DSLRUsers.com

This was captured in the early hours of Saturday morning. This group were on their way back from a late night out and the girl being carried lost her shoe. Her friends lead a daring rescue and retrieved her shoe.





This place is a photographer's dream for documentary. There are heaps of stories to tell and capture. Would definitely recommend making a trip here!

The first image does nothing for me, however it may grow on me, but the more I look at it the stranger it looks . The second image is teh one I really like, simple, quintessential NY and perfect for BW, maybe just a bit of distortion control and straightening and I think it would 2 thumbs up.

#2 is sublime!

Wow #2 is really well timed! I would like to see the tops of those building. Perhaps a touch of 'manual content aware fill' to elongate the picture even further to create the contrast between the big and small.

'

surenj wrote:Wow #2 is really well timed! I would like to see the tops of those building. Perhaps a touch of 'manual content aware fill' to elongate the picture even further to create the contrast between the big and small.

'

long time lurker - first time poster.

WTF do u mean by your comment? you dont make any sense at all.

and i dont think he needs to elongate the image...

#2 is superb!

I also like the first one. Lots to see in that image.

But number 2 is just a pure standout! Great capture.

Chickyboo - Quite an aggressive comment for a first time poster don't you think?

i think the problem with the first is that you're at the wrong end. would have been a nicer shot from the front.
as per the consensus, love #2.

NYC runs a close 2nd to paris for me as all time fave places ive visited.

@chickyboo. had me laughing hysterically at your silly post.

chickyboo wrote:

surenj wrote:Wow #2 is really well timed! I would like to see the tops of those building. Perhaps a touch of 'manual content aware fill' to elongate the picture even further to create the contrast between the big and small.

'

long time lurker - first time poster.
WTF do u mean by your comment? you dont make any sense at all.
and i dont think he needs to elongate the image...

Good to meet you chicky, remember that the images are posted in the Image Reviews and Critiques section, hence people are entitled to their opinions and views on the images posted, these may be good, bad, wrong, right or whatever, you or I may agree or disagree with them and thats all cool - maybe try and give the OP some more feedback rather than have a crack at someones else's opinion. There are plenty of PiroStitches image to comment on - feel free to contribute. Also fill in the location details in your profile, its one of the few requirements for participating on teh site.

In regards to Surens comment, my impression is he is referring to increasing the size differential between teh main subject (the person) and the tall buildings.

@Suren - can you please elaborate on the manual aware fill as I'd like to understand where you're coming from.

It's interesting that the general consensus is for #2 as I preferred the first one. It tells more of a story and there's more to it than first meets the eye (i.e., you need to keep looking at it over and over again to get the story). Street photography or photo journalism doesn't always require things to be in focus or tack sharp. Actually, IMHO any sort of photography doesn't always require things to be tack sharp all the time.

Everyone has their own opinion and I respect that, regardless of how it's expressed (or sometimes not expressed).

PiroStitch wrote: Street photography or photo journalism doesn't always require things to be in focus or tack sharp. Actually, IMHO any sort of photography doesn't always require things to be tack sharp all the time.

I certainly had no problem with sharpness or focus, I just could not understand what the image was about and the more I looked the more questions I had

Maybe the reason you like it more is because you know the story behind it, you were there, without reading your post I would have no idea whats going on, could be some dude carrying some girl to the hospital for all I know.

Each to their own view and perspective tho - otherwise it would be a dull old forum eh?

Indeed, photography (or art in general) is supposed to evoke conversation and opinion

PiroStitch wrote:@Suren - can you please elaborate on the manual aware fill as I'd like to understand where you're coming from.

I was joking about the 'manual' bit a little but I was keen to see the buildings extending even further (by manually painting them in) to further isolate the person in a concrete jungle. The organic vs inorganic.
In the example below, I just used automatic content aware fill in CS5 to extend the buildings further but I reckon a manual job will be better.
Just another point of view.
hth.

Surenj appreciate the elaboration but it doesn't work. Also I'm not a huge fan of cloning extra height to buildings when it comes to documentary.

I really like #2 - the timing on the silhouette is perfect and whilst I also like the story of #1 (but possibly only because you told us) I reckon #1 would have been more powerful taken from the other side where you could better see what they were doing and the expressions they might have had.

Looking forward to seeing more from NY.

chickyboo wrote:

surenj wrote:Wow #2 is really well timed! I would like to see the tops of those building. Perhaps a touch of 'manual content aware fill' to elongate the picture even further to create the contrast between the big and small.

'

long time lurker - first time poster.

And it's great to see you finally post; welcome. As Gerry has pointed out, you should take a few moments to add a location to your profile.

WTF do u mean by your comment? you dont make any sense at all.

and i dont think he needs to elongate the image...

And that's a perfectly valid opinion. As was Suren's. We encourage active debate here, as well as active critique. How would you process this image, in order to improve it? Or do you feel it's great, as it is?

I think that Suren's comment is framed around the contrast between the height of the buildings, and the "smallness" of the person by comparison. My belief is that he wants to see that shown, and perhaps even expanded, and maybe distorted, in order to emphasise the size differences being engaged in this image.

Is that a valid comparison? I believe that it may be so, but that's just my opinion, although I don't know that I'd go so far as to clone extra building parts onto the top of the image to achieve that outcome.

Rather, I'd like to see this shot with a nice ultra-wide angle lens, from a nice low angle, and perhaps with a couple of tall buildings crowding the foreground.

As to my opinion ... like any other opinion, it's neither right nor wrong ... it's merely an opinion.

I do like No 1 in terms of the story that may be present, however, as Gerry indicated, I think the observer is not able to view the complete image. By that, I mean that we don't have full context and therefore can only view it based on what is presented to us. We have no emotional or contextual attachment and therefore the the image looks like a tangle of arms, legs and piggy-backs.

I like No 2 as it is. I don't believe the proportions need to be changed and I definitely don't believe additional elements should be created. It's not like PiroStitch works for Reuters

No 1 is whimsical? Funky? Not sure, but I think it's true, the longer you look at it, the more possibilities enter one's head. As for #2, it seems typical of a huge, cold, dark city, one I've never visited. (I did have plane ticket to go there once, but after 5 weeks in the USA, I was so sick of the place, I tore up the ticket and came back to Oz).