Street Landscape, Paris

[Todd Suttles]

Last one for this week. C&C appreciated. Thanks -/t

Nov 18, I have added a second landscape orientation version:

[James Clark]

Hi Todd -

As always thanks for posting your images .  I'd like to offer an opinion, but I have to confess that I'm not sure I really "get" your vision so I'm not sure I can comment in a way that would be helpful to you.  Can you talk a little bit about what you're trying to show, and what aspect of the scene made you grab this place and time?   I'd apply the same comment, to a slightly greater extent maybe, to your "Sailing in Paris" image. 

That's not to say that every image has to tell a story, or capture an important moment, but in cases like those 'd be looking for some sort of visual grab - a unique geometry, some sort of dark/light interaction that grounds me in the frame, etc.  Help me understand what stood out to you as special in these Paris images.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

My friend James is an eloquent guy. I am much less cultivated, so I have only one comment:

Why?

[Rob C]

My friend James is an eloquent guy. I am much less cultivated, so I have only one comment:

Why?

It's a street; the street has great light on it. You don't always need a dominant human interest story that actually has a strong human player; isn't it also valid if you just catch a good mood of structure and mass? That comes courtesy human architects and town planners, expressing the then ideas of how things might look.

As its title says, street landscape, and often more interesting than fields, sunsets or bushes.

Rob

[James Clark]

It's a street; the street has great light on it. You don't always need a dominant human interest story that actually has a strong human player; isn't it also valid if you just catch a good mood of structure and mass? That comes courtesy human architects and town planners, expressing the then ideas of how things might look.

Rob

Rob, fair enough - I agree with everything you wrote here, especially the part about not needing a dominant human interest story.  That's why I've got about 2 dozen snaps in my LR catalogs of European streets just like this one, but almost universally, when I look at them, none of the images capture the "context" of the location, and *that's* why I don't consider them standout images.   Having just returned from Paris, I feel the same about this one (along with some other feelings about the light/shadow interplay).

BUT... that's why I was asking Todd for more explanation about what HE found compelling, because it's more than possible that I'm just missing the point, and with that information I might be able offer more helpful thoughts.

(Also, I thought it would be nice to give Todd - who is very appreciative and thoughtful about trying to get feedback - some conversation about his image )

[petermfiore]

It's a street; the street has great light on it. You don't always need a dominant human interest story that actually has a strong human player; isn't it also valid if you just catch a good mood of structure and mass? That comes courtesy human architects and town planners, expressing the then ideas of how things might look.

As its title says, street landscape, and often more interesting than fields, sunsets or bushes.

Rob

YES...

Peter

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

It's a street;...

Yep.

[Todd Suttles]

OK, after taking the time to remember what I was planning when I set the shot up... I did everything I could do in-camera to get the longest exposure possible (without adding a ND Filter which I did not have) because I wanted to capture movement in the receding lines of the geometry of the scene. It was setup on a tripod. I was going to see what I liked cars, or people moving. I shot several of these variations with the same setup. The only one I thought I might like was this one with the figure aligning with the line of the wacky posts. I would have preferred more blurred movement but that was all the exposure time I could stretch out and get the level of geometry detail I wanted.

So the answer to the question Why? was never even thought about. And that is obviously the point of everyone's comments. Thank you. I will give this more thought. -t

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

I didn't even see the figure as a person until I enlarged the image substantially after reading your comments. In he "full-size" image it just looked like another of the wacky posts. And the cars are too far away and moving in the wrong direction (away from camera) to show any motion blur.

I think what you are trying to do has possibilities, and I would do more experiments, and show them to us.
-Eric

[Todd Suttles]

I didn't even see the figure as a person until I enlarged the image substantially after reading your comments. In he "full-size" image it just looked like another of the wacky posts. And the cars are too far away and moving in the wrong direction (away from camera) to show any motion blur.

I think what you are trying to do has possibilities, and I would do more experiments, and show them to us.
-Eric

Eric, I stayed with that setup for about ten minutes. I rejected all of the attempts to capture and use moving autos almost immediately; didn’t do anything for me. Of all the people who crossed the field during that time this is the only one I felt could come close to “working” and that only because of the line extended from the posts. But boiling it all down, there is no “why” I took it, or wanted to take it, other than I thought it might be a cool image. I guess I could make up some BS about how capturing a duration of time in the blurred movement could be a statement about the temporary mark of individuals on the historical span of time represented by the old street in Paris. BUT, that “why” did not precede the shutter snap.

[Todd Suttles]

The only landscape orientation I shot of the scene.

[Ivo_B]

YES...

Peter

+1

[James Clark]

The only landscape orientation I shot of the scene.

I much, much, prefer this one. The figure in the front is either sinister or just in a hurry ... I also like the dimensions and the geometry of the street and buildings much more.  There's a balance here that the first one lacks, and some shadow detail that brings more interest.

[Rob C]

I much rather the vertical shot. It has height, which adds drama to the human scale of things; it's also slightly claustrophobically oppressive, which the wide is not.

;-)

[James Clark]

I much rather the vertical shot. It has height, which adds drama to the human scale of things; it's also slightly claustrophobically oppressive, which the wide is not.

;-)

Well...  you’re clearly wrong. 





(I’m kidding of course.  I agree that the vertical definitely has a oppressive and disconcerting  feeling - maybe because verticals haven’t been corrected, or maybe because the prominence of the open street makes the whole image “top heavy” and leaning toward collapse.)

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

Although Rob is almost always right, I have to say I prefer the horizontal shot, which has a few items in it to provide some interest.