Is this anything?

[John Thawley]

May as well start the critique section off with some light-hearted fun. This is one of those images that Jimmy Sykes and I call "Is This Anything?"

Comments?

[John Bubela]

I think it displays LRP well. It shows how the people, the cars and track are closely connected(if that makes any sense).

[Todd Corzett]

I LOVE the idea of using the foreground to show motion. I wish the car stood-out a bit more, as right now it's kinda lost. Maybe if the car was a brighter color? Maybe with a longer/slower shutter speed? Maybe just messing with the levels/saturation? The only thing I see as being annoying is the guy in the red shirt to the left of the frame, as it pulls my attention away from the car.

-Todd...

[Dennis Murray]

I like the shot. You could probably improve it with some practice and fine tuning, but great concept.

[Bob Chapman]

May as well start the critique section off with some light-hearted fun.

Well, as long as we're keeping this one light-hearted, the bottom 3/5ths of the photo distract from your exquisite interpretation of Armco at speed.

[John Thawley]

Well, as long as we're keeping this one light-hearted, the bottom 3/5ths of the photo distract from your exquisite interpretation of Armco at speed.


And it's like a stereogram... if you stare at if long enough, it becomes hard to tell if the Armco is in front or behind the scene.:rolleyes:

[Paul Hansen]

If all those people were nekkid, it would have added a lot to the picture.

...but then everybody would have told you to speed the shutter rate back up... ;)

[Daniel Buck]

hm... I'm not sure. It's kind of cool at first glance, how the picture seems to be shot "through the crowd", but I think beyond that I don't see anything else. Maybe just me :)

[John Thawley]

hm... I'm not sure. It's kind of cool at first glance, how the picture seems to be shot "through the crowd", but I think beyond that I don't see anything else. Maybe just me :)


Daniel, I tend to agree with you. Contrary to some of Todd's queries of how to improve it, I think technically the effect as come about because the shutter speed is just right and the spacing of the crowd was just right. The only way you could make this "effect" work better is to stage the crowd all dressed in light or off white clothing and have a darker, more colorful car.

But you're right.... beyond "cool" ratings for the effect, it's not much of anything. :)

Now on the other hand, this one I like:

http://gallery.johnthawley.com/albums/albup92/aak.jpg

[Daniel Buck]

yes, I agree, that one looks better to me, a better view of the car I guess :)

[Todd Corzett]

Contrary to some of Todd's queries of how to improve it
I can't be right all the time!

-Todd...

[David Castrillo]

Interesting concept, but honestly, both look like you weren't close enough to cars as other spectators and they got in the way of your shot. Perhaps this would work better in an event that features people as the subject in motion, such as a marathon or bicycle race. Other than that, great panning and exposure!

[John Thawley]

Interesting concept, but honestly, both look like you weren't close enough to cars as other spectators and they got in the way of your shot. Perhaps this would work better in an event that features people as the subject in motion, such as a marathon or bicycle race. Other than that, great panning and exposure!


David: Please don't take this as my "calling you out," but you raise a question that leaves an opening for discussion of how a photographer approaches a subject and a topic. So, in the spirit of good dialogue (the reason I think we're here) Is it always necessary to be close? Or, to fill the frame with the car? Isn't the track part of the story? Aren't the specatators part of the story? Isn't the foreground part of the story? Why does it have to be always about the car? If that were the case, wouldn't it just make more sense to shoot it while its parket?

With that in mind, I offer up these interpretatios:



http://gallery.johnthawley.com/albums/8x3x8000/aac.jpg

http://gallery.johnthawley.com/albums/albup88/aek.jpg

http://gallery.johnthawley.com/albums/albup81/agk.jpg

http://gallery.johnthawley.com/albums/albup40/ace.jpg

http://gallery.johnthawley.com/albums/lbgp/aht.jpg

http://gallery.johnthawley.com/albums/albup54/aag.jpg

http://gallery.johnthawley.com/albums/albup54/aac.sized.jpg

http://gallery.johnthawley.com/albums/albup37/aaa.jpg

http://gallery.johnthawley.com/albums/albup36/ado.jpg

http://gallery.johnthawley.com/albums/albup36/acg.jpg


To me, this is what I saw... this is what I want to tell you about... more than the car(s) - and afterall, it's just an illusion I recall. :)

[Bob Chapman]

FWIW, I tried shooting from the same location as JT at Lime Rock (crowd in foreground and track in background). Frankly, his result was better than mine, but the shot didn't "do much" for me. Here's why:

1) Crowd was too sparse and poorly placed. I'd have rather seen a thick crowd of people and then looked for a couple gaps in the crowd to shoot "through".
2) Crowd was too far away from the cars and/or I was too close to the crowd. This exacerbated the problem caused by #1.

That having been said, JT's results were better than mine. The Ferrari shot is worth keeping, even though I would have deleted the Mazda shot during my edit/review process.

FWIW, when I got frustrated trying to shoot through the crowd, I went and shot this instead (a couple hundred yards further down the track). Similar concept, but I substituted trees for people...

http://www.autosportimage.com/misc_photography/misc/20060701_e_3704.jpg

[David Castrillo]

I understand fully and I do not take offense to any of your comments. Perhaps it is just a matter of personal preference and I totally respect that. What I stated was a mixture of my opinion and constructive criticism. Isn't that the point of this forum?

[Jeff Boerio]

My opinion is that since some of the car is "lost" (rear wing hidden), I would say it's nothing but a good concept. And that concept was refined with the Ferrari shot.

- Jeff