Misc.

[BobDavid]

March 17, 2016

[David Eckels]

I love this, especially the first.

[BobDavid]

I love this, especially the first.

Thanks. I like the first one better too. The second one is of a sub shop in Lakeland, Fl. It's a local institution--great subs.

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

The first is an excellent, classic BobDavid, and the second is just downright hilarious.

But Bob, aren't you a bit worried that your overly detailed and expressive title for this post is perhaps steering the viewer to one predetermined interpretation?   

Eric

[RSL]

Do more of this, Bob. The first is slightly Edward Hopperish. The second is straight out of Martin Paar. Love 'em both!

[Rob C]

Do more of this, Bob. The first is slightly Edward Hopperish. The second is straight out of Martin Paar. Love 'em both!

Ditto both!

Especially like the treatment on the first.

Rob C

[GrahamBy]

Do more of this, Bob. The first is slightly Edward Hopperish. The second is straight out of Martin Paar. Love 'em both!

Yes indeed :-) The first really stands alone, even if it tips its hat Hopper-wards

[drmike]

The second one is wonderful. That group of three works so well and having explored various crops I suspect you have it pretty much just right. I wondered about the lone figure but while without her it still works because the group of three are tight but you have to crop so much it would look daft and she certainly does no harm. The light and cabinet on the right work as stoppers - for me anyway. The handling of the colours is excellent.

Now the question. Did you see and shoot quickly or did you wait and shoot when things looked good. Was it instinctive or analytical?

A recent speaker said he was a lucky photographer and cited an example where a shot of kid on a bridge worked so well because of some towering clouds he was unaware of at the time as he was focussed on the kid. My argument would be that subconsciously he was aware of those clouds and 'knew' when it was right.

Mike

[BobDavid]

The second one is wonderful. That group of three works so well and having explored various crops I suspect you have it pretty much just right. I wondered about the lone figure but while without her it still works because the group of three are tight but you have to crop so much it would look daft and she certainly does no harm. The light and cabinet on the right work as stoppers - for me anyway. The handling of the colours is excellent.

Now the question. Did you see and shoot quickly or did you wait and shoot when things looked good. Was it instinctive or analytical?

A recent speaker said he was a lucky photographer and cited an example where a shot of kid on a bridge worked so well because of some towering clouds he was unaware of at the time as he was focussed on the kid. My argument would be that subconsciously he was aware of those clouds and 'knew' when it was right.

Mike

I asked the owner if I could come back in an hour and take some pictures. I stopped by with a tiny tripod and an Olympus EPL-5. I observed the situation for about 15 minutes--waiting for the "right" moment.

[drmike]

You chose well. I'm a little surprised the owner agreed.

I didn't ask for this one



which I quite like but I seem to be in a minority one one

[BobDavid]

I usually photograph seascapes and gas stations. Occasionally, I see an interior that looks interesting--typically restaurants. I make it a habit to ask  permission. That way, I can take my time without being asked to leave. From a street photographer's perspective, I think all is fair so long as the photos are taken in public places. My "street" photos are few and far between. I think that genre takes a lot of dedication and involves a certain amount of risk.