Leslie, I have to agree that this is a perfectly good stock photo. Most stock is dreadfully bad. This has a clear and simple narrative - field doc tends to patient. The theme and subjects are engaging enough. There are other subtle things I see in the picture that make it a good choice. The formal qualities are just fine - in fact I think they are more interesting than the usual tight-ass compositions. The "decisive moment" thing is vastly over-rated. Illustrations need some ambiguity. Photo editors create their decisive moment to conform to their hook, never mind what really happened. A little PS magic can fix the tonal balance. AZ Build a Lookaround! The Lookaround Book, 2nd ed. NOW SHIPPING http://www.panoramacamera.us > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: RE: PF Galleries on 29 JAN 05 > From: "Eclipse Agency" <eclipseagency@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Mon, January 31, 2005 2:48 pm > To: "List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students" > <photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > NO it's marketable just like some stock photography is marketable but not > very aesthetic. For example my friend has a shot of someone typing at a > computer and it is one of the best sellers. It may not win any awards but is > a great illustration of someone typing at a computer just like yours is for > a doctor/patient. I think it meets the job of showing the work the UN is > doing but that is all. I think you miss the point between what is marketable > and what is dramatically pleasing. Some are both, some are not but still is > quite marketable. This image is quite marketable as an editorial > illustration but not compelling dramatic photojournalism. I wouldn't dismiss > it as such. > Dean > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > [mailto:owner-photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of > LScottPht@xxxxxxx > Sent: Monday, January 31, 2005 8:55 AM > To: List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students > Subject: Re: PF Galleries on 29 JAN 05 > > > Thanks, Emily for your long critique. It was very helpful, and I do > understand what you are saying. I also shoot documentary photographs for > ngo's and thought this would be a good type of photograph for them, > specifically here, the UN, to show the work they are doing. But, apparently, > compositionally it doesn't work and technically it doesn't work. So, I guess > I wouldn't bother showing it to anyone. I will leave it on my website > because I still like it. I just won't market it. Thanks again! > > > Thought on Leslie's pic. > > I really couldn't tell what was going on there except that someone's > hand was being held by someone who, assuming from his dress, was > providing a service, possibly medical. > > The point of this type of work is, to me, to present the decisive > moment. There's no problem with all the preferatory shots, except > that they're not the ones to show. The photo editor's job is to > locate and present the moment, but the shooter's job is to capture it > so it's there for the editor to find. You are, right now, both > shooter and editor, so I see it as your job to present as decisive a > moment as you were able to capture. This image doens't feel to me > like a decisive moment. > > Certainly fill flash was desperately needed, just to make the hand > discernable. But a bunch of cropping might have moved this > particular pre-moment closer to being decisive. > > It's in the nature of pj, to me, that one grabs as much as possible, > hoping simultaneously to get a decisive moment, and to be able to > keep track of what's going on all over the scene to locate the moment > in time to shoot it. That's one reason why pjs ran so quickly to > digital, because they didn't have to count costs for film, lug film > around, wait for the results or process it themselves after fearing > that they've missed the shot, worry about their cropping, worry that > they picked the wrong crop and left something out etc. etc. It's a > very alert and adrenalated type of shooting. The zone is very wide, > you can't concentrate on what's in the viewfinder, you gotta shoot > with both eyes open, and concentrate like hell. > > One of them damn skillful Turnleys just published an essay in > Harper's this month. Check out the decisive moments there. > -- > Emily L. Ferguson > mailto:elf@xxxxxxxx > 508-563-6822 > New England landscapes, wooden boats and races, press photography > http://www.vsu.cape.com/~elf/
