Skatepark pics

Starskream666 · Jul 16, 2012

Bevan - Kickflip by Skateboard C 91, on Flickr

Jack - Boneless by Skateboard C 91, on Flickr

I really like the edit of colours on the second one, I bet some of you won't though, what you think?

jwbryson1 · Jul 16, 2012

I'm fine with the colors I just wish you were closer.

Starskream666 · Jul 16, 2012

50 mill though.. Any closer and you wouldn't see the landing really

trabaker · Jul 16, 2012

Starskream666 said:
50 mill though.. Any closer and you wouldn't see the landing really

I know that skaters like to see the ramp/rail/or w/e they are skating on in the frame but you didn't catch the landing in either one of these. I would crop more off of the bottom and left to focus more on the subject. Nice expression in the second one.

GrantH · Jul 16, 2012

I think the first one holds well for the wide angle. He's already in the air.

The second on you could frame better from a lower angle and make the trick seem bigger than what it truly is. His shirt (to me) blends a bit too much with the trees.

Starskream666 · Jul 16, 2012

trabaker said:
Starskream666 said:

50 mill though.. Any closer and you wouldn't see the landing really

Click to expand...

I know that skaters like to see the ramp/rail/or w/e they are skating on in the frame but you didn't catch the landing in either one of these. I would crop more off of the bottom and left to focus more on the subject. Nice expression in the second one.

What do you mean by 'catch the landing'? you can see the landing easily in both. If you mean I didnt catch him landing on the floor, then why would I do that?

trabaker · Jul 16, 2012

I'm referring to the 1/4 of the frame that is dead space that doesn't add to the photo other than a tree and a trash can. Mainly the second shot where the kid still has his foot on the ground; I feel like the action is too far away and the left third of the frame is a distraction. I think the first shot works better because he is in the air and further in the frame. That's just my two cents, others will disagree.

CMfromIL · Jul 16, 2012

Like the pictures, could be either closer or get a different lens. You have decent timing, but leave much of the frame 'open' and your skater gets lost. Crop it a bit, and 'erase' the guys around him. Very, very quick edit.

Starskream666 · Jul 16, 2012

^
Sorry but that isn't how you frame skate photos. And I will never frame them like that. That is just showing him in the air, you don't see any of the obstacle or the landing so the crop is pointless because he could be doing it on the floor for all people know. It takes away far too much from the scene. The actual trick is only part of the shot in skate shots... The obstacle and environment are just as important.

Bitter Jeweler · Jul 16, 2012

This is going down just like last time. :thumbup:

CMfromIL · Jul 16, 2012

Starskream666 said:
^
Sorry but that isn't how you frame skate photos. And I will never frame them like that. That is just showing him in the air, you don't see any of the obstacle or the landing so the crop is pointless because he could be doing it on the floor for all people know. It takes away far too much from the scene. The actual trick is only part of the shot in skate shots... The obstacle and environment are just as important.

Ok. Change the crop, but your initial image was too open. Or on the flipside, forget anything I said and keep shooting the way you currently are. Perfect for a scrapbook, for people that don't mind wide open spaces with random strangers photobombing their pictures. Either way it's a win.

SCraig · Jul 16, 2012

Bitter Jeweler said:
This is going down just like last time. :thumbup:

Yep. Same subject, same arguments, same old same old.

rexbobcat · Jul 16, 2012

I also find that there's too much space and in the first one he's too close to the top of the frame. I know the environment is important because it gives the photos context, but when the photo is 70% background and 30% subject it just lessens the interest in the photo as a whole.

CMfromIL · Jul 16, 2012

rexbobcat said:
I also find that there's too much space and in the first one he's too close to the top of the frame. I know the environment is important because it gives the photos context, but when the photo is 70% background and 30% subject it just lessens the interest in the photo as a whole.

No, now I'm starting to appreciate the genius of the OP. He's making a statement about people not wanting to be confined to small spaces. To that end he's using an inadequte lens to convey a timeless shot of youth 'fighting the man'. If he would have only tilted the camera 27.5 degrees to give the added 'artistic flair' I would have bought them both. Or not.

rexbobcat · Jul 16, 2012

CMfromIL said:
No, now I'm starting to appreciate the genius of the OP. He's making a statement about people not wanting to be confined to small spaces. To that end he's using an inadequte lens to convey a timeless shot of youth 'fighting the man'. If he would have only tilted the camera 27.5 degrees to give the added 'artistic flair' I would have bought them both. Or not.

And yet nobody has commented on my milky way photo in the landscape gallery *hinthint

*. Am I too....conventional...