Disillusioned

[spike5003]

I love it you captured the entire essence of poverty here. Good work, look forward to seeing more from you.

 

[snownow]

nice work on the clone as well.

 

[Mansi]

:shock: I have always been a fan of your work right from your first post.

Eric

:blushing: Thank you very much Eric!

 

[Mansi]

thanks spike and snownow.. i haveta thank my friend Louise for the clone.. she did a prettty darn awesome job in a jiffy!

 

[Miki]

Another great journalistic portrait from you Mansi. You've posted consistently good stuff in this style recently. I know from what you've said that you do sometimes ask your subjects to pose, but this one, like others you have posted, looks candid. Is it, or did you talk to the boy first? I'm curious because while I like this type of photography, I'm always afraid of intruding on people by just photographing them without asking, and reluctant to ask in case the shot looks too posed. You seem to get the balance right consistently.

Good point, it's always a grey area. I go by the rule that if i'm not getting in their face (and it's for personal use only), it's okay to take pics without asking. I much prefer candid shots, and using a telephoto can help the DOF too, so keeping my distance works all around for me (though some may think it's sneaky or voyeuristic).

Great pic as always, Mansi.
Amazing job on the clone by your friend - wow.

 

[Mansi]

Thanks miki.. telephoto is not always a good option for people shots..
here's an interesting article...

<H2 number="5">Don't Be A Coward!

As much as the Magnum photographers would have you believe otherwise, photography is not about a passive, cool observer capturing the world "invisibly." Like in quantum mechanics, observation affects reality. "The Invisible Photographer" is something of a conjuring trick. Like any conjuring trick, it takes a certain amount of practice and, more importantly, a certain amount of confidence to pull off. You have to be comfortable with what you're doing and confident with your technique (or, failing that, zen about the pictures turning out successful or not). If you need to fiddle with your gear, you need to be able to do it casually. However, the rewards are well worth the pain of learning this confidence -- while few of us are Magnum caliber (pun entirely intentional), all of us can shoot candids that look light-years better than the phony "candids" by the creepy people in trenchcoats wielding long lenses.

Moreover, photographers often have a vague, subconscious guilt about what they're doing. We, too, are victims of the image of the photographer-as-stalker. However, and this cannot be stated too often, there is nothing wrong with taking photographs. Remember that, especially when you're actually doing the shooting.

Don't add to burden of guilt the collective subconscious tries to lay on us. Don't be a coward. Keep that telephoto for the subjects that really need it. Stick on the 35, walk up to them, smile, and start shooting. Your photography will benefit, and you'll be doing all of us a favor.

</H2>

 

[Mansi]

http://194.100.88.243/petteri/pont/Pontification/n_Telephoto_Is_For_Wimps/a_Telephoto_Is_For_Cowards.html?page=4

 

[Miki]

telephoto is not always a good option for people shots..

Not always - but in my opinion, most of the time. I should have specified moderate telephoto (maybe around 100, not a 300/2.8 ).

To demonstrate, let's take your pic. If there were more people in the frame, it would depend on the DOF to make the photo more or less appealing. More people in focus would definitely not work, but maybe a couple more moving people/carts/animals out of focus and in the right positions may have added the effect of the boy in deep (disillusioned?) thought while the world goes by at a giddy pace. I wouldn't have hesitated for a moment to use a moderate telephoto if everything else fell into place.
But like you said, it was very busy, and you've shown us the best shot you could get.

Anyway, this is a long discussion on what is quite a personal preference, i believe
Nice link - startlingly relevant to my statement !!

-Creepy person in a trenchcoat wielding long lenses


Edit: I forgot to ask - what did you use? Also, is this film or digital, your B/W pics are always stark & beautiful.

 

[erniehatt]

Sorry Mansi, I did an alteration on your pic, but unfortunately I haven't a clue on how to repost them here. Ernie

 

[dalebe]

absolutely love your street photography mansi, you have a great eye for capturing peoples expressions, they spreak a thousand words.

 

[Mansi]

Anyway, this is a long discussion on what is quite a personal preference, i believe
Nice link - startlingly relevant to my statement !!

-Creepy person in a trenchcoat wielding long lenses


Edit: I forgot to ask - what did you use? Also, is this film or digital, your B/W pics are always stark & beautiful.

yes, at the end of it it's all about what the photographer wants from his photo!
for most of my posts here in b/w i have shot on film..
this is however shot on my dslr.. and converted to bw on ps

thanks so much for looking :mrgreen:

 

[Mansi]

Sorry Mansi, I did an alteration on your pic, but unfortunately I haven't a clue on how to repost them here. Ernie

Thanks so much ernie.. may i suggest www.imageshack.us or if you have a photobucket account... just upload and copy paste the link in your reply
or you can pm me

 

[Mansi]

Thanks dalebe

 

[DaphneOracle]

A great shot. Even without the knowledge of the location and what was going on you could still see the despondency (disillusionment) in his eyes. BW just adds to the impact.


Great job!

 

[John E.]

You have a real talent for capturing people, enjoyed all your photo's so far and this one is no exception, good eye and instincts for picking this out. Conversion is very good and so is the comp. I like the last picture more.