Street Shots. Direction welcome

[jcdeboever]

D3300
#1 U.S.M.C. Craftsman: vr18-55mm - 38mm - f/5 - 1/100s - ISO 100

#2 Blacksmith: vr18-55mm - 34mm - f/7.1 - 1/320s - ISO 100

#3 Thinker: vr55-200mm - 200mm - f/5.6 - 1/320s - ISO 180

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[sashbar]

I think these are nice attempts.

I see you are trying to shoot at base ISO, often it is not optimal with street shooting and not really necessary anymore with modern sensors. You can easily crank up ISO to 400 and have a faster shutter speed. 1/100 s is a bit too risky, there are no obvious problems here, but you can easily get motion blur when shooting people on the street at 1/100. I usually try not to get below 1/200 - 1/250.

The first shot is ok, but it would be better if you concentrated on his hands, showed more clearly what he was doing and avoided the blown sky. Probably if you had moved to the left and forward and shot from a higher position, you could get a better result.

The second one is the weakest in my view, because there is no real action and again, the light is not the best. The foreground is too messy to be honest and the guy looks just grumpy.

The third one is a neat shot with some good geometry and light, but it is static with no definite mood. Just a man sitting on the bench with a rail going through his head. But I like the light and contrast. The geometry and shapes are a bit overwhelming for a shot of a solitary old man.

 

[Dave442]

1. more of the machine and less above the head. Have the roof line running through the head. A lot of nothing on the left side. Like that you caught the guys intensity.
2. Again a lot of headroom and can't really see what he is heating up to pound out.
3. Headroom here gives a sense of place so not really a problem for me. There is the handrail going through the head. Except for the subjects head the rest is kind of dark, the lighter area above in the background is pulling my view there and away from the subject. I do like the lighting on the subject.

 

[jcdeboever]

I think these are nice attempts.

I see you are trying to shoot at base ISO, often it is not optimal with street shooting and not really necessary anymore with modern sensors. You can easily crank up ISO to 400 and have a faster shutter speed. 1/100 s is a bit too risky, there are no obvious problems here, but you can easily get motion blur when shooting people on the street at 1/100. I usually try not to get below 1/200 - 1/250.

The first shot is ok, but it would be better if you concentrated on his hands, showed more clearly what he was doing and avoided the blown sky. Probably if you had moved to the left and forward and shot from a higher position, you could get a better result.

The second one is the weakest in my view, because there is no real action and again, the light is not the best. The foreground is too messy to be honest and the guy looks just grumpy.

The third one is a neat shot with some good geometry and light, but it is static with no definite mood. Just a man sitting on the bench with a rail going through his head. But I like the light and contrast. The geometry and shapes are a bit overwhelming for a shot of a solitary old man.

Thank you very much, very helpful. Crouched down on 1 & 2 trying to get a different angle. I see what you mean on #3 and light/shadow is what drew me to take it. Bump up ISO and Shutter speed. I am consistent on blowing skies up...

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[jcdeboever]

1. more of the machine and less above the head. Have the roof line running through the head. A lot of nothing on the left side. Like that you caught the guys intensity.
2. Again a lot of headroom and can't really see what he is heating up to pound out.
3. Headroom here gives a sense of place so not really a problem for me. There is the handrail going through the head. Except for the subjects head the rest is kind of dark, the lighter area above in the background is pulling my view there and away from the subject. I do like the lighting on the subject.

Thank you. Never considered the rail through the head. I need to slow down and think about all aspects.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[The_Traveler]

First, please post larger shots.
It is just damn impossible to see any detail when the shots are so small.

#1 is framed too high. He is looking at the work and thus the work becomes part of the shot.

#2 essentially the same.
If you had moved to your left, then much of that overbright sun would be gone and you would get what he is looking at and given the shot some content.
And it's underexposed.
With some editing this would have been better.

#3 that vignette just sucks all the reality out of this shot.

 

[W.Y.Photo]

In both 1 and 2 you chose good angles based off of the subjects, but in 1 your background really kills it.

2 is my favorite. It's a very interesting shot. I'm not sure why people think it is underexposed. My monitor shows it perfectly, plus if it were exposed any longer the guys arm would be blown out and the shade on his face actually makes for dramatic effect. Really the only qaulm I have with that shot is the woman with her hand on her hip in the background. She is very distracting.

3 does absolutely nothing for me. It might be cool if the guy had a pet Tiger or something climing over the bars and starring at the camera.

 

[vintagesnaps]

I'd keep trying different vantage points and thinking about how you're framing. I was thinking along the lines of Lew's edit, to crop whatever is above him and the crappy sky out of the picture and crop each side proportionately and bring the viewer in to see the subject. I sometimes frame lower to keep the sky out of my pictures if it's hazy, overcast, etc. and keep more sky in the photos if it's actually blue with while puffy clouds (or at least not too hazy and crappy! lol). I really don't think these are bad, just need some work and next time see what else you can do. I like the idea of these, you saw something interesting and worth photographing but maybe need to keep working on composition etc.

 

[jcdeboever]

In both 1 and 2 you chose good angles based off of the subjects, but in 1 your background really kills it.

2 is my favorite. It's a very interesting shot. I'm not sure why people think it is underexposed. My monitor shows it perfectly, plus if it were exposed any longer the guys arm would be blown out and the shade on his face actually makes for dramatic effect. Really the only qaulm I have with that shot is the woman with her hand on her hip in the background. She is very distracting.

3 does absolutely nothing for me. It might be cool if the guy had a pet Tiger or something climing over the bars and starring at the camera.

Thank you W.Y., rough crowd here but helpful. #2 is my favorite as well, maybe the smoke in front of him? Heck, that's his post as a blacksmith and what he does to pay for maintenance/upgrades on farm equipment. He was grumpy because he had a hard time controlling the melting with humidity and it was messing with him that day. Great guy, he was really tolerant of me. He was happy I sat down and just watched him for an hour, saying nothing, nor did he. After an hour he asked me what I trying to accomplish. I told him, "a man's work day sir on my off day, it is not respected today, but today, I am being schooled sir". All he said was, "yes sir.".

I got 50 shots of him and I admire this one the most. It is him, all of him, look closely and he is a living, woman's man.

It was a blessed day... He has me coming over to his farm in October so I can shoot freely on his property. I agreed to clean out the horse and cow stalls and other labor needs. I will work 12 hours on his land for the opportunity to shoot his investment. What a great day!

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[jcdeboever]

I'd keep trying different vantage points and thinking about how you're framing. I was thinking along the lines of Lew's edit, to crop whatever is above him and the crappy sky out of the picture and crop each side proportionately and bring the viewer in to see the subject. I sometimes frame lower to keep the sky out of my pictures if it's hazy, overcast, etc. and keep more sky in the photos if it's actually blue with while puffy clouds (or at least not too hazy and crappy! lol). I really don't think these are bad, just need some work and next time see what else you can do. I like the idea of these, you saw something interesting and worth photographing but maybe need to keep working on composition etc.

Thanks vintage, you are so kind to look further into my frame. I really appreciate it! I think your attitude and direction will get my thoughts, feelings, and inexperienced photography in line for my art away from canvas and oil. Your simple explanation has me motivated. I am going to try and run with your advice, it feels correct.

Side note: I could have cropped that beautiful girl out but I wanted the hammer in there. I can Gimp her out easy enough

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[The_Traveler]

Crouched down on 1 & 2 trying to get a different angle. I see what you mean on #3 and light/shadow is what drew me to take it.

I am reacting to what you said about crouching down to get a different angle. I'm not certain that looking for a different angle should be the end thought. I think that a shooter must have in mind what he wants to show, in a shot where there is so much supporting stuff available, I think that a shot should include what he is so intent on.
Other stuff - person or female - is distracting, extra space lets the viewer's eye skip out. This is a man who is intent on something and somehow the shot should capture something about that. Extra stuff thrown in doesn't add unless there is something to add to.

If the shot doesn't show anything then it is just an offhand portrait in bad light.
E.g. in the preceeding ****, if you had included more of his work, then all the lines focus on it and the shot has some direction. Without showing the work, then its just a guy looking down.

I'm not saying that every shot has to be someone working but where there is something going on, then the photographer must close that loop.

 

[jcdeboever]

Crouched down on 1 & 2 trying to get a different angle. I see what you mean on #3 and light/shadow is what drew me to take it.

I am reacting to what you said about crouching down to get a different angle. I'm not certain that looking for a different angle should be the end thought. I think that a shooter must have in mind what he wants to show, in a shot where there is so much supporting stuff available, I think that a shot should include what he is so intent on.
Other stuff - person or female - is distracting, extra space lets the viewer's eye skip out. This is a man who is intent on something and somehow the shot should capture something about that. Extra stuff thrown in doesn't add unless there is something to add to.

If the shot doesn't show anything then it is just an offhand portrait in bad light.
E.g. in the preceeding ****, if you had included more of his work, then all the lines focus on it and the shot has some direction. Without showing the work, then its just a guy looking down.

I'm not saying that every shot has to be someone working but where there is something going on, then the photographer must close that loop.

View attachment 108977

Well my intent getting lower than the subject was to put him in a position of authority. His concentration level was my main thought in capturing this scene. Unfortunately I made an error in putting too much sky in it, thus distracting from my original ambition. However, as bad as the photo maybe, I have a great example of an oil painting that I will be able to execute and change some things as it moves me in its execution. My issue is that I am a painter and not a photographer. I am learning photography as it is a way different medium than Photography. This is why I put myself out there for my crappy photos, I need to execute as well as I do in oil paintings. The canvas is totally different than the frame of a viewfinder. I find the viewfinder way more romantic then real life. This to me is the major difference from capturing a moment and feeling a moment and posted it online. I greatly appreciate your insight.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[The_Traveler]

Eventually you will get tired of just shooting intent faces- wrinkled faces full of authority and wisdom (I have lots also)- because those pictures are just casual portraits without much more to it.
After looking at several years of faces, that just became an empty exercise, like shooting random people on the street.
It is much more difficult - and more rewarding - to place those faces and heads and bodies in some sort of meaningful context.
That means thinking a lot and not just focusing on the face and pressing the button.

 

[jcdeboever]

Eventually you will get tired of just shooting intent faces- wrinkled faces full of authority and wisdom (I have lots also)- because those pictures are just casual portraits without much more to it.
After looking at several years of faces, that just became an empty exercise, like shooting random people on the street.
It is much more difficult - and more rewarding - to place those faces and heads and bodies in some sort of meaningful context.
That means thinking a lot and not just focusing on the face and pressing the button.

I get it. Thank you.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[vintagesnaps]

Usually I feel like if something doesn't add anything to my picture, do I want it in the frame? No I do not! lol I want it out of my photo unless it's doing something for it. Does she add to the picture? is she part of what's happening? (nah, in the background watching something else...) Taking a step to the left might have helped. Takes practice. (And thank you for your nice comment.)