Two Girls in Paris

[Todd Suttles]

Very High ISO (12,800). Live or die?

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

Mysterious and mesmerizing.
The two girls alone would have been a ho-hum snapshot. Adding the man and shadow behind them raises intriguing questions. And squeezing all the action to the far left enhances the mystery.

I like this one a lot.

[Todd Suttles]

Mysterious and mesmerizing.
The two girls alone would have been a ho-hum snapshot. Adding the man and shadow behind them raises intriguing questions. And squeezing all the action to the far left enhances the mystery.

I like this one a lot.

Thank you for breaking it down for me Eric. -appreciate you!

[RSL]

Hi Todd, Well, at least what you posted actually is street, even if it's not awfully good street. The main problem is that the light that jumps out at you is on the guy in the background instead of on the two girls, who are the central point of the whole picture. I'd suggest some PP to reduce that background light, though you don't want to lose that guy since he's an important part of the interaction. Then I'd bring up the faces of the girls a bit.

The whole point of LuLa, at least originally, was to give criticism on what was posted. That soon became a no-no because nobody wanted to hurt any feelings. Too bad. To go back to criticism might make LuLa more worthwhile.

I should add: Of course you never have to agree with the criticism. I often don't.

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

I will have to agree with Russ's critique.

(Sorry Russ! If you want a fight, let's take it outdoors!      )

[RSL]

No fight, my friend. But I do think criticism is worthwhile. I was sorry to see it disappear from LuLa. I've been fortunate enough to have experienced plenty of criticism, not so much of my photography, though there's been that too, but of my poetry.

[Todd Suttles]

Hi Todd, Well, at least what you posted actually is street, even if it's not awfully good street. The main problem is that the light that jumps out at you is on the guy in the background instead of on the two girls, who are the central point of the whole picture. I'd suggest some PP to reduce that background light, though you don't want to lose that guy since he's an important part of the interaction. Then I'd bring up the faces of the girls a bit.

The whole point of LuLa, at least originally, was to give criticism on what was posted. That soon became a no-no because nobody wanted to hurt any feelings. Too bad. To go back to criticism might make LuLa more worthwhile.

I should add: Of course, you never have to agree with the criticism. I often don't.

Thank you Russ for taking the time to break it down for me. I agree 100%. I will do the PP as an exercise to learn. Exactly what I want from LULA: Why it's not right. I can take that with me and use it later.  -appreciate

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Please, people!?

[Todd Suttles]

Hi Todd, Well, at least what you posted actually is street, even if it's not awfully good street. The main problem is that the light that jumps out at you is on the guy in the background instead of on the two girls, who are the central point of the whole picture. I'd suggest some PP to reduce that background light, though you don't want to lose that guy since he's an important part of the interaction. Then I'd bring up the faces of the girls a bit.

The whole point of LuLa, at least originally, was to give criticism on what was posted. That soon became a no-no because nobody wanted to hurt any feelings. Too bad. To go back to criticism might make LuLa more worthwhile.

I should add: Of course you never have to agree with the criticism. I often don't.

a better example of what you said?

[RSL]

I like the shot, Todd. But in order to be what I'd call "good" street there has to be something going on besides two people crossing the street. There has to be a story, even if the story is ambiguous. No... especially if the story is ambiguous. Ambiguity is what makes street powerful. Here's one with a story. Not much ambiguity, but at least a story. I posted this one on PhotoPXL yesterday. I've given up on LuLa. But I do still check Street Showcase, hoping to see something that knocks me back in my seat.

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

What this one needs, Russ, is a soundtrack: The sound of a locomotive rapidly approaching from the left or the right.   

[RSL]

Look at how shiny those rails are, Eric. There was plenty of traffic through here (Colorado Springs) back when I was walking the town, shooting street. I was kind of looking for the next coal train, and listening.

[Todd Suttles]

I like the shot, Todd. But in order to be what I'd call "good" street there has to be something going on besides two people crossing the street. There has to be a story, even if the story is ambiguous. No... especially if the story is ambiguous. Ambiguity is what makes street powerful. Here's one with a story. Not much ambiguity, but at least a story. I posted this one on PhotoPXL yesterday. I've given up on LuLa. But I do still check Street Showcase, hoping to see something that knocks me back in my seat.

Illustrative, this is helpful, Thank you Russ. I see the difference

[RSL]

Todd, I shouldn't, but I'm gonna do this again. I posted this picture in "A full street" back in June. I'm going to post it again because:  I keep coming back to this picture because it illustrates exactly what street photography is about. There's nothing there except the expressions on the principals' faces and the language of their bodies. The result is a kind of ambiguity that forces you, the viewer, to decide what the picture "means." That's what makes street photography powerful.

[Chris Kern]

There has to be a story, even if the story is ambiguous. No... especially if the story is ambiguous. Ambiguity is what makes street powerful. Here's one with a story. Not much ambiguity, but at least a story.

Actually, what intrigues me about this photo is precisely its subtle ambiguity.  Yes, the superficial story is that the shooter is making a portrait of a guy sitting on the rails.  But that raises the question, at least in my mind: why the hell is he posing that guy on the rails?  Why choose that particular and unusual setting?  The fact that the answer isn't clear is what makes this picture worth a second look (or even a third) in an attempt to tease out its meaning.  Unfortunately, no obvious answer is forthcoming.

Actually, what I should have said is fortunately no obvious answer is forthcoming.

Of course, that's my subjective reaction and someone else's may differ.  But that is another intrinsic attribute of street photography.  The same visual image may provoke different viewers to imagine different narratives.