Love Real Street

[seamus finn]

More pictures and less talk, anyone?

Family of Man:

[RedwoodGuy]

@family of man

This is a provocative photograph that works on it's content and framing. I get a very strong emotional and intellectual reaction that keeps me interested. Where we often like the f/g to be sharp, this diffuse profile works perfectly as a means of getting to the group behind the scrim. As the title suggests the group goes down in size referring to the famous evolution drawings. The simple tones work to maximize the effect here with no unnecessary distraction. This is one of my favorite photographs this week. This is one I'd like to see in a print.

[RSL]

I agree. Only the image matters. I don't care about labels;

Fair enough. Here's a landscape.

[RSL]

Family of Man:

Both good Seamus, but #2 is a great shot. Bravo!

[nemo295]

Fair enough. Here's a landscape.

I like it, very much in fact. What you want to label it is your business.   

[RSL]

Thanks, Doug. Here's another landscape.

[RSL]

And here's a still life for you.

[seamus finn]

Ok, here's a landscape called 'Brainwave':

[nemo295]

And here's a still life for you.

I liked your "landscapes" better. No matter what you call them, only the photograph matters. No one cares what category a great image fits into and no label will improve a photograph that sucks. You may argue whether Cartier-Bresson's definition of what he thought "street photography" ought to be is something other photographers should care about, but at the end of the day it's just an empty academic exercise. Labels don't matter. Art matters.

[RSL]

You may argue whether Cartier-Bresson's definition of what he thought "street photography" ought to be is something other photographers should care about, but at the end of the day it's just an empty academic exercise. Labels don't matter. Art matters.

I don't argue any such thing. HCB never "defined" street photography in words, but he defined it pretty convincingly in photographs. I'm glad to know that "art matters."

[RedwoodGuy]

Family of Man:

Boy in the bubble photo:
There's a fine line between sappy sentimentality and genuine nature, and at first I wasn't so sure which way this photograph fell on that line. But looking closer for a bit, I have a better appreciation of it, and I enjoy it even though the kid is too cute (sarcasm). It has an interesting texture to it that I really like.  The framing is spot on and gives all the story I need. The technical execution is near perfect for me, and I think it's a terrific photograph, although not as interesting for me as the first one.

[RedwoodGuy]

Ok, here's a landscape called 'Brainwave':

@Brainwave.

I liked the look of this at postage stamp size. But when I made it full screen size, I was a bit disappointed. There wasn't much there there. The backs of people in stasis aren't all that intriguing and the rest of the image fizzled for me. The shapes and tone are obviously interesting in an abstract sense, which is why I think I liked the thumbnail. And the wall of lights is interesting but not enough content to generate much excitement for me.

[nemo295]

I don't argue any such thing. HCB never "defined" street photography in words, but he defined it pretty convincingly in photographs. I'm glad to know that "art matters."

Ah, but you have argued that people should follow his modus operandi, and that anything that varies from it isn't worthy of being called street photography. My point is that it doesn't matter.

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

Love the Landscapes, Russ and Seamus.

(Maybe the colors are a bit too saturated?    )

I agree that the Still Life doesn't have the pizzazz of the Landscapes.

[wolfnowl]

Family of Man:

The second one is brilliant, Seamus.

Mike.

[seamus finn]

Thanks Mike.

[seamus finn]

Model Release:

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

You're really hitting your stride, Seamus! Nice work!

[RSL]

+1

[RedwoodGuy]

And here's a still life for you.

@ Man beating drum
Is this ambiguous? Really?