It looks to me like there is only one blatent effort to aviod being photographed and two or three other girls (the two main subjects on the L/H side and the two on the right) who may have made a concious effort to turn away. It could just be a coincidence as they turn to talk to each other at the exact point you pressed the shutter.

Also look at the face of the girl at the back in the centre, she has a frown and whilst she doesn't look distressed, she does look like she is telling you to bugger off but you didn't mention it as a concern.

And then at both the edges you have two girls smiling, infact the one on the R/H side is looking directly at you and still smiling.

It could just be the fact that they are girls and may just be a bit image concious ? (not trying to be sexist with that remark)

How was the scene before, was everyone facing you?

All of the above is just my interpretaion of the image and from what I can see I dont think you have actually caused anyone any distress, those that didn't want their picture taken have simply turned away.
Dilemma 2 can be answered simply be deciding whether or not you think its a good picture? if so keep it.

Regards
PaulM

BTW I have a lot of respect for anyone who does street or people photography cause I dont have the courage too. Unless someone wants to give me a bigma so I can sit miles away

My PP normally is just Crop, clone, curves.

With the first Shot I was shooting to try and make some thing out of the reflections in the table and then the next day I stumbled accros the effect and in my mind it just fitted the look in of the picture (I did three of the images from the series)

The second one was staged with the intent to recreate the effect of some previous pictures I had taken in fuji neopan 1600 black and white film which I loved so I did have the effect in mind

the third was one of those "ah-ha" moments, like I mentioned, I was googling post processing styles and I saw a few cross processing examples and thought it looked very 80s retro, the about 2 days later I took the snap of my boy with the sunglasses on and thought that would look good cross processed.

So yes I did have the idea in my head but not until I had seen the effects so it was both knowing what I wanted to achieve and PP or liking the effect and then chosing the image to apply it too.

Regards
PaulM

Father Ted, I'm with you on this one, I have the utmost respect for people who can do this. Photographing people is probably the subject that has the biggest fear for me. I would love to have the guts to do street photography
and it is one that I would like to conquer, so in a kind of "I will if you will" style, I will try and give it a go whilst being as discrete as possible

So are you up for it Father Ted?

Regards
PaulM

After playing with the tractor image for bwichmawr it got me thinking about being a bit more heavy handed with my post processing and whether or not I could turn some average images into betters ones. So I thought I would go back throu my library and try some different methods or styles that matched (in my opinion) the subject and or content of the photo.

For instance in the first shot (of my son) he had a kind of day dreaming far away look so I thought the hazy soft like Orten effect would suit the image.

In the second image (a self portrait, which was waaaaaaay harder than I thought) I wanted a high key image that emulated the grainy effect of a fast B&W film because I was playing with an old camera from a time when B&W use was prolific and which was mainly black along with the fact its shot against white tiles.

and in the final shot, the subject (my boy again) is wearing retro style sunglasses and faded demin and an old t-shirt. So I thought the cross processing style that I seam to remember was popular in 80's fasion shoots would work well.

1) The Orton Effect
[IMG]http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb113/pnjmcc/IMGP7210copy.jpg[/IMG]

2) Hi Key
[IMG]http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb113/pnjmcc/IMGP6979copy.jpg[/IMG]

3) Cross processing
[IMG]http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb113/pnjmcc/17022010018crossprocessed2.jpg[/IMG]

So Have I hit the mark?
Do any of these work for anyone else?

or is it simply down to they are bad pictures from the start and you cant make a silk purse out of a sow's ear

C&Cs please

Regards
PaulM

Well done to all, some great entries there along with superb comments from Judge Hyram.

Arrgh.......I looked at the stratos, along with many other Group B rally cars (quattro, 6R4 etc) and decided that I couldn't capture the essence of Groub B with one car !

Anyway, thanks for the comments Hyram and we done again to our winners.

If davidtrout doesn't mind I would like to give his urinal a bit of a pop art twist?

Regards
PaulM

I do appreciate that he was using a competely new style of camera compared to the rest and it was done without all the aids of the more modern cameras.

So is it not so much the acual resulting image thats genius but the process by which he came to produce it? (ie using this new style of camera, being there, planning the image and then waiting for that moment)

Thats kind of how I feel, like I should get it but I just dont, now that picture of the bike and the stairs on the other hand I do like.

Perhaps I should broarden my knowledge of his works a bit more. I think a trip to the library is in order.

Thanks for your inputs and opinions guys, I feel a bit better now that I know I am not the only one

Regards
PaulM

Taking Kris and Anvhs' suggestions heres my take on it

[IMG]http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb113/pnjmcc/oldtractorprocess.jpg[/IMG]

B&W conversion on an adjustment layer then added a sepia adjustment layer, darkend the tree a bit and a top layer with some (rough) fake vignetting.

If you want the PSD file with all the layers in to see what I did PM me your email and I will send it to you.
Regards
PaulM



Regards
PaulM

Another last minute entry, sorry Hyram

The design that defined a genre

[IMG]http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb113/pnjmcc/IMGP7602.jpg[/IMG]

K200D, Samsung 100mm Macro and Samsung 360 flash
1/125, f3.5, ISO200

Regards
PaulM

Hi All,

On Sunday night I watched the first episode of a series called "The Genius of Photography", which I believe was previously shown in the UK on BBC4.

The first episode (Called "Fixing the shadows") described the birth of photography and showed works by many of its early pioneers.

It was or is a very interesting program to watch and I was engrossed all of the way through it. But it raised a few questions in my head about the conclusions drawn from some of the images and the one tha I struggled with the most and I just dont get/understand or apprciate its Henry Cartier-Bresson – Behind the Gare Saint Lazare, 1932. See here if your not aware of it

It was described as capturing the essence of europe. With the broken rings in (bottom l/h side) symbolising a broken Europe after the first world war and the man jumping as Europe taking a leap in to the unkown of the future. I dont see any of that, or at least I didnt until the commentator told me to! All I saw was a bloke about to get wet feet.

We were also shown other works by Bresson most if not all had jumping in them, which makes me wonder if he intended to make such a statement as described by the narrator (and various photographers/ artists) made with the luxuary of hindsight of the last 60 years or if he was just trying to capture another jump?

I really cant see what is so great about, does this mean I will never be a great photographer?

Can somebody help me to see what I am missing please

Regards
PaulM

I dont think there is a "perfect" lens, only perfect for a given situation.

I read a piece recently where a photographer finally found a prime lens that he had been after for years (ISTR a fast longish prime) for sale at a market at a stupidly cheap price with "hazing optics". It was such a bargin he bought it and took it home, dismantled it so he could see how bad it was and possibly clean and revive it.

He took out the front group and noticed that the hazing was not fungus like he had first thought but the result of sand or mediablasting the inside of the front optic. He was devestated and distusted that some one could ruin such a hallowed lens and re-assemble it and shoved it in the cupboard in distgust.

Finally curiosity as to why someone would damage such a great lens in such a way got the better of him. So he took it out the cupboard and shot some still life images with it.

Needless to say he was amazed at the results, it gave a wonderfully soft dreamy style image and he loved it.

Regards
PaulM