I wish just once people would give me the benefit of the doubt about what I w thinking when making a comment. I’m pretty sure that only a few people on this list have a clear idea of why I make the comments I do.
I do not think too many others on this list are professional photographers and it is my desire to impart knowledge to the list members at large, not aim my comments at other professionals. Professionals worth their salt all have distinct points of view as well as skills they can bring to the discussion. Or at least they should.
None of us knows everything, and especially not me.
Jan
On Aug 19, 2012, at 4:44 PM, Howard LEIGH wrote: Hi Jan - I understnd your point, but (sorry) I feel you rather missed the point! It was precisely the mundanity of the experience that attracted me, especially after so many episodes of the "attacks" by police and others on the photographing public, together with recent comments about policing and photographers in the U.K.. You normally don't see riot cops, SWAT teams or camouflaged troops in the U.K., especially at at events like these. You're looking at the image as that of a professional photojournalist or documentary photographer, which I am not and have no desire to be.
Howard
P.S. I looked at your web site the other day; very impressive.
On 19 August 2012 18:23, Jan Faul <jan@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I think the overall quality of the images in this week’s gallery is better, except for the police shot. I realize there is no definition of what is or is not a good photograph, but I’m not impressed with the shot. If a photographer wishes to show police presence, police aggression, or police interaction with the public without actually showing an attack or a violent scene, get the lead out and shoot riot cops, SWAT teams, or troops in camouflage walking down a city street. Has anybody on this list ever been to Israel, Spain, Germany, Brazil, or o country where the police routinely carry automatic weapons?
Police in the UK dress as these two are dressed in so many venues that people no longer react with fear and panic when seeing them unless the location is in or near an airport or transportation hub. Get photographs of security forces when tensions are high and then I’ll congratulate you. When the photographer is under stress, then the senses are heightened and the pictures have the sense of immediacy this shot lacks.
Dan Mitchell’s shot of the lighthouse, while more interesting due to the way it pulls the viewer’s vision into the back, is better, but still suffers a certain ’snapshot-ish’ quality due to its lack of the correct DOF or I presume, the use of a tripod. It’s a fine example of a shot which is supposed to be ‘good', but is only 'good enough'. I’m sure Dan intended it to be sharp, but was let down by not taking the equipment and camera shake into account.
I will accept ‘puzzeling’ as a compliment for my ‘Lift Accident’ shot. Thank you.
Jan Faul
On Aug 19, 2012, at 12:35 PM, Howard LEIGH wrote:
Actually people were using dSLRs for the same sort of picture - and the day before I used a dSLR type bridge camera for the same purpose!! I've never had any problem with the police and photography (yet :))
Howard
On 18 August 2012 14:32, Trevor Cunningham <trevor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I'm commenting with recent conversations in mind.
On 8/18/12 2:56 PM, Andrew Davidhazy wrote:
The PhotoForum members' gallery/exhibit space was updated August 18, 2012. Authors with work now on display at:http://people.rit.edu/andpph/gallery.html include:
Howard Leigh - Armed Police snapped!
Good thing it was an iPhone and not a real camera! ;) Otherwise, I doubt the police officers would have been so friendly and you'd have a Chris Strevens tale to tell.
|
