[SI] Communication comments

I'm running very late this month; but since there aren't very many submissions
anyway, I'll take a shot at it. I haven't yet read anybody else's comments.

Bob


Mojitaba Talaian
A rather nice composition, but the glare in the window is a distraction. Since
the child doesn't appear over-illuminated, I assume that a poorly angled
bounce flash was the culprit. Given the inevitable black background of the
Shoot-In, I guess I'd rather have seen the mother dressed in lighter clothing.
The black works well with the red of the sofa, but gets lost against the
background.

Alan Brown (T.J.)
The Jefferson Memorial, I presume. I think Alan got Tom's face a bit
underexposed, but I like the fact that he managed to keep the wall inscription
in focus. One quibble regarding the mandate: While the Declaration of
Independence, on which Jefferson did most of the heavy lifting, was indeed a
masterpiece, Jefferson was a notoriously poor communicator. As President, he
sent his State of the Union messages to Congress to be read by a clerk,
reversing the practice of his predecessors. He claimed that he did it because
a speech to Congress was too "monarchical", but many believe it was actually
his aversion to speaking in public.

Alan Browne (modem)
Looking ahead, I sense a cliché in the making. But this picture doesn't do
much for me at any level. It's underexposed, and with such a static subject
there's little excuse for a DOF so small that not even the whole front panel
is in focus.

Alan Brown (Amish Fair?)
Even with the horribly blown-out background, I sort of like this picture.
Something seems to be going on, although it's not entirely clear what. I guess
the earpiece and microphone provide the connection to the mandate.

Bowser 1
Sam Adams, sounding off on Lexington Green? Or maybe Williamsburg, since in
Massachusetts the foliage doesn't jibe with the date the picture was taken.
Normally I'd use this photo to vent one of my favorite aphorisms ("Fill flash
is your friend; use it"), but in this case I could almost be persuaded that
the shadows on the face and hand add to the composition. I'll be interested to
see what others think about that.

Bowser 2
I might have stopped down a bit to improve the DOF, which I guess would have
required a tripod. But I sense that part of the point is to show that Bowser's
5D produces a high-quality image at ISO 3200, so maybe only a hand-held shot
would do. Anyway, it's a nice picture, although I'm not sure I believe that
Charles Dickens used that model (or even that the red/black ribbon had been
invented yet).

Bowser 3
I regard the connection to the mandate as a bit tenuous, but I know where
Bowser found the snow! We Bay Staters have been enduring one of our coldest
and snowiest winters in years.

Bob Coe
Hmmm... I did manage to send one picture in, and I even got the canned
acknowledgement. But evidently it didn't make it into the show. Oh, well, it
wasn't a great shot; I was just trying to stay in the game.

Russell Durtschi 01
??? This could be anything from a swim meet to a cockfight. I'm not much of a
fan of pictures in which the main center of attention isn't shown.

Russell Durtschi 02
I see the point, but this one would be an even better fit if the mandate were
"Urban Blight". One change I'd make would be to either show more of the street
or try to crop it out entirely. I think the picture ends too abruptly on its
left side.

Tony Cooper 1 & 2
Good composition and technique, and showing it in both color and B&W adds to
the interest. (I think I like the color version better, but it's a close
call.) I judge this one to be the most innovative and successful response to
the mandate.

Walter Banks
The composition is fine, but with the weeds in better focus than the fox, it
just doesn't measure up technically. Even if it were a better image, its
connection to the mandate is pretty hard to see.

Tony Cooper 3
Nicely rendered; Tony's on a roll this month. Those are two of his
grandchildren, I presume.

Jim Kramer 1
Nice idea, but when a lens is the subject, you've gotta get it sharper than
that.

Jim Kramer 2
A moderately arresting image, but I don't begin to get the point - or the
connection to the mandate. And again I don't think the lack of sharpness adds
anything.

Jim Kramer 3
Well, Alan beat you to it, but I suppose it's just because he's earlier in the
alphabet. (Actually, you and he took your pictures on the same day.) Is there
something about that modem that makes it impossible to get the whole display
panel in focus? Alan had the same problem.

Solomon Peachy 1
A touching sentiment and a very well presented image. Was he a relative, or
did you just happen onto that grave?

Solomon Peachy 2
This one is a lot less successful. The image doesn't say much, and the B&W
format just makes it murky.

Paul Furman 33642
I sort of like the colors, and I even see the connection to the mandate. But
overall it doesn't particularly work for me. Maybe it tries too hard to be
cute.

Bret Douglas
What's the point, Bret? That the bird is screwing up your TV reception? Bounce
a BB off his belly, and he'll think twice about coming back.

Paul Furman 33392
The scene probably doesn't look quite that hideous in real life; but a
photograph needs to make a point, and this one does. A good response to the
mandate.

Robert Coe wrote:

I'm running very late this month; but since there aren't very many submissions
anyway, I'll take a shot at it. I haven't yet read anybody else's comments.

Walter Banks
The composition is fine, but with the weeds in better focus than the fox, it
just doesn't measure up technically. Even if it were a better image, its
connection to the mandate is pretty hard to see.

The connection to the mandate is in the body language of the fox.
Soft face (non threatening)
closed eyes (I trust you)
Seated (Emphasis, I would not expect you to violate my trust)
One ear pointed away (cautious)

Together mean "thank you, friend but I am still being careful"

Technical comments well taken

Walter..

Robert Coe wrote:

Alan Brown (T.J.)
The Jefferson Memorial, I presume. I think Alan got Tom's face a bit
underexposed,

I don't agree. There is detail in the face.

What may be throwing you off is the perspective and lessened highlights
reflecting off of his face - not to mention that this is not a Caucasian
flesh colored statue... Had I been able to shoot from 8 ft higher, the
effect would no doubt be different.

but I like the fact that he managed to keep the wall inscription
in focus.

I shot this by rocking the focus back and forth and guessing at a point
between the wall and the statue. A DOF button check helped, but I
wasn't sure. Hand held 1/13 s @ 40mm. (With anti-shake). Leaning
against the wall, legs appart, tight handholding and waiting for other
tourists to do their 'I was here' shots. I took several of these before
I was sure that the statue and inscription were both acceptably sharp in
the monitor. A tripod would have been nice.

One quibble regarding the mandate: While the Declaration of
Independence, on which Jefferson did most of the heavy lifting, was indeed a
masterpiece, Jefferson was a notoriously poor communicator. As President, he
sent his State of the Union messages to Congress to be read by a clerk,
reversing the practice of his predecessors. He claimed that he did it because
a speech to Congress was too "monarchical", but many believe it was actually
his aversion to speaking in public.

Communication is not about public speaking ability, it is about the
conveyance of information, in this case an idea, an ideal. As you say
the heavy lifting is in the DoI ... not in yabbering it.

Alan Browne (modem)
Looking ahead, I sense a cliché in the making. But this picture doesn't do
much for me at any level. It's underexposed, and with such a static subject
there's little excuse for a DOF so small that not even the whole front panel
is in focus.

Not only is it not underexposed (bin 248 (of 0..255] holds info).

Given two "underexposed" opinions from you on shots that are not
underexposed, I do suggest you calibrate your monitor.

To put a point on it, in the roughest terms, 18% grey would have info in
bin 128 ( +/-10 or so). Another stop, would have info in bins around
200. Another stop at bin 255 and less. 248 is close enough for 2 stops
over the middle - the limit of most digital sensors and slide film.

The DOF is deliberately shallow to focus on the "prow" of the product in
the upper right of the image where the product label is. IOW: the "f/8
and be there" school of photography does not always apply.

Alan Brown (Amish Fair?)
Even with the horribly blown-out background,

That's "purposely" blown out background.

There is no camera sensor or film of any kind, anywhere in existence
that would not blow out a white sun drenched background outdoor when
shooting a scene indoor. The technical shot here is very good as the
subject is properly exposed (and taking on the the yellow tone of the
tenting) by letting what is outdoor be blown out. Please note that
across the alley objects under cover there are properly exposed (though
way out of focus).

I sort of like this picture.
Something seems to be going on, although it's not entirely clear what. I guess
the earpiece and microphone provide the connection to the mandate.

Most would see this for what it is - an auction. Communication in the
marketplace. The microphone and speaker are secondary, if
complimentary, communication tools.

Thanks for your comments.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.

"Robert Coe" wrote in message
...
I'm running very late this month; but since there aren't very many
submissions
anyway, I'll take a shot at it. I haven't yet read anybody else's
comments.

Bob

Jim Kramer 1
Nice idea, but when a lens is the subject, you've gotta get it sharper
than
that.

The communication contacts are sharp, what more do you need?


Jim Kramer 2
A moderately arresting image, but I don't begin to get the point - or the
connection to the mandate. And again I don't think the lack of sharpness
adds
anything.

It's a television screen...

Jim Kramer 3
Well, Alan beat you to it, but I suppose it's just because he's earlier in
the
alphabet. (Actually, you and he took your pictures on the same day.) Is
there
something about that modem that makes it impossible to get the whole
display
panel in focus? Alan had the same problem.


Not every image needs to be in sharp focus from corner to corner, pay
attention to what is in focus...

Thanks for taking the time to comment.

-Jim

On Sat, 14 Feb 2009 14:10:40 -0600, "jimkramer"
wrote:
:
: "Robert Coe" wrote in message
: ...
: I'm running very late this month; but since there aren't very many
: submissions
: anyway, I'll take a shot at it. I haven't yet read anybody else's
: comments.
:
: Bob
:
: Jim Kramer 1
: Nice idea, but when a lens is the subject, you've gotta get it sharper
: than that.
:
: The communication contacts are sharp, what more do you need?

My point, of course, is that I didn't think they were quite as sharp as they
should be. (I was tempted to say "If you think they're sharp, either you or I
need to find a better optometrist", but I don't want to get into a ****ing
contest.) Quite possibly, though, what I see is a manifestation of the low
resolution prescribed by the Shoot-In "rulz". I know my pix never look as
sharp on the Web site as they did on my computer, displayed directly from the
RAW image.

: Jim Kramer 2
: A moderately arresting image, but I don't begin to get the point - or the
: connection to the mandate. And again I don't think the lack of sharpness
: adds anything.
:
: It's a television screen...

Yeah, I finally got that when I read somebody else's comments on the image.

: Jim Kramer 3
: Well, Alan beat you to it, but I suppose it's just because he's earlier in
: the alphabet. (Actually, you and he took your pictures on the same day.)
: Is there something about that modem that makes it impossible to get the
: whole display panel in focus? Alan had the same problem.
:
:
: Not every image needs to be in sharp focus from corner to corner,

Quite right. That one does. IMO. YMMV.

: pay attention to what is in focus...
:
: Thanks for taking the time to comment.

You're welcome. And I don't claim that my opinion is any better than that of
any other participant in the group.

Bob

"Robert Coe" wrote in message
...
I'm running very late this month; but since there aren't very many
submissions
anyway, I'll take a shot at it. I haven't yet read anybody else's
comments.

Bowser 1
Sam Adams, sounding off on Lexington Green? Or maybe Williamsburg, since
in
Massachusetts the foliage doesn't jibe with the date the picture was
taken.
Normally I'd use this photo to vent one of my favorite aphorisms ("Fill
flash
is your friend; use it"), but in this case I could almost be persuaded
that
the shadows on the face and hand add to the composition. I'll be
interested to
see what others think about that.

I didn't have a flash with me, so it was an easy decision. It's an actor at
Williamsburg givint Patrick Henry's "give me liberty..." speech. The guy did
a great job, too.


Bowser 2
I might have stopped down a bit to improve the DOF, which I guess would
have
required a tripod. But I sense that part of the point is to show that
Bowser's
5D produces a high-quality image at ISO 3200, so maybe only a hand-held
shot
would do. Anyway, it's a nice picture, although I'm not sure I believe
that
Charles Dickens used that model (or even that the red/black ribbon had
been
invented yet).

I spoke to Charles. He says he didn't use one of these, he used a Mac.


Bowser 3
I regard the connection to the mandate as a bit tenuous, but I know where
Bowser found the snow! We Bay Staters have been enduring one of our
coldest
and snowiest winters in years.

Tenuous my ass. Mail? Newspaper? Sheesh...

Shot stinks, though.

Robert Coe wrote:
Solomon Peachy 1
A touching sentiment and a very well presented image. Was he a relative, or
did you just happen onto that grave?

No relation; I stumbled into this grave while looking for my
Grandmother's. It turned out I was in the wrong part of the cemetary..

Solomon Peachy 2
This one is a lot less successful. The image doesn't say much, and the B&W
format just makes it murky.

...It looked much worse in color.

- Solomon
--
Solomon Peachy pizza at shaftnet dot org
Melbourne, FL ^^ (mail/jabber/gtalk) ^^
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.