Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,677   Posts: 1,482,027   Online: 882
      
Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ... 5678910111213 LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 126
  1. #101

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    NE USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    171
    OP, does not bother me. But I shoot super wide 80% of the time.

  2. #102

    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    194
    Quote Originally Posted by benjiboy View Post
    There's actually very little in the difference between them because they are nearly equal in distance from the diagonal measurement of the 24x36mm frame is 43mm which should be the ideal focal length to approximate human vision.
    I shoot most often with pentax 43mm prime and I find it the most natural of all my lenses on 35mm cameras. I also like my 40mm Rollei 35se, even though it's not an slr, the focal length feels just right.

  3. #103

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    northern england
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    552
    Quote Originally Posted by clayne View Post
    This "leave something to the viewer's imagination thing" is an identifiable crutch BTW. Consistently attempting to use implication or ambiguity as a tactic for increasing the "mysticism" of a photograph becomes cloying quickly. I'd go so far as to say it's a cliche these days and people are still beating that horse day in and day out. Most PJ and documentary professionals are beyond this and know when implication is to be kept and when it isn't. It's not black and white - where it goes from imply/ambiguity<>literal/science. There are in-betweens. Perhaps it's more of an annoyance to me because I tend to notice it quite quickly - especially when it seems forced and not straight up.
    I disagree - profoundly! At various times in my life I've had the (mis)fortune to be an editorial photographer, and worked on advertising pack shots and other quick turnaround studio work. Editorial photography consists largely of getting the portrait/ event/ whatever in sharp focus and properly exposed. Filling the frame is about the limit of the aesthetics demanded by most editors. It's not an unreasonable aspiration as far as it goes, but it demands little of the viewer or photographer. Look at Cartier-Bresson's work in comparison. Almost every photograph implies more than it explains and leaves the viewer wondering. Most great photographs suggest a world that goes beyond the edge of the frame.

    The OPs shot of people gathered round a car in a hole is just about the most mindless portrayal of the event imaginable. You could crop that photograph almost anywhere and make the image more inviting. He/she went for distortion and a wide angle lens. There's a hint of desperation about reaching for such a solution. For example, do those faces tell us anything? Not to me, they're looking off in various directions and make the photographer at least as big event as the car. I'd say the rows of legs in traditional and Western clothing are more revealing. Do we need to see all the car? Not for my money. Having it disappear out the frame would make its demise even more dramatic. All those options and micro decisions are what make a photograph good, not relying on the angle of the lens for drama.
    Last edited by blockend; 08-14-2013 at 11:07 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  4. #104
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,455
    ^^I agree 100%. Well stated.^^
    I do use a digital device in my photographic pursuits when necessary.
    When someone rags on me for using film, I use a middle digit, upraised.

  5. #105
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,455
    Quote Originally Posted by clayne View Post
    This "leave something to the viewer's imagination thing" is an identifiable crutch BTW.
    You misunderstand its purpose. It is not about the viewer's imagination; it is about the viewer understanding what is going on without needing to see everything. Photojournalism has the added benefit of using captions to explain, and to place an image in context.
    I do use a digital device in my photographic pursuits when necessary.
    When someone rags on me for using film, I use a middle digit, upraised.

  6. #106

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    northern england
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    552
    Quote Originally Posted by lxdude View Post
    Photojournalism has the added benefit of using captions to explain, and to place an image in context.
    Absolutely. Given the text, editorial photographs are often little more than visual alliteration, when they could be underscoring or counterpointing the words. They used to be from the 40s till the 70s in the best magazines and newspaper supplements, where photographs acted as miniature pieces of art as well as documentary. Now their use is mostly banal.

  7. #107

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,257
    Quote Originally Posted by blockend View Post
    Look at Cartier-Bresson's work in comparison. Almost every photograph implies more than it explains and leaves the viewer wondering. Most great photographs suggest a world that goes beyond the edge of the frame.
    More baloney. Keep it coming, people!

  8. #108
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,455
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael R 1974 View Post
    More baloney. Keep it coming, people!
    It's easy to say "baloney". Back it up.
    I do use a digital device in my photographic pursuits when necessary.
    When someone rags on me for using film, I use a middle digit, upraised.

  9. #109
    cliveh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    2,714
    Images
    335
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael R 1974 View Post
    More baloney. Keep it coming, people!
    But some of us don't think it baloney, but perhaps sensitivity.

    “The contemplation of things as they are, without error or confusion, without substitution or imposture, is in itself a nobler thing than a whole harvest of invention”

    Francis Bacon

  10. #110

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,257
    That's the point. It's just a matter of aesthetic preferences - in other words, taste. Perhaps you think his photographs "imply more than they explain and leave the viewer wondering". That's fine. I, however, do not think that. For that reason I could not care less if he thinks people use wide angle lenses because they don't have enough to say. It's nothing more than his opinion, and so in my opinion, there is nothing wrong with the photograph presented at the beginning of the thread. I don't think the short focal length makes or breaks it.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin