real life for some...

[mmaria]

This I could call a test, and I pretty much feel I failed....

I was in the countryside today. I was driving two women to visit some people they know. I thought, I'll bring my camera, maybe it will be something interesting there.

I came in this house as a stranger. They were not in a mood for me and my camera.
Light source was one and only window and luckily the tablecloth served as a reflector. I sat in the place where they show me to.
I was not able to move, stand or else. Every time I picked the camera, they would froze or comment: don't photograph me (in a kind way, though).

I feel I failed because I was thinking about capturing emotions, which is my usual way to think. I didn't think about the place they live and how about to show some more of that. Instead I thought their environment was distraction.

The fist photo is the only one I took of this man. After that he was hiding his face when seeing me rising the camera up.
Edit: I reedited a bit



I liked this capture, but here I failed technically. Eyes out of focus.

........

This woman was constantly smoking and won't let me caught her with the cigarette.


......

I failed with my process of thinking, and I'm glad this was just test.
For the real visit which starts next week people would know that I will photograph them and hopefully be friendlier then these and hopefully I learned something from this experience.

Any, I really mean any comment, critique, advice on any segment of my future visits are greatly appreciated.

 

[The_Traveler]

These shots aren't bad.
The shots could use a lot more quality and my guess is that you are not shooting at the best f stop for that lens.

Shooting people up close is a real trial and a few not-so-terrific is no sin.
Just keep on shooting.

 

[mmaria]

The shots could use a lot more quality and my guess is that you are not shooting at the best f stop for that lens.

Assuming you mean a lot more image quality I could just say that this is the best in that conditions.

The settings 1/125 sec; f/3,9; ISO 800

With what I have to shoot I always must make compromises and sacrifice something (or everything, that seems to me is the truth lately) In order to get a decent exposed (but still not properly exposed) photo, I must raise my iso (max of the camera is 1600), use the lowest possible shutter speed, and the widest aperture.
The lens is decently sharp across entire range, but of course when wide open and with that camera and with that small amount of available light is just as you saw in the examples above.

Just keep on shooting.

I'm just on the edge to stop shooting.... but really....

In this so called test I stumbled on my camera limitations again. It is just not possible to capture with it what I want to capture. There is no IQ to show the difference between the black something and shadowed something. Sharpness - non existing. and so on and so on. I spent fair amount of time with it to know that I would be frustrated with it in almost every situation. Maybe someone with fresh eyes and attitude would produce much better results then me

Again, my thinking process wasn't right at that moment and I'm afraid that will happen again, I just feel now I'm doomed to fail.

I converted the image in bw



the rest I deleted. This one had a sincere emotion, the rest had nothing.

Acceptable or not?

Can you tell that he is a poor, hard working man? That he is hiding his eyes from me and my camera, feeling some sort of shame because of his clothes, his hands and the state of his house?
Can you guess who give him that frayed NY sport cap? Can you conclude that his smile is in contradiction to all of stated?
Or is it just me knowing all of this because I met him?

Thank you!

 

[paigew]

Honestly in that situation I would have backed out of their faces and tried to go with more of an environmental portrait...more of a documentary type shot. Sometimes you have to stop thinking about the shot you can't get and look into the shots you can A little lesson I have learned from my kids LOL

 

[The_Traveler]

Yes, to all your questions.
I would go for a slightly lower contrast conversion so that it looks a bit more dreary.

 

[limr]

I do like the one that you kept, though I think it's got more impact in color than in black and white. If the purpose is to show the stark reality of their lives, then you need the color. Maybe other shots will be different, but in this one, I think you see more little details in color that tell the story you already know by having met him: the dirt on the collar and the hat can't be seen in the black and white; the washed out color of the hat is also not visible. These things are part of the story but they're not in the black and white shot.

I wonder if people would eventually forget about the camera if you are sort of quietly moving around taking pictures constantly - not necessarily only of the people, but of the house, the scene, the dog...Given the limitations of the setting and the camera, I think you can't rely on the few shots you can sneak in before they notice.

Are you there with someone who is talking to them? Can it be explained to the people you're interviewing what the purpose of taking pictures is? Perhaps they are uncomfortable because it feels like one more thing they don't have control over, and looking away is their way of trying to exert even a little power over it. Is there another way they can feel they have control over the pictures? Maybe showing them some, or showing previous ones, or promising them a copy of the nicest ones...something like that? Maybe addressing the camera openly will make them more comfortable with its presence.

Keep shooting, though. If you only got a few shots at that practice run and still have a keeper, then there's something to work with. Get a lot more shots and you'll have more keepers.

 

[mmaria]

Honestly in that situation I would have backed out of their faces and tried to go with more of an environmental portrait...more of a documentary type shot.

The room was so small, I couldn't back out because I sat on the place they show me to and that was at the couch across them, behind me was a wall and only window.
Documentary style I failed...

Sometimes you have to stop thinking about the shot you can't get and look into the shots you can A little lesson I have learned from my kids LOL

yeah, that's how I was thinking the whole this time I own that camera, but I guess I'm tired.

 

[mmaria]

I do like the one that you kept, though I think it's got more impact in color than in black and white. If the purpose is to show the stark reality of their lives, then you need the color. Maybe other shots will be different, but in this one, I think you see more little details in color that tell the story you already know by having met him: the dirt on the collar and the hat can't be seen in the black and white; the washed out color of the hat is also not visible. These things are part of the story but they're not in the black and white shot.

I thought so when I first was editing that the color say more about him. But posted bw also to hear opinions.

I wonder if people would eventually forget about the camera if you are sort of quietly moving around taking pictures constantly - not necessarily only of the people, but of the house, the scene, the dog...Given the limitations of the setting and the camera, I think you can't rely on the few shots you can sneak in before they notice.

Are you there with someone who is talking to them? Can it be explained to the people you're interviewing what the purpose of taking pictures is? Perhaps they are uncomfortable because it feels like one more thing they don't have control over, and looking away is their way of trying to exert even a little power over it. Is there another way they can feel they have control over the pictures? Maybe showing them some, or showing previous ones, or promising them a copy of the nicest ones...something like that? Maybe addressing the camera openly will make them more comfortable with its presence.

This people weren't aware that I was coming. I was trying to explain them that I just practicing with my settings and I was casual, pleasant and talkative. I couldn't move around the kitchen because they placed me on the couch between two women.

People I'll visit next week know why I'm coming and hopefully I'll be freely moving inside and around their home. There would be some kids involved and I'l show the camera and some photos to them in order to relax them
A women from Red Cross and a principal of a primary school will go with me.

Keep shooting, though. If you only got a few shots at that practice run and still have a keeper, then there's something to work with. Get a lot more shots and you'll have more keepers.

I pressed the shutter exactly 13 times and got just this one, decent enough.

Thank you Leonore so much for the help!

 

[The_Traveler]

You are working with what you have.
It is the pictures that count.

Leonore is right on target with her suggestion.
Up close pictures depend a lot on the clarity and detail to make an impression.
Pictures that take in more of the environment lend themselves more to a more impressionistic processing.