Looking for the Smaller Details

Home Photography Forums The Shark Tank Looking for the Smaller Details

This topic contains 16 replies, has 7 voices, and was last updated by  bucweeet 1 week, 4 days ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #393639

    Richard Barnard
    Participant

    From the recent spell of good weather in Manchester (now a dim & distant memory). I usually shoot street close-up but wanted to portray something a bit different. Your thoughts and critique welcome.

    Fuji X-T2, XF 55-200 (95mm). 1/250 f8 (ISO 250). RAW file edited in LR & Silver Efex.

  • #393642

    Erik Fransman
    Participant

    Richard, good job. Possibly just a tad more detail in the window frame. (middle, left and lower) Just a tad.

  • #393690

    billyspad
    Participant

    Richard I find the shot quite interesting and like the processing exactly as it is. I'm assuming you lightened the face and its well done indeed. Finding it interesting comes with some discomfort. If the person in the frame was not made aware of this shot then as its not journalistic and would be a stretch to call it art then its voyeuristic in nature. If there is a story here then it could be any number of things. Guy with head in his hands, has he got a headache, did he get home and find the dog dead on the mat or is he just tired? Maybe you know Richard and just did not tell us. Unlike the lands that endorse twisted human rights if someone poked a camera lens through my front window and took a candid I would commit no crime by kicking shite out of him. The private security team that patrol here would pick him up eject him through the gates with his camera smashed to bits. So the fact I find it an invasion of privacy colors the way I look at the shot. You will no doubt continue to shoot candid's like this and I will continue to feel uncomfortable when viewing them. Just beware of doing it around my neighbors cos when they catch ya you will find that Fuji and lens a tad uncomfortable when wedged up your rectum lol.

    • #393711

      Richard Barnard
      Participant

      Thanks for the positive feedback. City centre office space shot from the public highway and subject not identifiable so I sleep easy on this one. Story is yours to create and I like your suggestions. First time rectum has been mentioned in a critique of my photos but sadly no prize.

  • #393729

    Robert Apple
    Moderator

    Agree with Erik, raise the blacks just a tad.

    • #393860

      Richard Barnard
      Participant

      Thanks Robert – will experiment with that idea. Bw.

  • #393731

    Roger Wehage
    Participant

    The rule of thirds may be applicable here. I didn't see the subject in the photo until someone mentioned it. Probably because the dark shadows overwhelmed my old eyes, which is why I have difficulty with applications that use light text on dark backgrounds.

    • #393859

      Richard Barnard
      Participant

      Thanks for sharing your thoughts Roger. I deliberately ignored rule of thirds in this instance and placed the figure bottom of frame. I wanted it to be a ‘surprise' discovery in the frame rather than something the eye immediately went to. Your comments suggest that my intent may have been successful in that respect. Bw.

  • #394018

    bucweeet
    Participant

    A minor point…. you should ‘clone out' the two bright highlights (spots) in front of the man's nose.

    I believe you have the potential for several images within this one Richard. Of course it's dependent upon what the purpose of the image is for.  I'm going to do this over a few posts as we can only post one image per post.

    In this first image — I wouldn't necessarily brighten the ‘darks'… rather I would “remove” some of the brightness of the top third. In the image posted I used the Graduated Filter in LR that was angled to match the shadow line. I started the Graduated Filter at the shadow area and dragged it about 1/8″ (4mm) into the shadows. The settings were approximately:

    Exposure: -90
    Contrast: -29
    Highlights: -67
    Shadows: -54
    Clarity: +16

    • This reply was modified 1 week, 4 days ago by  bucweeet.
    • This reply was modified 1 week, 4 days ago by  bucweeet.
  • #394019

    bucweeet
    Participant

    Crop to the lower window:

  • #394021

    bucweeet
    Participant

    Cropped to the Shadow (I also lengthened the highlight using the LR clone brush):

    • This reply was modified 1 week, 4 days ago by  bucweeet.
  • #394023

    bucweeet
    Participant

    Further Cropped to 16×9:

  • #394024

    bucweeet
    Participant

    As you can see, there are several options for ‘different' images.

    Horizontally reversed, larger than 16×9, with the canister moved over using the LR clone/healing brush. (The “rings” on the canister are causing the two highlights in your original image):

    Contrast: -10
    Highlights: -46
    Shadows: +100
    Whites: -63
    Blacks: +36
    Clarity: +46

    Shadows were also lifted in the Tone Curve to +22

  • #394093

    Federico Alegria
    Participant

    For me it works as you presented Richard, a nice example of Barthes' punctum and studium theory.

    • #394121

      Richard Barnard
      Participant

      Appreciate your time and efforts here but, like you, I prefer the original version. The highlights are key for me along with the progression to shadow and that becomes lost in the darker versions. The close crop loses the context and I wanted the figure to be a small, but significant presence in the image, and not something the eye was immediately drawn to.

      • #394222

        bucweeet
        Participant

        No worries Richard.

        I was in studio in Arizona one year and this photographer had an image of a ‘lightening strike' at the Grand Canyon as it struck the ground.  Looking around the studio, I noticed the photographer had about 8 or 9 variations of the same image… but in different crop sizes and crop shapes.  Each version sold for a different amount with some being in the 1,000's.

        With the exception of cloning out the two highlights in front of the man's nose, the remaining was just showing the potential for different ‘variations' on the image depending on what you may be using it for.

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.