Oblivious

[Ivan Garcia]

I took this image from inside my car (a reoccurring event that I am very found off).
The day was (once again) cold and wet, and as usual, I found the city rush and noises overwhelming (I should move to the country side).
I was in London's Bond Street ( premier shopping grounds)and as the people around her went about their business, this girl looked oblivious to her surroundings. All of the sudden, the street appeared deserted on my viewfinder, and I just couldn't resist taking the image. Wdyt?





http://www.igdimages.co.uk/Forums/DS3_2375.jpg

Ivan Garcia: Oblivious

Canon EOS 1DS MKIII, EF 70-200mm F/2.8 L IS @ 125mm,
f/2.8, ISO 3200 1/50 sec, hand held. Please do not edit

[Doug Kerr]

Hi, Ivan,

I took this image from inside my car (a reoccurring event that I am very found off).

Stunning!

Another reminder that, the "eye" of photography is not the camera, with its retina-like film or sensor, but the eye of the photographer.

[Nicolas Claris]

Hi Ivan

glad to hear (see…;-) from you!
No more biking? I can understand with that kind of weather!

I'dlike to add a word play: she's obviously oblivious…

Though as usual I had like to see some color reflections on the black of the macadam, I find interesting that large different black texture of the macadam just where she stands…

What is she waiting for? we just don't know and will never, but that's the magic of a good shot, one may think and wonder about that and let the imagination running, just being intrigued for long…

I also like the bokey not being too blurred so we can guess the stores atmosphere in such a street (Bond street!) a few weeks before Christmas.


Thanks for sharing!

[fahim mohammed]

Excellent. This is what photography is all about.

[Ivan Garcia]

Lately, I am going through a bit of a slump, so your comments make me very happy indeed. I am overwhelmed, thank you guys.
@ Nicolas.
I sold my bike to buy my 1Ds3 and my EF500mm. Cried like a baby when the guy came to pick the bike up... still, I am happy with my decision, I get more pleasure from my photography. The weather is very inconsistent in England, which makes riding days few and far in between. In any case, I can always get another bike if I feel the itch again.

[Bill Miller]

Excellent - This could have been a commercial shoot. The space to right leaves room for the text.

I do agree w/Nicolas color streaking on the pavement from the lights would have been nice.

[Nicolas Claris]

I would add, more specifically for Asher that, within the debate do frame tight or shoot wide to crop later, Ivan's image posted here, is for me, a tight frame.
The space on the right brings all the atmosphere needed to the girl mood and the place unusually uncrowded.

So, yes wide can be tight ! ;-)

PS To Ivan, keep going with your good phototgraphy and you should be soon be able to buy a new and even nicer bike ;;;-)

[ashik ikbal]

This is what photography is all about. The canvas is a true one (seems no cropping). Which has become a challenge now a days; stick to the originals. Ok, it’s not always mandatory to keep the actual dimension. Cropping, chopping and effects sometimes needed to enhance the quality of the composition.

But, Ivan thank you again for the 'true girl'

[Mike Shimwell]

Ivan, a lvoely shot. I completely agree with Nicolas that the space to the right of the girl is vital to the success of the shot. I often think that creating space for the person to breathe allows a sense of movement, not just in space, but in time - a looking to an unkown future.

lovely and great tonality

Mike

[Rachel Foster]

Ivan, it is wonderful. But...if it were mine I'd criticize the bright area to the right that is beyond the dof. (This relates to something in another thread.) OPFers, why is this "criticism" of mine (the bright area) not a genuine criticism?

I hope this does not derail the thread. I'm hoping to learn and Ivan's lovely photo seems a good opportunity. If this is a derailer, mods and admins, please delete?

[Nicolas Claris]

Ivan, it is wonderful. But...if it were mine I'd criticize the bright area to the right that is beyond the dof. (This relates to something in another thread.) OPFers, why is this "criticism" of mine (the bright area) not a genuine criticism?

For me it balances nicely the dark area with the girl and do enlight her…

[Ivan Garcia]

Thank you guys, having your work praised and liked makes it all worth it.
@ Rachel.
The overexposure on the backlit add scrolling display (as that what it was)is a necessity of sorts.
The image (as you can see) was taken in near darkness, to get the exposure right for the girl, detail on the well lit windows had to be traded. This is not a composition flaw, or bad technique, as in this case, it fills the otherwise negative space with light, which helps balance the image.
I hope that helps some in clarifying my choices.
[EDIT]
@ Nicolas... LOL our post crosed... you have a gift! ... you read my mind.

[Rachel Foster]

Oh, no no no! It was not a criticism of your image I meant to post. I am trying to learn to distinguish what works from what doesn't work.

Thank you for allowing me to learn from your image.

[Nicolas Claris]

Rachel
look at Mondrian's work! I'm serious!

[Rachel Foster]

Dutch neo-plasticist painter, yes?

[Nicolas Claris]

Yes! Piet Mondrian…

For start: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piet_Mondrian

[Rachel Foster]

Yes, I've had a brief look at the work. It will definitely go on my list.

[Nicolas Claris]

It(s all about frame and construction, filled and empty, balance and fantasy… imHo
US Museums do have a lot of… worth looking the originals!

[Ivan Garcia]

Rachel
look at Mondrian's work! I'm serious!

I have been giving your replay to Rachel a great deal of thought.
You see, I had no previous knowledge of Piet Mondrian, so I did not use his art as a reference to create my image. In fact, I do not (consciously) use any artist as a given guideline in my workflow.

I don't seem to think about making images at such a deep level... I just go with what I consider to work for me. Once I like what I see in my view finder, I go through a very quick process to identify elements I do not want within the frame... then I shoot. These processes are automated; i.e. I am not consciously thinking about them, it just happens, like a reflex action.

So my advice to Rachel will be, stop trying to understand the process, just let it flow, trust your instincts.

Ps: Rachel I did not interpreted your post as a critique to my work, and even if you were to comment negatively on my image, I would not find it offensive, ... I present my art in a public domain, criticism is expected and welcomed. Moreover, I am flattered you consider the picture good enough to learn from it.

[Rachel Foster]

Ah, herein lies my dilemma. Am I over thinking it or not thinking about it enough?

[Ivan Garcia]

Ah, herein lies my dilemma. Am I over thinking it or not thinking about it enough?

Considering the sheer number of question you have posted, yes... you are over thinking by quiet a large margin. In fact, I recon it is consuming you to the point of doubting your own ability. So, in the words of one George Lucas... stop thinking about it and use the force Rachel. Trust your instincts.

[Rachel Foster]

Maybe I should. I'll think about that. (Couldn't resist.)

[Bill Miller]

Maybe I should. I'll think about that. (Couldn't resist.)

Rachel - Rachel forget your training, your sounding like the shrink you are. Quit trying to psychoanalyze photos and art. (Sorry couldn't resist. LOL)

[Nicolas Claris]

Hi Ivan
I have been giving your replay to Rachel a great deal of thought.
You see, I had no previous knowledge of Piet Mondrian, so I did not use his art as a reference to create my image. In fact, I do not (consciously) use any artist as a given guideline in my workflow.

I gave this reference to Piet Mondrian to Rachel as a guideline to also look at a picture with the masses and geometric aspects:
It(s all about frame and construction, filled and empty, balance and fantasy… imHo because of her question about the square of light in your picture…

I don't seem to think about making images at such a deep level... I just go with what I consider to work for me. Once I like what I see in my view finder, I go through a very quick process to identify elements I do not want within the frame... then I shoot. These processes are automated; i.e. I am not consciously thinking about them, it just happens, like a reflex action.

So do I!!!!
but as you mentionned "not consciously" what is unconscious is deeply involved in our comportments, such as shooting a picture. Hello Mr. Freud! are you there? :-D

So my advice to Rachel will be, stop trying to understand the process, just let it flow, trust your instincts.
This is exactly what Ken Tanaka and I told her in the "children returning from school" thread…

[Nicolas Claris]

Hi Ivan
I have been giving your replay to Rachel a great deal of thought.
You see, I had no previous knowledge of Piet Mondrian, so I did not use his art as a reference to create my image. In fact, I do not (consciously) use any artist as a given guideline in my workflow.

I gave this reference to Piet Mondrian to Rachel as a guideline to also look at a picture with the masses and geometric aspects:
It(s all about frame and construction, filled and empty, balance and fantasy… imHo because of her question about the square of light in your picture…

I don't seem to think about making images at such a deep level... I just go with what I consider to work for me. Once I like what I see in my view finder, I go through a very quick process to identify elements I do not want within the frame... then I shoot. These processes are automated; i.e. I am not consciously thinking about them, it just happens, like a reflex action.

So do I!!!!
but as you mentionned "not consciously" what is unconscious is deeply involved in our comportments, such as shooting a picture. Hello Mr. Freud! are you there? :-D

So my advice to Rachel will be, stop trying to understand the process, just let it flow, trust your instincts.
This is exactly what Ken Tanaka and I told her in the "children returning from school" thread…

[Johnny_Johnson]

Ivan, it is wonderful. But...if it were mine I'd criticize the bright area to the right that is beyond the dof. (This relates to something in another thread.) OPFers, why is this "criticism" of mine (the bright area) not a genuine criticism?

Hi Rachel,

I've read the responses to your question and I still think that you have a point. It may be because I'm primarily interested in landscape photography and therefore attracted to shapes and colors more so than people but when I look at this image my eye is first drawn to the overexposed area at the top center and then to the overexposed rectangle to the right. It's only after looking at those two areas that my eye wanders over to the girl. By that time ..........

Later,
Johnny

[Ivan Garcia]

The problem here is that you are confusing overexposure with dynamic range limitations.
The girl is the main subject, and as such, it needs to be perfectly exposed; the windows are the trade off and are not over exposed as such. The image has simply reached the dynamic range limit of our current technology.
With 22Mp at my disposal; I could easily have cropped the bright rectangle on the far right out of the image. Also, as I shoot RAW, I could have blended several f-stops to create a pseudo HDR montage. But the picture would have lost its appeal. Is a matter of balance and creative licence, not a flaw.

[Asher Kelman]

I took this image from inside my car (a reoccurring event that I am very found off).
The day was (once again) cold and wet, and as usual, I found the city rush and noises overwhelming (I should move to the country side).
I was in London's Bond Street ( premier shopping grounds)and as the people around her went about their business, this girl looked oblivious to her surroundings. All of the sudden, the street appeared deserted on my viewfinder, and I just couldn't resist taking the image. Wdyt?




http://www.igdimages.co.uk/Forums/DS3_2375.jpg

Ivan Garcia: Oblivious

Canon EOS 1DS MKIII, EF 70-200mm F/2.8 L IS @ 125mm,
f/2.8, ISO 3200 1/50 sec, hand held. Please do not edit




Ivan,

This is impressive! I missed it and now I am so pleased I discovered this very special image.

Asher

[Helene Anderson]

First time I have seen this shot, totally excellent me thinks. Looks like a still from a film, just from the photo someone with an imagination could create a film screenplay.