A Moment

[DEAN01]

Haven't been online much lately and haven't been doing much in the way of photography. However, on the way to a photography exhibition, I saw this couple and grabbed a quick shot. C & C always.
BTW: I received an honorable mention (second place) for black and white photography in the exhibition

[Shadowman]

Nicely captured.

[bnnrcn]

Nice image Dean

[Geoff F]

Even with more thinking time I doubt you could have come up with anything better than this composition.

[rpcrowe]

Lovely shot!

[FootLoose]

Nice shot, Dean. I like the way everything seems to be listing to the left - boats, masts, the guy - but the woman is leaning to the right.

[William W]

Nice grab shot. Congratulations on the HM at the exhibition.

*

Apropos C&C - the line of the wharf/pier is just slightly askew: this is just enough to annoy some (perhaps critical) eyes.

There are a couple options to 'correct', if you want to:

- the first would have been to move slightly to camera right before pulling the shot: the composition could have been kept the same but you (your camera) would have been square on to the edge line of the pier, thus the pier would not be appear to be 'dipping' in the Final Image. This is mainly mentioned because irrespective of relevance to this particular shot, any slightly askew aspect of foreground horizontals in general can often spoil an otherwise good Portrait. Foreground horizontals can usually be easily kept in check, if the camera viewpoint is wisely chosen: noted that it is understood this was a grab shot.

- the second is to 'correct' in post. It is the Vertical Perspective (+5 using Photoshop v.CS2) and an extremely minor rotation (6/10ths degree) which will 'correct' it and there will not be any perceivable degradation to either Subject's form; or affect the list of the yachts or the lean of the woman.

*

Quick example - the original is on the top in both:



*



WW

[Mike Buckley]

Wonderful composition and conversion.

It would bother me if the horizon had not been straight. Considering that it is straight, it doesn't bother me that the edge of the wharf is not parallel to the bottom of the frame. It also doesn't bother me in Bill's version that it is indeed parallel.

[William W]

By way of explanation and for clarity.

. . . for me, it's because the many years of portraiture making, much of which was by necessity "controlled" that my eye gets irritated by (for example) the edge of the wharf.

And for absolute clarity - it wouldn't bother my eye at all, if the edge of the wharf was at a "definite" or "strong" angle: it is because it is only a tiny little bit skew, that it is irritating.


***

And, yes, Mike's comment reminded me - I meant to mention the conversion: specifically the B&W tonal range is very good. So very often this is not so with digital conversions.

Maybe you could please post the B&W image for which you earned the H Mention?

WW

[DEAN01]

Thanks all for your comments. Bill, thanks for taking the time to explain how the wall at the bottom of the shots could be made parallel to the horizon.

[Mike Buckley]

And for absolute clarity - it wouldn't bother my eye at all, if the edge of the wharf was at a "definite" or "strong" angle: it is because it is only a tiny little bit skew, that it is irritating.

When I get that feeling (I didn't get it when viewing this photo), it's always because I have the impression rightly or wrongly that it's an accidental mistake. If the angle is large enough, it seems clear that it is by design. It's when the angle is relatively small that it so often feels that it has been a mistake.