nice edit Joni.

I like the idea of people making short edits of their own pictures but wasn't Bens idea to let people post short edits from the pool?

The former would be preferable, I didn't really envisage a platform for self promotion - but that said I think joni's edit is quite interesting and a good start point for people to work from. So I guess if people keep things quality we should be ok.

Moved to here---> Surroundings

@streetclicker: I'm amazed you're a completely different photographer than a year ago, or maybe it's the edit

@dave & benneh: yeah, fuck it, if it goes pear shaped we nuke it... I hope that even the not-so-good edits at least have room for improvement, and basicly it all is a notch better than the critique thread

HCSP pool search - umbrella

street clickr, yeah, thats a fucking good bunch of photos.

Well this is certainly off to a good start.

i definitely think that it should be for curation posts of other peoples worth though. isn't that the point?

can there be another thread for people to post edits of their own work?

erik

lol the fake palms have their own set:)

Some great stuff here.

I second Bens suggestion that there be 2 separate threads though ...

I learned a lot from here Dr. Karanka. : )

Thanks.

OK, I've split this out into 2 threads, this one is for HCSP curated edits, and this one is for personal edits, would the people who posted personal stuff kindly shift them over to the other thread.

Ta.

oops, i was typing that stuff.

you're more logical than me, I did it the other way round - sorry!

it's okay, i copy pasted it.

and as i said, i will do an hcsp edit, but i'm taking my time for that.

Smokers - this one seems to feature quite well amongst some of the better knowns of the group. David Solomons has a host of cracking photos, but try these for size.

hey i wanted to use that last one!

... how do you make the images so that you can click through to the photo page btw?

Beaches

Ha I like the progression toward the apocalyptic :D

www.flickr.com/photos/sjixxxy/3109065588/

www.flickr.com/photos/jkaranka/3078965473/

www.flickr.com/photos/davidsolomons/196770050/

www.flickr.com/photos/furrukh/2325170739

www.flickr.com/photos/chuckp/20392762/

www.flickr.com/photos/primitivenerd/210235977/

night/ club/ dance/ nightlife /fun

Man's best friend

Guys, please add metadata to the pics.. at least something to click on to have the photographers stream.

This is how it works :
<a href="FLICKR PAGE URL"><img src="PICTURE URL"></a>

nice thread so far.

nice, hills

ha yeah thats a great one hills.

"In the name of love"

Nice thread, reminds me a bit of this group.

I like the idea and its interesting to view the pool this way but if you don't mind my saying so, it seems to be having the opposite of the desired effect - by showing how many clliche based photos get in and how fast something can become a cliche.

well therrrrrr, the ultimate opportunity to try and do better yourself!

well I realize the umbrella photos are not all about umbrellas and the head cut off photos aren't all about head cut off, but as a casual viewer of the pool who comes around once in awhile to try to figure out what goes it, it can be misleading. For example, one month I came around to have a peek in the pool and it seemed it was all about "random guy caught laying around in a park" , next time I came around I didn't see so much of that. I really like the ones that are harder to classify and leave more questions than answers. Guy with head cut off is a bit like that at first, but seeing a bunch all together? It may not do justice to the individual photographers image.

I"ll have a closer look at the pool later to see if I can come up with a nebulous and flaky theme idea that only I understand :)

That's the spirit.

i dunno, i ultimately agree with what theresa is saying.. not so much as far as seeing which cliche's make it in the pool but more about the edits' glue being a certain prop or setting..

i'd rather see some edits that aren't strung together only because 'these people wear funny glasses'...

maybe i'll take regina up on her offer.. maybe not :)

Therrr, I think that's a problem inherent to thematic series.. like typologies applied to street.. All umbrellas, all primary colours etc.. like amateur photo contest themes.. But if you give this thread the time I bet people will come up with different narrative patterns.

The guy-laying-down string of photos was sort of a joke*, but it's interesting to hear they have a lasting effect.

*Plus, it was basically the reason one admin decided to quit....

i was trying to choose photos that were related in more ways than just heads cut off. i also tried to put them in an order that flowed. there were quite a few headless photos that i passed on because i didn't think they worked in the overall aesthetic of the series.

could you say that any sort of cohesive element within a set of photos inherently become a cliche no matter how subtle it might be?

There are two ways to look at it:

1) the subtleties are lost on the less discerning
2) we kid ourselves about the subtleties

I guess a bit of both occurs when choosing a strong theme as the main linkage. Creating a poetic edit that has no single obvious repeating theme is the dark art - and takes a bit more time. But at the end of the day we're editing the work of others and having to draw completely disparate images together so its not going to be straightforward to create something mindblowing.

jeff, which offer?
benneh, i wasn't really going for 'mindblowing' just so you know...

this one:

the ultimate opportunity to try and do better yourself!

loving this thread.

A couple of these have been featured in series' above already, but i don't suppose that matters. And sorry they aren't big size, I just used the "surround the url in [square brackets]" technique.

I really liked how the first 2 of these sit together in the pool, so I went looking for others to extend the series.


[https://www.flickr.com/photos/devinyalkin/3494134317/in/pool-onthestreet]



[https://www.flickr.com/photos/waxypoetic/2156847718/in/pool-onthestreet]
[https://www.flickr.com/photos/bform/1738887885/in/pool-onthestreet]

yeah griff, much less obvious, still has a common element.

NOTE TO SELF: .... the fast and the last, oh well.

Great idea and one that will be very interesting as it evolves further.

EDIT: full caps

These are really fun to look at... but are they exposing some street photography cliches?

they are, that's why I think it's better that you show edits of your own work than edits from the pool... isn't it scary that these photographs work together even if being shot by quite a few different photographers?

i'm well aware that my original "umbrella" edit was a total cliche - i knocked it together in just a few minutes before getting on with more pressing matters. however i think there is definitely the potential for more interesting curated series if people are prepared to put some time into going through the pool. however i think it would definitely be time consuming - flickr pools (viewed as a group member) are hardly the ideal interface for screen based editing.

I agree with ben, while these are fun series to look at...they all are just being connected by one similar component....which in the end just tells us street photographers go after similar aesthetics...

I think more interesting street photography sets can be created if people give some time and thought.....create an idea...a mood....or something.

Being currently unemployed I'll give it a shot myself.

Regardless this is WAY MORE INTERESTING than 50% of the threads in this group....I mean this is actually USING the pool to create something interesting....now we aren't just looking at a street photograph and saying "yeah its a good street photo"...instead we are CONNECTING great street photos together to create something... i dig it.

both these threads are a great read. What a change from the invasion of the talentless hacks/trolls, lead by Sir:whatshisname.

I Am Legend

Ged, I really like the first one you included from rafmad.

The Birds

I looked at about the last 40 pages. Lots of shots with people caught off guard. These ones have something that could be called "The Level Gaze". Probably not as easy to pull off as it looks. These ones gave me pause to look.

"IMG_4667a" by Richard Greene Photography [?]
"The Human Race: 2" by (1964) [?]
"IMG_4681a" by Richard Greene Photography [?]
"" by nosdy / Pierre Belhassen [?]
"Shima on the RT" by funkaoshi [?]

"Porcelain" by WAXY. [?]

So, let's try this.
"Exodus", maybe?



















Ƒin




(while deeply browsing through the pool... there are really some undiscovered gems! ;))

nice selection Purf. And you're right about the hidden gems

ha rafa

I have to say that the series compiled by Therr is one of the best short edits I have seen on the internet as of late. It is very thought provoking and all of the photos are classic shots standing on their own two feet.

I adore how each subject is looking at the camera and the subtle interplay of light in addition to the photographer's presence. What is more moving than anything is how the power of the photographer is revealed through the subject's gaze. Many normal people wouldn't realize the power of a camera in someones hand and it is indeed a very powerful tool. It can influence events and emotions in a subconcious way, that is beyond normal everyday thinking.

I would go onto say that that edit is magnumesque in its final edit as it incorporates all of the elements that the sharp shooters use, like Webb, Capa, Elliot etc - that is interaction with the subjects. If you are not close enough then your photos will disappoint as Capa was famously misquoted as saying.

But, I tend to think that he meant you had to be close to the subject on a tenderness level, it WASNT physicality idea about subject to photographer distance of anything of that ilk, however many critics have jumped onto the bandwagon of the polar opposite set of thinking that was in the camp of physical presence. Regardless of the number of theories that do exist that pertain to this quote, I would like to conclude that his theory encompasses a combination of the two, as revealed in the above edit!

Now, that last selection by that guy Purf was also very VIIesque as it incorporated the feeling of being displaced from your home. I predict that VII will gain more significance than their magnum rivals in the next five years or so, especially as contracts become increasingly hard to divide for assignments in places like Haiti.

Magnum seems to be almost a parody of itself and as an intstitution and it seems to be archaic and loosely survives from publicity generated by internet idols and chat room talk. VII seem to be much more hard hitting street than their Magnum rivals and in this day and age Magnum has many people predicting a life span of less than five years. That could be the deathknell of them. Besides, Magnum doesn't have many sharpshootes left and the work coming from them seems less quality than the stuff produced by their forefathers, like Bresson and Capa. Too many guys from their are bothering with cheap point and shoot digis and it is reflected in a lot of the portfolios. Time will tell.

But back to the topic, that edit compiled by Purf is very similar to the work produced by the VII agency. Well done.

magnumesque

Hello Jakes World.

@Lasalis

Name dropper...

actually i think lasalis is therrr :)

Okay waxy, point made. I used too many names in my above critique.

But at the end of the day, Therr's edit still stands as a tightly formed edit regardless of comparisons. Enough said.

@lasalis: I don't think Magnum is going anywhere. The new blood they've added with Soth, Bendicksen, Parke, Aue Sobol, Sanguinetti, Arthur, Anderson and Majoli will keep them alive well into the future. From what I gather, they're in the process of re-vamping their web presence in order to make it more, well, up to the time with what's happening with photography.

In terms of aesthetics, the gaze of the subject is certainly something worth debating. Personally, I feel it's a bit antiquated.

I think the New Topographic movement has kind of made the Capa quote obsolete. It's simply not true anymore. You can be far away and still make, amazing, compelling photographs.

Byran, 'be far away and still make amazing, compelling photographs'? From the research that I have conducted, movements come in and out of vogue in cycles, so I wouldn't write of Capa just yet. I'm sure that New Topographic movement that you allude to will be a passing fad in the not to distant future, and there will be a whole band of naive internet photog junkies dropping Capa's name and quotational philisophy and dinner parties and on photo sharing websites like this one.

Well, this following rant is not directed at you personally, but people who adhere to this philisophy of 'being far away' street photography are infact a copout, because they use these superzoom telephoto numbers that brings them NO closer to the subjects except in terms of viewing distance, however, those who use wide angle lenses get close so they can interact and learn about the subjects and watch their movements up close and personal.

In conclusion, that is where the stark beauty of Therr's edit lays, because the photographer was in a way challenging the subject, instead of taking the gutless stealth approach with the zoom. Each to his/her own, but I will say that it shows in the finished product.

Daniele's series also exhibitied the idea of getting close with a wide and the end product illustrates that this was successful. If I did have one criticism, that it would be he/she shouldn't have mixed genres of b&w and color, but that is just my personal opinion as it lost momentum. Cheers>

lasalis, what are you talking about? i like how - most - of the contributers of this thread tried to respond in some way to what the previous have tried to do. and tried to do their own narravitive, knowing that others know the pool they are reffering to, too. according to theme/tag searches, according to what stook in their memory. and their tastes.
see it like a movie, no one wants to see a movie build on nothing but close ups - or panoramas, on the long run, as well.
sorry, but i can´t see what makes therrr´s edit superior to purf´s or some other´s. we all gambled with the signs we found. sometimes better, sometimes hmpf. actually, i like ged´s picks...
dynamics, cheers.

@Lasalis: Well, it's a 'fad' that's been going strong since the '70s and doesn't seem to be waning. I think most people in this room understood that I was in no way referring to the use of a zoom lens but was referring to the use of medium and large format cameras.

Certainly trends come and go, but I believe we're near the end of the line in terms of photography (perhaps it already happened in 1987, MFA peeps?). I have no confidence that up close, wide angle Winogrand style street photography will come back into vogue anytime soon. But who the fuck cares? There's a bustling community online that values the entire eclectic mix of photographic genres and styles.

Style is dead. If you need to obey one style, or attempt to define your work by one style, you're working in a dated paradigm. The recent past and the future is about eclecticism and mashing up styles.

Two recent tweets from the Doug Rickard come to mind that really hit on this idea.


"Document, fine art, street? Not so much, they've merged/are merging, forwards and backwards,sideways,a big hybrid. Cream, rise to the top."


The past, present and future are co-mingling like never before... this co-mingling is the future...

Lasalis: don't drag my name into this silly trolling stuff. Its old. I just thought the thread would be an interesting way to view the pool if you put some thought into the edit. Every group you go to doesn't have to be about "satire".

Erik, I called the edits how I saw them. What I said about Therr''s edit as better than some of the others shouldn't be written is stone - it is just my opinion, thats all. I don't see why there is a problem if some of them were subsequently compared by me. Its just my voice: no more, no less. I feel that would be a normal turn of events considering they were all listed under the one thread.

Bryan, when you said style is dead, I find it rather ironic that you were the one who dropped the name New Topographic Movement and brought it to the table of discussion here. So, who cares? Well obviously you do, or you wouldn't have argued so valiantly that it will still be around for sometime yet. But in retrospect, you are right about one thing, different styles are merging into one, where they are less defined. (I also enjoyed those links, so thanks for posting them)

Magnum, yes, you maybe right. Those newer generation photogs certainly have produced some excellent and creative work. Unfortunately, there exists the problem of older members spoiling the birthday party and utilizing new technology that they obviously have little idea about. People like Webb, Harvey, Vink, Abbas have changed to digital but haven't studied photoshop or the second phase of digital processing. Just my opinion, but ultimately they bring down the newer work from the younger members and cast a dark cloud over this transition from analog to digital. An analogy would be that grumpy grandad who ruins his granddaugther'sfifth birthday party from drinking too much then snoring during the cake cutting.

Take Ben Robert's & Daniel's edit for example: 20 years ago it would have been inconceivable to blend color and b&w together in one tight edit, but now those boundaries or borders I should say have fragmented. A newspaper editor would have told you to pack up your Leica on the spot. In addition, I would say Ben's edit doesn't work, mainly because the theme is too insignificant - umbrellas, of course no deep resonance there.

But the fact he mixed color and b&w together shows some courage. However, how this was executed, one b&w, then one color almost seems poor. I was once taught that photographers are only as good as their weakest shot/edit, so I wouldn't have included this particular edit as it can bring all of your work down in the long run. If you go to the trouble of posting an edit, do it properly.

However, the question that arises from the ashes is whether this practise of mixing mediums is just another fashion victim, or is there something more significant happening? In this particular edit, I would definetely argue the former, but I have seen good examples elsewhere where the two were combined aesthetically.

In conclusion I take no stance here, but one could argue that that is the beauty of the internet, as it brings such issues to the fore for all to ponder.

I learned long tim ago to ignore people who dont share their work with others. We had a know it all troll here who refused to do that, and he was banned. De ja vu all over again with Lasalis.

ooh purf, i like yours!
this place has been so postive and supportive and fun the last few days (i know, scary huh?), let's not ruin it with having fits with stray strangers, please.

For 24 years I've been living next door to lasalis. lasalis? Who the fuck's lasalis?

hahaha, benneh. a song i had reasons to skip for more than one decade.
lasalis, everything is fine, but i haven´t slept for more than 24 hours, and actually it´s a picture thread.
i hope so. makes it easier to handle.
maybe one day the day will come when there´s a thread for each edit. not my day. but after a nap i read thru all this:)

I only ever name drop HCSP.

Like when I'm at the beach, I'll point to WAXY's building. The chicks love it.

"If you go to the trouble of posting an edit, do it properly."

it takes a lot of time and effort to make a good edit of other peoples work. here's one i made earlier:

lapuravidagallery.com/2009shows/january/


please judge me on that one. the umbrellas were merely to get the thread rolling, okay? now go troll elsewhere...

Ben,

dont play his game. The guy has no photos, no avatar, he is basically a troll. I love these sorts of people who have no work, or in Lasalis' case who havent done an edit on top of having no work calling people out for their edit. Lasalis, why dont you do an edit yourself?

hiding

2nd one down is Lasalis. or is it the 3rd?

Oh, just checked your latest edit Roberts and I like it a lot. It seems that it is more coherent than your rainy day umbrella offering and definetely a vast improvement. I like the overall theme.

I would have to agree with your above comments - a good edit does indeed take time.

Jinju - I would much prefer to evaluate your offerings. Also, I really don't have the skills to do an edit that I would deem worthy of maintaining my credibilty in the company of such prestigious talent.. Hence, the whole process could be a potential exercise in futility. You do the math.

troll.

my edits are easily seen here

lafamiliaabrazada.tumblr.com/

you have zero credibility as you have nothing to show in terms of your work or your own editing. IOW you are a troll, and not an original one either.

I don't see that much trolling from lasalis, but I understand that most people here don't like the amount of anonymity.

a midsummer daydream





















top to bottom:
www.flickr.com/photos/cafone/2882006760/
www.flickr.com/photos/naveenjamal/419093497/
www.flickr.com/photos/shveckle/1332281949/
www.flickr.com/photos/20698158@N03/2902157071/ (livia geabelea)
www.flickr.com/photos/ljmcallister/91948313/
www.flickr.com/photos/hinius/135034336/

Joni

cmon

1. confrontational
2. totally anonymous in every conceivable way

He is just like the guy who when challenged refused to post his super awesome stuff because he was "still editing". Lasalis refuses to post an edit because he has "no time" but does apparently have the time ane energy to write esays about other edits. Zero difference. What was that guy's name? Anyone? Drew something, right?

hey guys, let's just move on. plz.

well, ben already had stated that the edit of the umbrellas hadn't been done in all seroiusness but to show what the thing could do... I'd say he's more argumentative than confrontational, and we've sort of got into that

Thanks for that link to your edit Mr Jinju. I especially liked Jay and Khan's pieces. All in all it seemed to be a well established site/link and I enjoyed the experience very much. The fact that you have taken the time and found photographers who have a similar style is inspiring.

As this is a discussion forum, I have done nothing but provide feedback into the edits that were provided - unlike you, I haven't made any personal remarks. However, if you want to be confrontational (note I wasn't, hence Dr Karanka's comments above) then I will call you on it.

So, I noticed that some of your work that is here on flickr under your name was also coincidentally on that link you so generously provided. Just a thought, but isn't this whole thread that we are all currently enjoying titled 'short edits - others'...? By including your own work, then it seems like you're the one stepping out of bounds, not me.

Also, if I was going to go down the treacherous path and eventually produce an external edit of other photographer's work, I certainly wouldn't create a conflict of interest and get my own 'work' mixed up into the final product. A sense of objectivity would be paramount if you were going to do it legitimately.

Cheers

lasalis,
as you so eloquently pointed out this thread is about edits of others and feedback on that. so maybe you could stick to that as well and not get into the fact that in a link jinju posted there are some pictures by himself. he never posted the edit in this thread after all.
this group has had his it's fair share of people showing up and demaning attention by having an opinion about just about anything and not giving any input themselves. i for one would like this to not be another one of those cases. in dutch we say "de beste stuurlui staan aan wal" i don't know the english version of that, but translates to " the best sailors are on the shore". please join in (show some photographs on your stream, edit someother people's work, etc) an not just talk. i mean even I think you talk a lot.

Also, if I was going to go down the treacherous path and eventually produce an external edit of other photographer's work, I certainly wouldn't create a conflict of interest and get my own 'work' mixed up into the final product. A sense of objectivity would be paramount if you were going to do it legitimately.

sorry, but this is absolute rubbish. perhaps if the curation was for the bloody Guggenheim or MOMA this might have some relevance; as it is, this is friends interacting with photographs on the internet. get a grip.

found photographers who have a similar style is inspiring.
---------------------------

I didnt. its an edit from a flickr group they joined.

--------------------------
Also, if I was going to go down the treacherous path and eventually produce an external edit of other photographer's work, I certainly wouldn't create a conflict of interest and get my own 'work' mixed up into the final product. A sense of objectivity would be paramount if you were going to do it legitimately.
----------------------------

look above. its an edit of a flickr group.



And as was said, I didnt put this edit here, it doesnt have to abide by the rules of the thread. I put it out there for you to go and see because unlike you, I have my own work and my own editing to back my words up. Atleast I put myself out there, unlike you. And to clear things up khanosu's edit was purely his not mine and I agree that it is great, thats why I invited him to put his work in the group and put it on tumblr.

You words carry no weight. You are a backseat driver, a monday morning quarterback. I love how you took a swipe at Webb and harvey. Hilarious.

'sorry, but this is absolute rubbish. perhaps if the curation was for the bloody Guggenheim or MOMA this might have some relevance'

Sorry to point this out, but you have just contradicted yourself in all of two lines. Also, if one was to take your advice, perhaps when all is said and done on this thread, there may arise the opportunity to raise the bar and set new editing standards right here on flickr. Shoot for the stars and follow the curatorial approach adopted by the above said institutions.

'look above. its an edit of a flickr group'.

Is that important where the photographs have evolved from? I don't give a damn where the photographs originate from (as long as you have permission before posting them): Flickr or a museum, as long as its cutting edge and is creative. At the end of the day it's still your edit, the final decision is yours, so take the responsibility for that cut that you were spouting earlier.

It might pay dividends to adopt a sound objective editing approach early in the game. Also, perhaps you should have properly referenced Khanosu's edit as his when you initially provided that link. This all leads back to my point about a habitual sound editing practice. cheers and thanks for the excellent discussion.

OK, move on please, danger of derail.

I predict a riot.

[https://www.flickr.com/photos/raoul/280436307/]


[https://www.flickr.com/photos/stygian_jone/172819387/]


[https://www.flickr.com/photos/antitezo/136493345/]

Why are they tiny? I suck. :(

erm, I was doing the teacher above but in fact I'm not a master of html :/
Is it possible to put pictures that don't have the + sign?
If not my edit is fucked :D

f-ing spaceball!!

Annie, try adding :
width="500"/>

But in fact I quite like it small.. smooth browsing!

@spaceball. hint: view sourcecode.

lectured on editing by a guy who most likely hasn't edited a single thing in his life. You are in no position to offer any advice. Im done with this.

Annie you do suck, but I really like the edit with the title. Nice one.

To outer senses there is peace,
A dreamy peace on either hand,
Deep silence in the shadowy land,
Deep silence where the shadows cease.

.....



Save for a cry that echoes shrill
From some lone bird disconsolate;
A corncrake calling to its mate;
The answer from the misty hill.

.....



And suddenly the moon withdraws
Her sickle from the lightening skies,
And to her sombre cavern flies,
Wrapped in a veil of yellow gauze.

..........



Oscar Wilde - La fuite de la lune

cool olov!

man, and i thought i had taken some time.... respect.

@spaceball.gif shit: HINT. bottom few pixels of the image remain unprotected by that shit.