Jump to content

Recommended Posts

"Slender Dreams"

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Out of sync"

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately we don't have a Dislike button. This picture is just disrespectful and serves as a good example of how to discredit streetphotography. Just my 2ct.

 

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you citral. Bilbao, Spain.

Where they built the Guggenheim museum

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

sorry for the OT pic

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

 

I don't know why but people get offended about almost everything nowadays.......perhaps the truth hurts sometimes and yeah, it's always easier to make it someone else's problem rather than our own. IMO, the title and the pic is very powerful. Definitely thought provoking...whether it is acceptable or not depends on who and where you are.

Link to post
Share on other sites

WhatsApp!!!

 

(X-A1,27mm,f/8)

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel so strange today.

(X-A1, 27mm, f6.4)

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

You know me better than anyone else

 

(X-E1, Pentax A 70-210)

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

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?

 :-)  Thanks!

The pic was taken with the XF56 ... actually a bit (too) long for street.

I like the perspective near ground. I've seen the dog arriving 50m before, went down, waiting to take a "head shot" ... but he decided to tag his street ... i felt free to document his action. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately we don't have a Dislike button. This picture is just disrespectful and serves as a good example of how to discredit streetphotography. Just my 2ct.

Thank you for your comments. I fully appreciate your point of view and when you wrote "Dislike" you did press a virtual dislike button. The intention is not be disrespectful. The culture we live in, dreaming to be slender is a very positive thing and even to tell somebody that You will look great if you trim down a bit is considered very normal. So respecting your point of view, I will not change anything , the title or the picture as your norms don't work the same way in every country. Thanks for being honest with your opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Amsterdam with Fuji XT1, 10-24mm f/4

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Amsterdam, Fuji XT-1, 35mm f/1.4

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Amsterdam, Fuji XT-1, 10-24 f/4

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dam Square, Amsterdam, Fuji XT-1, 10-24 f/4

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Vangough museum, Amsterdam, 14mm f/2.8

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Vangouh museum, Amsterdam

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Example: I am using a custom recipe, and I then use the film simulation dial to select a simulation. Are values from the custom recipe carried over, such as highlights, shadow, and white balance etc.? After studying the articles in Fuji X Weekly, this appears to be the case If you set a recipe on one of the C slots its settings will be applied to all the film simulations on the dial. The workaround is to use your 'standard' recipe at C1.   Please clarify this for me . I would have thought the film simulation dial would have no input from other camera settings.   Thank you - Very Confuded!
    • Is this on the X-T30 II? Sounds like you have HDR selected in the shooting menu. The other alternative when you see the "storing" message is that the Clarity setting is non-zero but that doesn't cause multiple clicks.
    • My XS10 came with a Capture One license but my PC at the time would barely run it so I stuck with my ancient version of Picasa.  Bought a new PC and my old Capture One has been deprecated and fuji site only talks about a 3 month trial.  Is there a work around or should I be looking for something else?
    • On aperture priority and single shot, camera clicks twice after one shot and then takes several seconds showing "storing" message.  This is a new camera and did not do this at first.  Does not do this on auto.
    • I have the Fuji 80 mm macro and really like it. It's very sharp and I use it for macro but also for general photography. If you find yourself zoomed to 55, this may land in the right spot. Also, this lens is very good with magnification distortion (pincushion or barrel), which is probably important if you're doing product photography and the product has straight lines. It is autofocus. I hear you don't prioritize that, but there's something else you gain when you have autofocus. You can combine multiple photos taken at slightly different focus distances, using stacking software, and autofocus lets the camera automate the process of taking all these, using focus bracketing. It even calculates how much the focus should change between these exposures. This lens, new, is above your stated budget. Maybe you can find it used? In any case, options are always nice to have, and others may like this option too. So, just a thought. One more thing: I've never used the Laowa macro you mention, but I do have their circular fisheye. I love circular fisheyes, and also have two other brands, and comparing them I find the Laowa is considerably better than the other two. That's a vote for Laowa.
×
×
  • Create New...