excellent shot and perspective!
But please allow me a little criticism concerning the image processing: the sky is obviously darkened a little bit sloppy and as a result of this the transition between sky and the wooden beams in the foreground shows a pretty visible white edge... The same with the hills in the background: towards the houses you forgot to ad polarization or what ever you used. I think a little bit more editing of this stunning pic and will be perfect!
Sadly this place probably doesn't exist anymore due to the earthquake.... Bhaktapur was hit pretty hard. I wish all the best to the Nepalese people!!!
Interesting point. I, sometimes, keep thinking about a title to put on my shots, because I feel weird about leaving the camera file name. Never thought of just putting the location and letting the view figure out whatever they want.
My favorite in the thread so far. Absolutely stunning. Framing is great, processing is awesome. How did you have time to get low and frame so quickly? What did you shoot with/at?
II wouldn't say that. I'd say the title is very unfortunate, not because I am shocked but because I firmly believe a phtograph's interpretation should be up to the viewer, it's not the role of the photographer to tell people how they should interpret it. Something like Street Name - Year would be much better imo. I don't like titles that are oriented because they seem to imply the viewer is not intelligent enough to make a link on his own about what's happening, so he needs the help of the pohotgrapher to explain him what it's about.
Now if one discards the title, he can imagine anything. Would it be called "dreaming about fine lingerie" people would react differently. I know a man from poland who would find this woman a bit underweight. It's all a matter of personal perception and interpretation.
I would argue that it's really a shame that some people think one should not photograph fat people because it's disrepectful, or children because it's creepy.
If the viewer has issues in his head and thinks immediatly about sex when seing children, or about morbidity when seing overweight people it is entirely HIS problem, not the photographer's and certainly not mine. I don't mind my children being photographed because they are part of an interresting scene or just because they are beautiful.
Why could only beautiful slim women, flowers, sunsets and men in suits be photographed? How is that any more sane and democratic than photographing everyone, the homeless included?
How is photographing the ass of a beautiful woman next to the rear of a race car and call it "nice bottoms" less exploitative than to photograph a not-so-slim one next to a scrawny mannequin and call it "slender dreams"? It is not. It's all about perception and street photography is often about juxtapositions of things that work in the picture without necessarily having anything to do in real life (here we can't even be sure that the woman is looking at the mannequin due to the angle, that made the picture work in the first place)
The title is unfortunate but the picture does not discredit street photography which is exploiting life to make interresting pictures imo. Somehow nobody has risen a concern about the '"out of sync" picture capturing a woman that one could depict as being probably anorexic.
