[SI] Shoot-In Point of View is Visible

[SI] Shoot-In Point of View is Visible

* w w w .pbase . com /shootin/pov

Re: [SI] Shoot-In Point of View is Visible

* jimkramer wrote:
> * w w w .pbase . com /shootin/pov

Well done to all those who posted. I am really pleased there were
13 submissions. I wish I had a chance to submit one myself.

Not really sure of what the critiquing "rules" are for the SI,
but I'll have a crack at it from an amatuer/novice point of view.

There were several shots that I suspected were going to be there
in some form or other.

I quite liked Bowser's view from the motorbike - does leave me
feeling like a ride :)

But for me the standout is Helen's shot. I don't know whether
it's the mood I'm in, or whether it's because my long gone
grandmother would have turned 87 within the last week, but that
shot really put me in the place of an elderly lady's "point of
view". The wrinkly hand, the writing on the card. All of it
screamed emotion to me.

--
Troy Piggins
I always appreciate critique.

Re: Shoot-In Point of View is Visible

On May 2, 10:11 am, Troy Piggins <usenet-0...@piggo . com > wrote:

> But for me the standout is Helen's shot.  

As usual.

Oh yeah, I'm Helen!
Yeah, that's the ticket!

Re: Shoot-In Point of View is Visible

On May 2, 10:11 am, Troy Piggins <usenet-0...@piggo . com > wrote:

> > * w w w .pbase . com /shootin/pov
>
> Not really sure of what the critiquing "rules" are for the SI,
> but I'll have a crack at it from an amatuer/novice point of view.


I shall save my critique until all the submissions are posted.

What? That's it? Well, ok then .....

Helen's pic was the class of the field. It tells a story and the
viewer can almost feel the sadness in the old woman in the pic.
Bowser's shot was very good as well.
The super wide-angle shot from Tully was somewhat interesting.
Ken's pic did nothing for me .... maybe it was because the color was
off.
So now we know what a Wilba looks like.
Paul Furman's wasn't bad considering it was taken from a commercial
airliner.
Rich Pos is a drunk.
I liked the punchy colors in Doug Jewell's pic (Ken, are you
listening?).
Walter Banks needs a new lens.
Jim Kramer needs a new cat.
My shot was uninspirational, a last minute effort to beat the deadline
("We need more time!").
Tom Gabriel needs a room with a view.
The shot from D-Mac (oops I forgot, he's Alienjones this week) was
garbage and could be improved with some cropping at the bottom left
and some Photoshop (maybe Photoshop in some real tits). However, I did
learn some new nautical terms from his description. Only a salty old
semen (oops, that's "seaman") like D-Mac would refer to the "pointed"
end of the boat. Take a "Bow" you old Sea Cock.

Well, that's my Readers Digest version. Overall, not as nice a
collection as I'd hoped. I was a little stuck on this mandate myself,
and hope to produce something better next time.

Just remember the most important photo you'll ever take is .. the next
one.

Re: Shoot-In Point of View is Visible

"Annika1980" wrote:

> Ken's pic did nothing for me .... maybe it was because the
> color was off. I liked the punchy colors in Doug Jewell's
> pic (Ken, are you listening?).

Heh, heh... Now exactly how certain are you that it really isn't one-third of
a tri-color separation negative set? Subtlety *is* the name of the game, you
know. Maybe you just weren't looking hard enough for those distracting
colors... ;)

Ken

Re: Shoot-In Point of View is Visible

"Ken Nadvornick" wrote:

> Now exactly how certain are you that it really isn't one-third
> of a tri-color separation negative set?

P.S. There *is* a way to tell...

Ken

Re: Shoot-In Point of View is Visible

On May 3, 1:30 am, "Ken Nadvornick" <register.nad...@verizon . net >
wrote:
> "Annika1980" wrote:
> > Ken's pic did nothing for me  .... maybe it was because the
> > color was off.  I liked the punchy colors in Doug Jewell's
> > pic (Ken, are you listening?).
>
> Heh, heh...  Now exactly how certain are you that it really isn't one-th=
ird of
> a tri-color separation negative set?  Subtlety *is* the name of the game=
, you
> know.  Maybe you just weren't looking hard enough for those distracting
> colors...  ;)
>

We know we can always count on you for technical excellence and a
display of mastery of your craft. I also enjoy reading your detailed
notes.
=====================

Fence line along the West Snoqualmie Valley Road
Snohomish County, Washington, USA
7:03pm, Thursday, April 17, 2008
Dark, heavy overcast skies, intermittent rain.
Just finished dinner. Had the fish. Undercooked.

Ilford FP4+ B&W 120 roll film at ASA 160
Developed in Kodak D-76d (1+1) for 16 min at 68F/20C Split-printed on
Ilford Multigrade IV RC 8x10 glossy paper Digitized on HP 6200C
flatbed scanner, 680x680x24bpp/100 dpi Post-processed using GIMP 2.4
under Window 2000.
New computer chair purchased at Office Depot.
Room lighting 5450°, room temperature 71.4° F.
Had to pee.

Re: Shoot-In Point of View is Visible

"Annika1980" wrote:

> We know we can always count on you for technical
> excellence and a display of mastery of your craft.

Yoda said you either "Do, or do not. There is no try."

> Had to pee.

And you also do realize, of course, that it *is* possible to develop film
using...

Ken

Re: Shoot-In Point of View is Visible

On Sat, 3 May 2008 20:14:47 -0700, "Ken Nadvornick"
<register.nadvor@verizon . net > wrote:

>And you also do realize, of course, that it *is* possible to develop film
>using...

And poop... as Bragika has proven many times.

RP©

Re: [SI] Shoot-In Point of View is Visible

Let's see what we got ...

Tully ( * w w w .pbase . com /shootin/image/96458896):

I like the way that the viewer has a POV on the dog, but more so that the
dog seems to have a POV of the photographer - Is he dangerous? Am I in
trouble? Should I growl or run away? I don't know what's going through the
dog's mind, and that makes it an interesting image.

I would like to see this scene shot from a little lower (so the dog's head
isn't bang in the middle of the frame), and including her (?) forepaws so
she's not chopped off at the shins.

Alienjones ( * w w w .pbase . com /shootin/image/96458898):

She does have a couple of interesting points to view. (Sorry, couldn't
resist!) I'm not sure whether I'm supposed to connect with the
photographer's POV or the figurehead's POV. The flat light and clutter
detracts for me. I'd like to see her from closer in and lower down to see
what she looks like "in the net", but that would probably lose the context
and connection with the theme.

Bowser ( * w w w .pbase . com /shootin/image/96458900):

Cool idea. Enough blur to know that you're in motion. I like the way the
screen forms a frame within the frame, focussing my attention on the rider's
view down the road into the distance.

Tom Gabriel ( * w w w .pbase . com /shootin/image/96458902):

I like the idea but I'm distracted by the branch and the bulk of the window
frame on the right. I wonder if it would work better for me cropped down to
focus on the people getting on the bus? I imagine that might have a more
voyeristic feel to it - an idea that works for me as a view-through-a-window
thing.

Ken Nadvornick ( * w w w .pbase . com /shootin/image/96458905):

I imagine a hillbilly sitting in the chair with a shotgun across his knees,
ranting xenophobically, and defending his property against varmints and
forners.

Wilba ( * w w w .pbase . com /shootin/image/96458907):

The Man With No Legs. Easy to work out how it was done. The idea was to get
a portrait from an unusual POV. Nasty green tint on the arm - probably could
have done something about that.

Paul Furman ( * w w w .pbase . com /shootin/image/96458909):

I needed to read the comments to get what the photo is about, and how it
relates to POV.

Rich Pos ( * w w w .pbase . com /shootin/image/96458911):

POV from a barstool? POV about martinis? I'm not sure what I'm supposed to
make of this in relation to the topic. I want to be able to see all of his
face, but that thought also makes me think I've missed the point somehow.

Doug Jewell ( * w w w .pbase . com /shootin/image/96458913):

I like the unfolding ambiguity - is this about the shape of the skate ramp
... tick tock tick tock ... or is it about the POV of the "artists"? What
would make you want to paint weird skulls all over the place?

Good technical work - deep blue sky with white clouds, vivid colours, detail
in the shadows, disciplined framing, etc.

Walter Banks ( * w w w .pbase . com /shootin/image/96458915):

I'm not sure what to think of this - it doesn't say anything to me. Unless
that's a face carved into the rock ...? Is that a plane taking off?

Jim Kramer ( * w w w .pbase . com /shootin/image/96458918):

To be engaged by this image, I have to mentally crop a sixth of the width
from the left, so that the bright eye isn't in the centre of the frame. I
take full responsibility for my aversion to "bullseye" compositions. :-)

Helen Silverberg ( * w w w .pbase . com /shootin/image/96459156):

Nicely put together. The image tells a story by itself, and the text adds
value. Makes me wonder what is her POV (opinion) of the granddaughter, and
vice versa.

She was your subject in * w w w .pbase . com /shootin/loss?

Bret Douglas ( * w w w .pbase . com /shootin/image/96459451):

Nicely ambigous. Could be a building, a vent, rack, sieve, grate ...? What
is it? :-)


It's hard for me to pick a winner this time. I like Bowser's idea - it works
well for me as a response to the challenge, but the one that connects the
most for me is Tully's dog. Goodonya everyone.

Re: [SI] Shoot-In Point of View is Visible



Wilba wrote:

> Let's see what we got ...
>
>
> Walter Banks ( * w w w .pbase . com /shootin/image/96458915):
>
> I'm not sure what to think of this - it doesn't say anything to me. Unless
> that's a face carved into the rock ...? Is that a plane taking off?

The face will change again in a year or so, its natural. This was an
idea that didn't work. The birds are Turkey Vultures catching
some lift. The cliffs here are about 200 feet tall. I wanted to
tie it to an unseen earlier SI mandate. (At the time not knowing just
how much overhang when I was on top of the first outcrop taking
unseen)

Thanks for the comments.

w..

Re: [SI] Shoot-In Point of View is Visible


"Wilba" <usenet@CUTTHISimago . com .au> wrote in message
news:fvgu27$obh$1@news-01.bur.connect . com .au...
> Let's see what we got ...
>
>
> Bowser ( * w w w .pbase . com /shootin/image/96458900):
>
> Cool idea. Enough blur to know that you're in motion. I like the way the
> screen forms a frame within the frame, focussing my attention on the
> rider's view down the road into the distance.

I thought the speedo reading might also give a clue as to true motion, but
it seems it's too low key.

What amazes me is how the fisheye lens makes the windshield look like a
"chopped" shield. It's a full-size 2-up shield.

Re: [SI] Shoot-In Point of View is Visible

Jufi wrote:
> Wilba wrote:
>>
>> Bowser ( * w w w .pbase . com /shootin/image/96458900):
>>
>> Cool idea. Enough blur to know that you're in motion. I like the way the
>> screen forms a frame within the frame, focussing my attention on the
>> rider's view down the road into the distance.
>
> I thought the speedo reading might also give a clue as to true motion, but
> it seems it's too low key.

Just 'cos we didn't comment on it doesn't mean we didn't see it. :-)

Re: [SI] Shoot-In Point of View is Visible


"Wilba" <usenet@CUTTHISimago . com .au> wrote in message
news:fvldjv$f66$1@news-01.bur.connect . com .au...
> Jufi wrote:
>> Wilba wrote:
>>>
>>> Bowser ( * w w w .pbase . com /shootin/image/96458900):
>>>
>>> Cool idea. Enough blur to know that you're in motion. I like the way the
>>> screen forms a frame within the frame, focussing my attention on the
>>> rider's view down the road into the distance.
>>
>> I thought the speedo reading might also give a clue as to true motion,
>> but it seems it's too low key.
>
> Just 'cos we didn't comment on it doesn't mean we didn't see it. :-)

Sigh, shoulda known.

I think I'll sell all my lenses and just keep the fisheye. The only time I
get good reviews is when I shoot the pic with the fisheye. If I need a
telephoto, I'll just crop.

:-)

Re: [SI] Shoot-In Point of View is Visible

Jufi wrote:
> Wilba wrote:
>> Jufi wrote:
>>> Wilba wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Bowser ( * w w w .pbase . com /shootin/image/96458900):
>>>>
>>>> Cool idea. Enough blur to know that you're in motion. I like the way
>>>> the screen forms a frame within the frame, focussing my attention on
>>>> the rider's view down the road into the distance.
>>>
>>> I thought the speedo reading might also give a clue as to true motion,
>>> but it seems it's too low key.
>>
>> Just 'cos we didn't comment on it doesn't mean we didn't see it. :-)
>
> Sigh, shoulda known.
>
> I think I'll sell all my lenses and just keep the fisheye. The only time I
> get good reviews is when I shoot the pic with the fisheye. If I need a
> telephoto, I'll just crop.
>
> :-)

The day you start shooting to please the critics is the day you lose your
artistic integrity! :-D