I tend to agree with Moose on this one but I think the photographer's
choice of focus is deliberate and I wait to hear his reasoning. Still,
I'd have chosen the face as the point of focus.
Chuck Norcutt
Joel Wilcox wrote:
> On Jun 13, 2010, at 12:54 AM, Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> On 6/10/2010 12:32 PM, Dawid Loubser wrote:
>>> The gap between rich and poor have never been - even in our troubled past
>>> here in South Africa - been as great as it is now. I generally don't like
>>> photographing unfortunate people, and tried here not to focus as much on
>>> the sitting man, as on the contrast of him and the scene behind him.
>>>
>>> http://fc07.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2010/161/d/5/The_Gap_by_philosomatographer.jpg
>>> (OM-1, 90mm at f/2.0, Ilford FP4+, 8x10in analogue print)
>>>
>> Nicely seen and captured. Still, your métier of very shallow plane of
>> focus requires great care in focusing and has, to my eye, failed here.
>> The lower legs in focus and face soft doesn't really work for me. I'm
>> not sure I mind the soft face, but the part that's in focus seems wrong
>> to me
>
> To me the amount of focus on the man's face is just about perfect. It would
> be difficult to get that by focusing anywhere else. I might like to see the
> car a little more in focus to emphasize the social comment, but that takes
> attention entirely away from the man. Tough photographic problem, but I
> think to call the decision a failure is far from obvious, at least to me.
>
> Joel W.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|
