|
|
Dave Stacey
{K:121052} 2/2/2008
|
Good shot of his hand gestures, Nick!
Dave.
|
|
|
|
|
aLi Naghizadeh
{K:19457} 2/3/2008
|
Wonderful shot dear Nick.. well done..
Cheers... aLi
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:98945} 2/3/2008
|
I consider this one to be the best of the 6 regarding details and definition on little Sammy and his immediate surroundings too, Dave!
But even on this one I miss something - still trying to find out what it could be.
Thanks a lot again and all the best,
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:98945} 2/4/2008
|
Many thanks for the nice comment, Ali!
Wonder-full of problems too, I guess, since I have the impression that much is missing on these images. But I work myself through the whole problem.
Cheers,
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
aLi Naghizadeh
{K:19457} 2/4/2008
|
Thanks for the reply Nick . But i believe the simplicity of this shot has made it special ..
Cheers .. aLi
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:98945} 2/4/2008
|
Yes, I did have the intention to let it be simple, Ali - just a kid. As Paul suggested about "Heureca!", I guess that simplicity would come stronger with a tighter framing (i.e. closer zoom). I'll have to try that out.
Thanks a lot for your reply and all the best!
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Vandy Neculae
{K:6585} 2/4/2008
|
Marvellous composition!
Pleasant, fresh and colorful view.
Vandi
|
|
|
|
|
Gust@vo Sch3v3rin
{K:126819} 2/4/2008
|
Muy linda toda serie, transmite alegrķa y vitalidad...
Felicitaciones!
|
|
|
|
|
Andre Denis
{K:56160} 2/5/2008
|
Hi Nick,
I have just reviewed all of these images of this little story that you are telling. I think it is a good idea to do this kind of presentation BTW.
I'm reading the comments with interest. I'm going to make a few suggestions for you particularly concerning the composition of the images. I believe they can all be improved considerably with just a small change. I think this one is a good example to show how "getting close" makes a world of difference.
One of the things that sticks in my mind from one of my photography classes is when one of my instructors told us that one of the biggest mistakes people make is not getting close enough to their subjects. I believe this series suffers from that problem more than anything else. What he used to say to us was... Get close to your subject. When you think you are close enough, get closer, even uncomfortably close. Of course this can be achieved with a large telephoto lens, so as not to disturb the subject. :) Or we can crop afterwards. Getting close right on the negative or file, of course improves the quality rather than blowing it up after the fact. But it is the composition that should really be considered above all. The attached example is exactly as you photographed it, but with a lot of unimportant details taken away.
I know you have explained that you were not looking for a masterpiece with these images. It's just that I thought this was a perfect opportunity to pass on an important lesson that I will never forget. That hint from my instructor really hit home with me when I went home and looked through family albums and I could see exactly what he was talking about.
Andre
|
Getting Close |
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:98945} 2/5/2008
|
Thanks a lot for the nice comment, Vandi!
All these six images have problems for me, though, which I am very interested to know more about, considering the suggestions of the people here.
Cheers,
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:98945} 2/8/2008
|
And I think that the transmission of joy would be stronger of I would have zoomed closer and left pout the branches of the top half, as Andre's crop demonstrates so nicely, Gustavo!
Thank you very much for the nice comment again,
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:98945} 2/8/2008
|
Andre, what can I say else thatn a big warm "Thank you!" for your suggestions and for your analysis of the problem! Yes, sir! That is exactly what I think is *the* problem of these images! The subject is too small, too weakly representend on the image! This great crop you did is exactly what I just *have* to retry using a better zoom or, even better, standing closer to the subject!
Of course the subject has to be embedded in some scene, and of course the scene is that part of the image that enhances the subject - so it must be there. But in all these images the scene was too much, really! The branches, for example, over and behind little Sammy are completely unnessecary if not even completely wrong here!
Thanks a lot, Dave! I see that I must start putting more weight on the very subject and less weight on the scene - and that's exactly my kind of problem. I am too much into the meaning of the scene, and I have to reduce that attitude by the time!
Best wishes,
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Andre Denis
{K:56160} 2/10/2008
|
Hi Nick,
I would just like to add that I don't think every single shot should be extremely close to the subject. (especially in a series of images) We can always isolate the subject at a distance to create a different mood.
Andre
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:98945} 2/11/2008
|
Oh yes, that's quite clear to me too, Andre! There should be a balance between the close-ups and the more distant shots. But for some reason for this series I think that eliminating the trees on the upper part would make the whole series better. Or perhaps it is simply that we want to have always exactly those shots as we didin't make them? ;-)
Cheers,
Nick
|
|
