I like the juxtapositionof the tough man on the left and trhe flower on the right

@ Racklever: your image is too single dimensional to hold a read for more than a second, and even after that you’re disappointed because it reveals nothing more, what you see is what you get…..

you basically have a group of people walking from right to left across the frame lines, every thing in the image is moving from right to left. If you want to see the magic of exactly the opposite of this weak image dynamic, take time to understand the simple magic that can be seen here:

2point8.whileseated.org/?p=87

Also, its key subject matter is a spectacle, it’s gagging to have its picture taken; which makes me wonder why you took the shot from hip level. Also, the lopsided horizon is not enough to be intentional, but just enough to make it look like a sloppy hip shot.

On the upside, yes, you are right; the guy on the left does look a bit too-cool-for-school and this makes me look back to what seems to be his entourage behind him, this almost makes me like this image, as if the tough guys are overtaking the sugar-and-spice-and-everything-nice duo on the right.

The passing aspect of baddies could have made a second motive erupt from the image read, but it’s here when we see the second blow to the image (first being single-dimensional pictures of people walking past a lens).

There’s nothing worse than muddled lines around key subject matter, clipping heads is ok, but when the muddled lines are hiding information that if revealed could help the image (like the rest of the entourage behind the gang leader) then it has let the image down.

This is when you know if someone is a tourist or a street shooter. The street shooter would bob-weave, duck-and-dive to unhide faces. A tourist just stays planted and hopes for the best.

How could this shot have been improved? You had two juxt-worthy forces, i would have tried to wring out the passing aspect of the gang and maybe allow it to make the duo look to be cowering away from the baddies as they passed.

To do this you would have had to let the entire gang reveal themselves, and let the duo look to recognise they were passing.. They may have showed some interesting body language to suggest they are getting out of the way….or maybe nothing would happen, it’s street and nothing is certain.

what do you think? Can it fit here?

i think this works - why doesn't it?

i like the 3 plans with 3 different situations going on. i think the composition is good. what do u think?

@ nir kristal.... RE: what do you think? Can it fit here?

i don't like it and no, it doesn't fit here, it’s just some guy playing to the camera.

you "do" have at least two images in your stream that might…….please go read some of the suggested readings in the HSP description page and those images will become more obvious, if not, go and read some of the old critique threads and you will definitely get the picture.

AND Ladies and Gentlemen...... you'll see from our first piece of feedback above that we like giving feedback, maybe not always the best, but usually our best effort, but please do yourself a favour, go read the reference material in the group’s description page before you post something, if your post is purely a ‘test the water’ post like the one i’m commenting on now, then i think we may just delete the post as ‘pseudo-spam’ so that the more thoughtful efforts get the feedback they deserve.

@ cafone.. i can only say, please submit this to the pool. it may not be to everyone's taste, but it's definitely to mine :-)

@model337 - for me there is too much nothing on the right, and it isn't interesting, dynamic nothing, just black space that happened to be there. I remember seeing this one on your 'stream, I think, and liking the three faces; but for it to work, it needs something extra, or a crop (bottom and right edge, perhaps, to leave some of that darkness, but not too much.

Junku does great things with deep, dark negative space:


- junku-newcleus

@nir kristal - This feels too contrived a situation and too flat a composition, for me. Just doesn't click.

@cafone - I saw this one in the queue, and I did think about it, because I knew I wouldn't let it in (sorry), but wanted to figure out why I didn't like it... Sometimes with wides you have to be careful just how distorted things are becoming - here is feels a bit too distorted, and thus imbalanced. The kids in the background aren't quite distinct enough, in terms of what they're doing or how they're working within the frame; and I really want to see more of the fight. It is an interesting moment, but not quite a great photo, for me. But I'd be intrigued to hear what others (admins or whoever) think.

[edit: I just saw Joe's comment, and am happy let it come into the pool for the consideration of all ;-) ]

Further to Joe's comments above, please do try to post images you genuinely think are good, street images, both to the pool and to this thread. And when you post something here, leave a little bit of information as to why you like the shot...

@cafone: I'm guessing the composition wasn't someone's cup of tea [or possibly cutting off the foreground figure at the eye was a dealbreaker], but that said, I wouldn't have bounced that one from the queue.

@model337: that one's just not terribly interesting for me. [The queue overflows with shots that are essentially just people walking.] I do like the narrow focus and the way the negative space of the backs of heads frames that one figure, but, ultimately, what's captivating about that figure?

On a general note: if possible, a little more detail than "I think this works" or "what do you think?" might be helpful in self-evaluation.

@cafone: I left that one in the queue but I wasn't convinced... it's on the right direction, I like the subject, the distance, the chaos of the wide angle, but it just finally doesn't work as well...

I agree with Mr. K. on the "chaos of the wide angle" being a positive, but I think it is a little too chaotic, there - too much overlap and not enough (looking at it again) to really separate out the main pieces of action. And as Kramer notes, the crop (for me) is too tight on the head of the boy. Out of interest, was it the only frame you shot at the time?

Would be good to see if there are better ones. I mean, it's a good way to shoot, just not the best result (imo).

I think we all talk too much. Come on, send some more photos.

Yep, quote me

I think I tried to submit this one a bit ago. Perhaps it's a bit too chaotic but I like the curve formed by the people above and the smoker. Actually there are things I don't like here but I'm curios about your critics.

@kramer.oneill:

do you want me to try to sway an objective critique before it takes place? i'd rather the image speak for itself. but since you ask, i think it captures the feeling of being inside a crowd, while simultaneously isolating the subject via DOF and highlight / shadow (& darkness) contrast. the subject is looking directly at the camera / viewer, which engages the audience, like the experience of momentarily locking eyes with a stranger while walking through a crowd. but it doesn't work for you, so thank you for explaining why.

@scribe: thanks for elaborating. perhaps the subject just isn't strong enough. will keep at it. & thanks for the reference; junku-newcleas has some fantastic work.

@model337: yeah, I'm with you there, I just think that in a composition that forces the eye so precisely toward a subject, that subject has to be really stimulating. Looking at the camera can create a wonderful eyeline and that quasi-self-reflexivity that elevates the work of Winnogrand or Towell, but I'm just not seeing it with that guy.

As for the self-critique: Of course, a photo should stand [or fall] on its own merits, but when I have to describe my own shots, I often get a better sense of what does or doesn't work for more objective observers. Most of the admins have already seen and formed opinions on these shots, so this thread is intended to examine different perspectives rather than as a pure critique.

At least that's how I intended it.

@'tonytigre: I like the look of that one; almost-glowing whites, smooth greys, nice contrast. I like the smoker a lot, too. The chairs forming the lower-right backward "L" also creat an effective frame, although, as the element most in the forefront, they aren't really nice to look at, and don't say anything about what's going on. It's funny how some things work as compositional elements while simultaneously kind of mucking up a shot.

what about this?

that might have been an interesting shot were it not for that goddam awful tilt.

unless the building was in fact built on a very steep slope. in which case i take it all back, great shot.

The girls should stand straight.

Yeah, I'm actually a lover of the well-used canted angle, but I can't tell you why they sometimes work and sometimes don't. This would be a "don't". The contrast between the people is nice, though. There's probably a couple ways to frame this scene and make it work, and a million ways to frame it where it doesn't work. I think this is one of those million.

EDIT: The "On This Site" slab in the foreground is a problem, too. It's the foremost element, but does nothing but partially obscure the women. Probably unavoidable from that angle, but a big obstruction, literally and figuratively.

thanks for the constructive critiques. appreciate it.

@macskata: I tilt quite a lot. I think that in this case there's nothing too strong that keeps balance. If the girls were not on a tilted frame (as they are straight in reality) I would enjoy the feel of the man being lying down on a 'hill'. But then you would need something stronger on the right handside, something that contains an element of balance which is actually not tilted relative to the frame.

Maybe they all have one leg shorter than the other?

@Lee - yes, it should stand and fall on its own merits; but I think if you're posting them in here, for critique, it would be interesting to here your take on the shot, not necessarily an explanation of it... just your own critical thoughts... Maybe. ;-)

Yes, Junku is ace.

Tony, that guy in your shot is wicked, but for me the framing is all wrong - too tight in the corner.

Back to that last shot... Tilting is something to be done with care.

Mr Karanka: you are right , the girls souldn' tilt. i had some questions about the picture earier , I just coudn't verbalize it.

macskata. Though dutching can be used well but most of the time it just irks me. While I can appreciate you trying to contrast the distance between your subjects with the tilt, the weight of the photograph is too right-sided almost to the point that I'm waiting for the man to slide out of the picture. *smile* Like kramer said, it can be difficult to say why it works sometimes and not others. My feeling here is that it has something to do with the perception of the strong architectural features and weighty statue and a lack of other heavy lines or shadows to balance the picture. The processing is nice. In fact, I'm glad you took this shot. Like others have said recently, take the fucking shot -- and experiment. You won't know until you try. That said I would have also liked to see another shot without the girls and statue while keeping the layed-out man and architectural features.

We don't really have a set rule requiring people [or, a close observer will notice, cows] in the shot, but I tend to go with a simple concept: If no people are in it, it had better be pretty fantastic. Here, I see a street on an overcast day. This I do not find very interesting.

@Wozza:

"A group dedicated to candid situations that momentarily reveal themselves amidst the mundane hustle and bustle of everyday life. An ode to all great street photographers such as Winogrand, Arbus, Levitt, Koudelka and many, many more. Respect the past but avoid being beholden to it."

scribe of light-

that'd do it :)
cheers

In a recent discussion of no-people street shots, someone talked of "echoes of people" or "traces of human existence".

Here, for example, is an ironic take on a countryside pastoral:

www.flickr.com/photos/nilsjorgensen/1423627449/in/pool-on...

The cow provides character, but for me it is the sign, that oddly located and constructed sign, that makes the shot - the way it slips in between the tree and those flowers, tipping the shot from "countryside scene" into something cleverer, somehow.

The shot above is, as Kramer notes, just a shot of a street.

Wozza. I'm not sure what an Urban Landscaper is (Is that a construction worker or an Urban Planner?) but this is not what I consider Street -- whatever that is. The photo is too static and there is no storyline. I encourage you to read this which talked about blurring the framelines. Also, while including people in the shot is not necessary for us, it is important to include some tension or aspects of humanism. Hin has a great shot that was recently added to the pool . . . and one could argue that it isn't even urban.

My point, which is not just directed only at you but everyone who submits here, is that the admins want photos that stretch the imagination. Does this do that for you?

@wozza: There are, of course, excellent practitioners of the kind of work I think you're talking about; Stieglitz is maybe the most obvious, although a contemporary version would be the fantastic work of Stephen Shore. And, of course, flickr's very own hinius. These photographers certainly make work that could be considered "street", but much of their work is a bit more nebulous.

Or Joel Meyerowitz's large format stuff, that I'm not fan of

waxy -
what i assume they meant was that the pictures i was taking were urban landscapes - not particular moments in time. Reflecting something wider of an area than conveyed by a split second in time.

i would say to each their own, the shot from Hin doesn't take me in a special way - i see a lot of nice things in it, but i didn't gasp or feel particularly drawn in.

Maybe it didn't come across strrongly enough in my picture, but i felt something to it and it had resonated with people other than me - the old metal fence drew the eye into the shot where the boards on the office windows stretched all the way down the street on an overcast day, I can't speak for what other people saw in the picture except that some poeple like it for what it is - a picture of a deserted boarded up street on a cloudy day in london. Not everyones cup of tea - s'all good

I like the b/w, 35mm film grain, the lovers interaction in front, the lines of stairs/fence and the heart soccerball in upper right corner. This was taken during the world cup '06 in the old town square, Prague.

"Maybe it didn't come across strrongly enough in my picture, but i felt something to it"

Leave it in the bottom of a drawer for two months. Shoot fifty rolls in the meantime. Take it back then. If instead of 'feeling good' it 'looks good' or evocative, maybe it's worth it.

cafone. I like the action and could almost add it to the pool, but as with the others, the distortion is a bit too much for me. I'm not against any kind of equipment but I'm finding that I like a more natural view of the world for people. While I'm at it, the processing also drags down the quality. I can see it was late in the day but the photo is too 'warm' and feels mucky.

Quick note, as I'm getting behind on stuff: what do you like about the lines of the stairs\fence? I mean, what do they add to the shot, in your opinion? I can't see the heart football, but that may be because I'm dumb.

For me none of it hangs together, and the guy with the camera is an annoyingly superfluous presence.

@Wozza: I would recommend spending a good amount of time at the library with your nose in photography books.

The shot you posted here is not even comparable to the Hin shot. And sorry, it's not a to each their own situation. The vast majority of people that have a strong interest in fine art photography would immediately disregard your shot as rubbish, and would likely move on to discussing not only Hin's shot, but his 'The World is What We Make It' project as a whole.

Wozza. It would be nice if you just added comments in linear order . . .

Aside from the intent of Hin's photograph, which I'll let you figure out, his photo has an overarching balance and requires one's eye shift around the photo to take in a number of elements. I'm not telling you to like it, but the fact is, it offers a number of elements and focal points and this makes it more enjoyable. To contrast each of your photos, both have a street, fence and perspective. The difference is that his has emotion.

ok, maybe some more context - and this is how i see it, mine is a picture of some mothballed offices on a deserted london street taken on a walk around the capital that i turned into a photoset. It was a depressing sight - i took a picture of it in a way i thought framed it at least reasonably, An entire victorian street laying empty in the middle of a bustling city.
Point taken in isolation it don't mean a hill of beans, and in "fine art terms" it may be rubbish, and that would bother me if i was trying to take a fine art picture. I wasn't, i know nothing about fine art photography and wouldn't pretend to.

(sorry about the comment order first off)

replies to:

bryanF -
fair enough, i don't move in fine art photography circles - i take pictures of what i want to - display them on my blog and my flickr and take flack or cudos, whichever.
Am i comparing my technical abillity to Hin's?, no, am i saying it didn't grab me? - yes, and that is all i'm saying. I, personally, can take or leave Hin's picture. Again, and i can only stress this Hin's is a good picture, just not one that took me in to it.

waxy -
granted Hin's is a very good picture, and i can see the juxtapositions in it, but it didn't engage me emotionally. When i look at it i see a lot in there. i read messages, but did it invoke an emotional response in me?, no. Was it taken by Hin with emotion? from what i can see, yes.

Wozza. If you need to explain your photograph with words then the picture isn't doing its job. Period.

Wozza, you're in a hole - probably best to stop digging. As Joni said: stick in a draw, go and shoot a ton, and come back and look at it later.

Look at what is in the 'stream, look at threads like "Photostreams That Rock", look at some books, read what has been said over and over again, and just move past your snapshot of a dull street on a dull overcast day - it really isn't good.

Cheers peeps, it's all solid advice and much appreciated.

I guess we were operating under the impression that you were trying to convey some of the ideas you just listed through a photograph. If not, then yeah, I'm not sure why you wanted a critique.

Oh! For the benefit of any readers out there who are interested in this topic: One great photographer of industrial decay: Edward Burtynsky

Have fun with that; it seems like a pretty complete site, although there's nothing like seeing his stuff as giant prints.

was in the pool in the now-deleted BW version.

maybe the colour version sucks?

any hint would be appreciated.

what i like of it is the weird, creepy feeling that i could get out of the subject. it might not be hortodox "street" though (being a posed portrait) but still the atmosphere of the image is definitely urban and conveys the idea of rotten and desert Bologna in the middle of August.

love to ya'll

Ph

Kramer -
origibally posted it to find out why it hadn't made the stream, received the feedback (which is appreciated) - discussion evolved, and i had to contextualise it to explain why i felt it was worth submitting - if not nessercerally approving it.

@pH: Oh man...that may have been the most-debated of the new batch. Some of us loved it unconditionally, some of us found it striking but compositionally not-there, some of us were too disturbed and confused to talk for a while.

I was in the second group. It's cool, though.

@wozza: understood. Thanks for the clarification. I really would urge you to try and stretch your ability and see what you can convey through image alone; I find people like Burtynsky incredibly prescient right now.

I like that shot, in a way, but I'm troubled now you reveal it was posed. I think it may have been a case of the idea being stronger than the final shot - I don't know. I'll let one of the other admins talk about it, as I don't remember the reasoning behind pulling it (it was in the 'stream for a short while, in the colour version).

I think I said something along the lines of "I'd like to see more along similar lines" or "I like where he's going with this". I forget.

Cool, though, and the colour does no harm, in my opinion.

pH. Haha. Kramer hit that discussion right on the head. I like it but it didn't quite do it for me. The zombiness is great but the comp was a bit off for me. Maybe if you panned a bit more to the right or down I would have enjoyed it more. As it is, something is missing. I did enjoy flash *POP* though. : )

edit: In our discussion about this image, I asked if this was someone's grandmother and not a candid.

actually the shot is halfway posed: the weird (and possibly insane) lady just popped out asking me a cigarette. i was shooting something else, told her "sure, if i can take a portrait of you", then just raised the camera and shot it without the lady posing (for i think she has no idea of what a pose could be). 2 seconds and she was gone. no time to compose it better to avoid that damn cycle-sign or to include more of her shadow(yeah, i suck). and, oh, guys, we were on the traffic lanes and although at 03:00 am bologna has virtually no traffic...

bad excuses, anyhow.
glad to hear your feedback guys

I really like your photo pH, no it is not the most perfect "photographer" photograph with perfect composition etc. But I am so interested in that woman, she is weird and I like that way more then tons of photos in this group. And my assumption was right that it was a stranger you asked to take a photo of ,and that is awesome!!!!!!!!! I feel the spontineaty in the photo of your interest in her and that is why I like it lots. I am always always more interested in people them composition or lighting. But that is just me. I feel you were interested in her and taking her photo not because of the perfect camera or flash/ lighting but genuinely because she interested you, and that is what I like. Of course both, perfect photograph and person is best but if I had to choose one, I would way choose the interesting people over the great photo with people who are half a dozen or another figurines that can be easily substitued for any other people.

it's awesome.

pH, I also like that your photo feels real as opposed to the tons of photo portraits that people do these days that are set up like this. A full length person looking dead pan and stiff, a lot of times on a road or just outside somwhere, but those really look fakely set up from the set up, the pose, the deadpan look, forced the lighting so maticulous, the large format camera, blah. Yours is real, true, and not pretentious. Just keep doing the same and eventually it will be perfect in every way, although hopefully never looking forced and pretentious, or not keep doing the same thing, but I like it.

hey, now both of you is exxagerating
;)

thanks, really.

@ph: now go on the street and get us more ;-)

pH: In a way, failing to make a quorum just means you're on the right track. You got moderators thinking more about your shot than almost any others submitted, which is kind of amazing. I mean, Citizen Kane lost the best picture Oscar to...some movie absolutely no one remembers. Boldness has it's pros and cons, but ultimately, more pros.

@Joe: thanks but after all this commenting I think this picture doesn’t deserve to be posted.

@scribeoflight: also for me it is an interesting moment, and as for the deformation, I sometimes like it. Deformed people are about to enter the camera in a way. I was using a 16mm so I was in the fight more or less. I like the “chaos of the wide angle”. It is a good name for a portfolio.

I shot other frames at the time, and one which I like is the following:



in this one the distortion is still big but i get a lot of energy from this kind of shots where i am in the shot. always 16mm. but probably this doesn't enter the pool because is not candid, i mean, it is candid becauese the kid was looking at my ayes and the camera was on my belly, but his attention was on me too much (?).

@kramer.oneill: maybe a bit more distance from the action would have been helpful to the geometry and distortion of the image

@mr karanka: thank you for “the chaos of the wide”.

@waxy: actually it was early in the morning and the muckyness probably is due to the quality of the jpeg? Or maybe the lens was dirty? I don’t know.

@cafone : i like the second more.
smells a lot of "hey i'm an alien attracting curiosity in Morocco" thus is more revealing and empathic.
less street, if "street" is a definable concept.

@cafone, I think in both of your photos, especially the first one that opening up the lens or slowing the shutter, basically letting in a bit more light would help with the muckiness, especially for the 1st, but for the second too. For me shooting in manual helps speed this process up more, because the +/- is another 3rd button to think about and slows me down.

But personally I like distortion.

In thumbnail, I like this shot:

www.flickr.com/photos/cafone/580380023/

a lot more...

Going to go back to my beer for now. More later, when people submit some images.

Benny - you're a star.

@pH: to be good this picture should have something on the left to balance the weight of the weird lady. if a car was coming it would have be better.

i post another picture as i really enjoyed all of your comments:



in this shot I like the opposition of human and architecture, of light and shadow. human is going towards the shadow, geometry is in full light. old european cities (like cordoba in spain in this case) are lightening concrete architecture, letting no space for all ladies to seat and play cards with her mates... maybe... or maybe not...

IMHO

i think the 'one image per week per poster' rule from the old thread would be a good idea. but i'll leave that up to the new mods to decide...

I'd love to get some critiques of this image. For me some of the positives are:

- general composition, arrangement of elements in frame
- the 'judgement seat' joke/irony
- the two yellow signs (man's back and rubbish bin)
- the little groups of reds and yellows

@Ben: Point taken. I'd like to stay libertarian on posting limits right now, and see how the marketplace of ideas plays it out. I would suggest avoiding submitting multiple shots in a short timespan, though. Unless the conversation is on a roll. I don't know; use discretion.

@dave: Where the shot doesn't work for me is that there isn't really anything happening. This guy was making a spectacle of himself, and he was photographed doing it. In that scenario, you really need an interesting character, some kind of stark juxtaposition, dynamic framing, an interesting face, something. Even then, these people are one notch above street performers; to make it work, there better be some fantastic interaction. This shot documents this person's presence, but it doesn't tell me much beyond that.

dave. Seek ye the inspiration . . . .

It's boring.

I'm wondering why this didn't make it to the group pool.

The left is a guy looking at the group to the right like they are crazy, and on the right is a bunch of people really badly wanting their picture taken on a train going through the city. I think there is a lot of emotion with the guy and the girl next to him. I also think the writing on the train helps the image Musuem of... (hooligans?) I only had like 2 seconds to take this picture because it was a moving train, I would like to start experimenting with other things I would really appreciate some thoughts. Thanks



By the way, this is an excellent thread, very useful and insightful, I wish more groups would be as picky with their pictures, because I too don't like looking at images that don't meet certain requirements

This is a great example of the photographer getting caught up in the excitement of taking the photograph: the sound of a roaring train, people yelling at you in excitement, having only seconds to capture the fleeting moment. Unfortunately this energy doesn't carry over to the viewer. And is the man on the left really looking at those people, or just off into the distance? You are best leaving a photo like this in the drawer for a few months and then evaluate whether it is truly something spectacular or just another train load of drunk tourists. Not that there is anything wrong with being a drunk tourist. It just doesn't offer much to the viewer.

Thanks for the quick response WAXY. I think you may be right about getting caught up in the moment. When I look at this image it puts me back in that place. It is sometimes difficult to closely examine and evaluate the interestingness and depth of a photo to give some meaning to someone who wasn't there -but I guess that is what makes a good capture like most of the photos in this pool. An image should bring the viewer into that place and give them something to think about, or at least provide eye candy. I believe that for most people this picture is not doing much of either. I got into photography a few months ago for abstract ideas in the architecture field, but recently I stumbled upon this group and began to realize more and more that people and their interactions are a very imporant aspect of the field. Keep up the good work.

Butcher it:

@Joni: seriously? :-D

Whoah! That car has three wheels?!

Rowan? Rowan Atkinson? is that you?

@Joni: it's the dullest photograph in your stream since 'Early morning in the centre - Milano'

It is a car with three wheels and a guy with a pen behind his ear, right, yes... all in one picture... :-P but just doesn't work, does it?

no need to be gentle >:)

@Kranka: My favorite aspect is that guy's face inside the car. That, and the detritus of this guy's life in his left hand. But that detritus isn't so exciting, and it's ultimately not so compelling. Not terrible, but not remarkable either.

@th0rium: Interesting interactions aren't really happening here, which causes the mind to wander toward composition; people walking can still be interesting provided their motions create interesting symmetry or interesting lack of symmetry, but here, not so much. The frame is so close to being square, yet it's not, so the lines on the ground that echo the lines formed by the stairs and run perpendicular to the vertical lines of the fence and columns all are not quite square to the frame. And they probably should be. That would go a long way toward, you know, a more formal compositional piece.

Some shadows could make stuff interesting, too. More sunlight, I say. Get on that.

Knives out!

i don't have a knife. i'd offer you a lifeboat, but i think it would be pretty futile as this is a sinking ship.

I like this shot for its social interaction. The three black guys chillin' over a cold beer, the couple looking so into each other. Technically i know it's nothing special, but I think it has a story to tell.

I'd love to know what you think.

someone else will probably come in and offer you something more constructive, but i say bin it. it's really badly exposed and for me that kills that shot - i cant really see anything that is going on and need you to tell me... which doesn't cut the mustard.

@Bennybedlam: reckon a lifeboat would be pretty useful on a sinking ship... how about, rather than a terrible metaphor, a comment, any comment, that could make the vessel a little more seaworthy next time round (yep, that was one too :)?

One of a few I've attempted to submit . . .

Big croc, little cop. Too cute?

@snapshooter: if there was somebody falling into it... hell yeah... problem is that the crocodile takes the whole frame and there's nothing else going on...

@snapshooter: There's hardly any human element to this at all and it's just another pointless point picture.

It's a crocodile. It is not interesting. The one above is an example of how not to cross process.

Having a "story to tell" is not enough. There are stories to tell everywhere, all the time, every second. Some people write about them. Some people paint pictures. A bunch of us here - and a lot of other people, all over the world - have chosen to try and take photos to try and "tell the stories". And it would be good if those photos were good stories, not just visual post-it notes of interesting things you happen to have seen on the street.

Yeah?

@Paulocas: That's why they call the man Bedlam. I like the woman in the car [close observers note: that's my second complement of partially-obscured figures in cars. Not sure what that means], and I like the over-all look--and that's saying something, because the queue overflows with murky B&W, and, being a bit of a tri-x fanatic, I really appreciate B&W where the blacks are, well, black; like more than I did a week ago, before I discovered how many ways there are to butcher B&W.

But yeah, there's not much going on.

</a

Hi all - is it too dark and is the inclusion of the dad crappy?

is that his dad? i thought it was a stalker.

@O_lisa_O: The dad doesn't help, nor does the kid's face being a bit in shadow. But it's just not very dynamic in general. It's a kid blowing bubbles, so you're going to have to do some pretty outstanding framing to make that interesting.

Now a stalker, that's interesting.

Thanks for your comments - hmm ye must be as busy in work as I am with those quick responses! Jesus, bennybedlam don't say that I'll have to send my pic to the Spanish police or something!

Also wodering @O_lisa_O the thing that is only in focus is the green plant on the right. Was that on purpose or by accident?

Fair play to you for noticing shveckle that part is so dark

I actually don't see it as terribly dark on my monitor. Beware the differences in computer monitors. They are all over the place.

Lisa, take a look at some of the photos that have recently gone into the pool. Or perhaps at some books containing strong street photography from the past. Have a look at what seems to make them work.

Your photo has an odd crop (look at the elbow), the proportions don't help it, the action itself is drab, and the stalker or father figure feels really superfluous to it all. And the fact we can't really tell if it is a stalker or father says a lot about how poorly the photo is doing at telling its story.

I have seen great photos of kid's blowing bubbles - a Noemi Farkas had a couple on Flickr, once, but she is no longer active on Flickr, so I can't really present them. It is a hard subject to make work.