>of context or meaning. If one knew these two people, this would be the kind
>of moderately amusing photo one might hand them as a 60 Minute 4x6,
>expecting them to titter in embarrassment as they tore it in half.
>
>B. D.
>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
>[mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of Mārtiņš
>Zelmenis
>Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2002 2:10 AM
>To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
>Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: decisisve moment question on PAW ?
>
>
>OH.
>I wouldn't call it <a decisive moment>, too, but the picture IS GOOD! And
>largely it's the sign that makes it. Most certainly I like it as it is.
>
>Martin
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Ted Grant <tedgrant@shaw.ca>
>To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
>Date: Monday, July 01, 2002 4:51 PM
>Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: decisisve moment question on PAW ?
>
>
>B. D. Colen wrote:
> >>> Just wondering:
> > What's decisive about the moment? What makes this an outstanding
>photograph?<<
>
> > robmellor showed his::
> >PAW 26
> > >
> > > http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=850786
> >
> >Alastair Firkin @ work  responded:
> > You caught this one at the decisive moment: looks a good FOM2 shot to
>me.<<<
>
>Hi B.D.
>I wondered myself what was so decisive when I saw Alastair's comment. ( no
>offence Alistair ) Sure there's a moment of what looks like a some what
>sodden human and one smiling waving a flag,  accompanied by a very flashed
>#15 table sign, which your eye must fight before you get to the people.
>
>Yes there's the moment of the flag waving woman, but even she doesn't look
>like she's really into it and the guy looks like he's close to out of it.
>maybe a pint too many. ;-) But it's the sign that's an eye blocker and takes
>the picture down.
>
>What would I have done in this situation?
>
>Probably been working available light if at all possible in B&W, at 3200 or
>higher if there was any chance of decent exposures. And if it were necessary
>to use flash I'd have bounced it and still worked at the higher film speeds
>to squeeze every possible once of light from the flash bouncing back to the
>tables. That would've softened the sign and highlights a little while
>lifting the lighting level throughout..
>
>Before posting as a PAW I'd have burned down the sign and attended
>highlights to at least give the couple a stronger meaning.
>
>Now for the guys who know how to Photoshop very very well..... (not me)  I'd
>have removed the sign all together! ;-) I know, I know that's cheating....
>;-) however that kind of manipulation is done every day around the world in
>removing slightly annoying things like signs and other tid bits. :-)
>
>So there you go eh. ;-)
>
>ted
>Ted Grant Photography Limited
>www.islandnet.com/~tedgrant
>
>
>--
>To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>
>--
>To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>
>--
>To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html


- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

In reply to: Message from "Mārtiņš Zelmenis" <martin@lrpv.lv> (Re: [Leica] Re: decisisve moment question on PAW ?)